Homeric Receptions across Generic and Cultural Contexts

Homeric Receptions across Generic and Cultural Contexts

Trends in Classics ndashSupplementary Volumes

Edited by Franco Montanari and Antonios Rengakos

Scientific CommitteeAlberto Bernabeacute middot Margarethe BillerbeckClaude Calame middot Philip R Hardie middot Stephen J HarrisonStephen Hinds middot Richard Hunter middot Christina KrausGiuseppe Mastromarco middot Gregory NagyTheodore D Papanghelis middot Giusto PiconeKurt Raaflaub middot Bernhard Zimmermann

Volume 37

Homeric Receptionsacross Generic andCultural Contexts

Edited byAthanasios Efstathiou and Ioanna Karamanou

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication DataA CIP catalog record for this book has been applied for at the Library of CongressBibliographic information published by the Deutsche NationalbibliothekThe Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutschen Nationalbibliografiedetailed bibliographic data are available on the Internet at httpdnbdnbde

ISBN 978-3-11-047783-2e-ISBN (PDF) 978-3-11-047979-9e-ISBN (E-Pub) 978-3-11-047918-8ISSN 1868-4785

copy 2016 Walter de Gruyter GmbH BerlinBostonPrinting and binding CPI books GmbH LeckPrinted on acid-free paperPrinted in Germanywwwdegruytercom

Preface

This collective volume grew out of an international conference on Homeric Re-ception held at the Department of History of the Ionian University in Corfu in No-vember 2011 All papers profited by the fruitful interaction between classicistsand reception scholars which gave rise to challenging and refreshing questionsand subsequently by the process of peer review for publication The ensuing re-vising process took a considerable period of time but we hope that the revisionsmade contributed to the focus on the generic and cultural contexts of Homericreception and in turn to the coherence of the volume as a whole We are ex-tremely grateful to the General Editors of this series Professor Antonios Renga-kos and Professor Franco Montanari for their brilliant guidance their scholarlyacumen their great perceptiveness and unfailing patience throughout the publi-cation process

This conference was made possible thanks to the valuable insight scholarlyvigour and unstinting support of Professor Chris Carey who has been for us amentor in the truest sense over the last decades The debt that we owe him can-not be adequately expressed in wordsWe are much indebted to Professor LornaHardwick for generously offering her valuable advice and great expertise on clas-sical reception during the preparation of the volume for publication and to thefour anonymous readers for providing constructive criticism and improving com-ments We are truly grateful to Professor Mike Edwards Professor Ariadne Gart-ziou-Tatti Professor Yorgos Kentrotis Professor Stratis Kyriakidis and ProfessorIoannis Perysinakis for their fruitful suggestions as members of the ConferenceAdvisory Board Special thanks are due to Professor Dimitris Anoyatis-Peleacute Pro-fessor Theodosis Pylarinos and Assistant Professor Ilias Yarenis of the Depart-ment of History of the Ionian University for their excellent collaboration as mem-bers of the conference Organizing Committee

To our great regret Professor Daniel Jacob who was a member of the Con-ference Advisory Board brightening the conference with his presence and partic-ipating with a significant paper included in this corpus passed away on 21 May2014 before this volume went to press Those who were fortunate to have metDaniel Jacob were impressed by his philological vigour scholarly insight andsteadfastness Younger scholars benefited enormously from his humanity hiskind encouragement and the valuable guidance which he generously offeredto them For young researchers he was and still is a model of academic conductand scholarly devotion His academic life formed part of the high scholarly ach-ievements of the Department of Classics of the Aristotle University of Thessalo-niki A remarkable volume dedicated to his memory and edited by his eminent

colleagues Professor Antonios Rengakos and Professor Poulheria Kyriakou isforthcoming in this series (Wisdom and Folly in Euripides) The editors of thepresent volume feel the need to honour the memory of Professor Daniel Jacobgratefully acknowledging his major offer to classical scholarship and his ever-lasting aretē

Athanasios Efstathiou Ioanna KaramanouDepartment of History Department of Theatre StudiesIonian University University of the Peloponnese

VI Preface

Table of Contents

Preface V

Ioanna KaramanouThe Contexts of Homeric Reception 1

Part I Framing

Lorna HardwickHomer Repetition and Reception 15

Part II Homer In Archaic Ideology

Margarita AlexandrouHipponax and the Odyssey Subverting Text and Intertext 31

Andrej PetrovicArchaic Funerary Epigram and Hectorrsquos Imagined Epitymbia 45

Margarita SotiriouPerformance Poetic Identity and Intertextuality in Pindarrsquos Olympian 4 59

Chris CareyHomer and Epic in Herodotusrsquo Book 7 71

Part III Homeric echoes in philosophical and rhetoricaldiscourse

Athanasios EfstathiouArgumenta Homerica Homerrsquos Reception by Aeschines 93

Eleni VolonakiHomeric Values in the Epitaphios Logos 125

Ioannis PerysinakisThe Ancient Quarrel between Philosophy and Poetry Platorsquos HippiasMinor 147

Kleanthis MantzouranisA Philosophical Reception of Homer Homeric Courage in AristotlersquosDiscussion of ἀνδρεία 163

Christina-Panagiota ManoleaHomeric Echoes Pythagorean Flavour The Reception of Homer inIamblichus 175

Part IV Hellenistic and later Receptions

Maria KanellouἙρμιόνην ἣ εἶδος ἔχε χρυσέης Aφροδίτης (Od 414) Praising a Femalethrough Aphrodite ndash From Homer into Hellenistic Epigram 189

Karim ArafatPausanias and Homer 205

Maria YpsilantiThe Reception of Homeric Vocabulary in Nonnusrsquo Paraphrase of St JohnrsquosGospel Εxamination of Themes and Formulas in Selected Passages 215

Part V Latin Transformations

Helen Peraki-KyriakidouTrees and Plants in Poetic Emulation From the Homeric Epic to VirgilrsquosEclogues 227

Sophia PapaioannouEmbracing Homeric Orality in the Aeneid Revisiting the Composition Politicsof Virgilrsquos First Descriptio 249

Charilaos N Michalopouloslsquotollite me Teucrirsquo (Verg Aen 3601) Saving Achaemenides SavingHomer 263

VIII Table of Contents

Boris KayachevScylla the Beauty and Scylla the Beast A Homeric Allusion in theCiris 277

Andreas N MichalopoulosHomer in Love Homeric Reception in Propertius and Ovid 289

Part VI Homeric Scholarship at the Intersection of Traditions

Robert MaltbyHomer in Servius A Judgement on Servius as a Commentator onVirgil 303

Ivana PetrovicOn Finding Homer The Impact of Homeric Scholarship on the Perception ofSouth Slavic Οral Traditional Poetry 315

Part VII Homer on the Ancient and Modern Stage

Katerina MikellidouAeschylus reading Homer The Case of the Psychagogoi 331

Daniel J JacobSymbolic Remarriage in Homerrsquos Odyssey and Euripidesrsquo Alcestis 343

Ioanna KaramanouEuripidesrsquo lsquoTrojan Trilogyrsquo and the Reception of the Epic Tradition 355

Varvara GeorgopoulouAndromachersquos Tragic Persona from the Ancient to the Modern Stage 369

Kyriaki PetrakouOdysseus Satirical The Merry Dealing of the Homeric Myth in Modern GreekTheatre 379

Table of Contents IX

Part VIII Refiguring Homer in Film and Music

Pantelis MichelakisThe Reception of Homer in Silent Film 393

Anastasia BakogianniHomeric Shadows on the Silver Screen Epic Themes in Michael CacoyannisrsquoTrilogy of Cinematic Receptions 405

Hara ThliverilsquoTravelling to the Light Aiming at the Infinitersquo The Odyssey of MikisTheodorakis 417

Bibliography 435

Notes on Contributors 475

General Index 481

Index of Homeric Passages 483

X Table of Contents

Ioanna Karamanou

The Contexts of Homeric Reception

Introduction

For more than two decades Homeric scholarship has been fruitfully interactingwith the increasingly developing field of classical reception studies by delvinginto the manner in which Homeric poetry has been transmitted translated inter-preted rewritten and represented A respectable number of studies have investi-gated the reworkings of Homeric poetry in Greek and Latin literaturesup1 and in laterperiods of timesup2 along with the significance of audience and reader response asa trigger for the ancient and subsequent interpretations of Homersup3

The purpose of this collective volume is naturally not to offer an exhaustivetreatment of the fields of Homeric reception this would be impossible not leastbecause particular areas as for instance the Hellenistic or Latin transforma-tions of Homeric poetry may well provide enough material for several volumesRather its objective is quite different As stated in the title it seeks to explorehow varying aspects of Homeric poetics appeal to and can be mapped on to adiversity of contexts both vertically that is over time and horizontally across dif-ferent genres of the same period This key approach is consistent with a funda-mental concept of classical reception studies which is the exploration of thecontexts of reception and of the manner in which the reworking of the sourcetext is shaped under different socio-historical intellectual literary and artisticconditions

I am truly grateful to Professor Lorna Hardwick for kindly taking the time to read through thisintroduction and for providing valuable comments In a chronological order see Knauer Kindstrand Neitzel Barchiesi aValakas Rengakos and Knight Rutherford ndash Sotiriou Zeitlin Graziosi ch Michelakis Fowler (ed) section (esp Hunter ndash and Farrell ndash) Fantuzzi Hunter ch and ZanettoCanavero Capra Sgobbi (eds) Graziosi a Nagy Michel on Homericreception in ancient philosophy see Lamberton Planinc Manolea See most importantly Callen King Beissinger Tylus Wofford (eds) Hardwick ndash Clarke Currie Lyne (eds) Graziosi Greenwood (eds) Winkler(ed) a Hall Latacz Greub Blome Wieczorek (eds) Davis Most Nor-man Rabau (eds) Myrsiades (ed) Vandiver Bizer See especially the chapters by Purkis Furbank and Hardwick in Emlyn-JonesHardwickPur-kis (eds) Lamberton Keaney (eds) Scodel ndash Nagy Niehoff(ed)

The significance of context exploration has been theoretically propoundedby Charles Martindale in a chapter entitled lsquoFraming Contextsrsquo of his seminalwork focusing on the hermeneutics of reception⁴ lsquoContextsrsquo he argues lsquoarenot single nor are they found ldquolying aboutrdquo as it were we have to constructthem from other texts which also have to be interpreted (And by text I meanevery vehicle of signification so that in this extended sense a mosaic or a mar-riage ceremony is a ldquotextrdquo as much as a book)rsquo⁵ This concept originates inJaussrsquos theory of the aesthetics of reception asserting the continuing interactionbetween source text and the receiving work in conjunction with the receiverrsquos so-cial and cultural context⁶ Reception is thus figured dialogically as a two-wayprocess of interpretation backwards and forwards The relation between thesource text and the receiving work is reciprocal therefore elucidating the formeras much as the latter At the same time it is essential to look at the routesthrough which the ancient source text has passed and at the manner in whichgeneric and cultural conditions have shaped later reworkings

Accordingly the wide spectrum of Homeric transformations is approached inthis volume in the light of their generic and cultural contexts Genre and cultureare intrinsically interrelated and both play a key role in establishing the receiv-errsquos lsquohorizon of expectationsrsquo This notion was introduced by Jauss to refer to thereceiverrsquos mind-set determined by hisher literary and socio-cultural milieu andto frame the reciprocal relationship between source text and receiver⁷ In turnthe survey of the contexts of Homeric reworkings presupposes the investigationof the interplay of epic with different genres (literary scholarly artistic) andunder varying cultural conditions A major part of this volume naturally coversthe echoes of Homer in classical and post-classical literature (sections II-V) aswell as exploring the implications of Homeric transmission in Latin and Serbiancontexts (section VI) and Homeric refigurations in the performing arts such astheatre film and music (sections VII and VIII) At the same time these contribu-tions seek to evaluate how Homeric referents are appropriated within differentcultural contexts and over a wide time span (Ancient Greece Modern GreeceRome Europe and North America) Therefore the very use of the plural in thetitle (lsquoreceptionsrsquo rather than lsquoreceptionrsquo) aims at drawing attention to the multi-formity and diversity pervading the transformations of Homeric poetry

Martindale ndash see also Hardwick esp ch Martindale Jauss Reception is regarded as a fundamentally lsquodialogicrsquo process also in the major the-oretical works of Gadamer and Iser For a discussion of the impact of these theoriessee for instance Holub

ndash Hardwick ndash Martindale ndash See Jauss ndash Hardwick ndash Holub

ndash

2 Ioanna Karamanou

As mentioned above the shared objective of the essays is the exploration ofthe generic and cultural contexts of Homeric reception At the same time thiscollective volume displays a range of methodological approaches by bringing to-gether internationally acclaimed researchers and acute young scholars in thefields of classics and reception studies The value of the publication of selectedpapers originating in an academic conference derives from the engagement ofthe participants in genuine scholarly lsquodialoguersquo which stimulates carefulthought and scholarly interaction about the issues raised in individual papersthus enhancing the cohesion of the resulting collection of essays This collabo-rative attitude constitutes a distinctive feature of the research in the area of clas-sical reception which invites a variety of voices and a series of theoretical per-spectives testifying to the vitality of debates and to the breadth of possiblereceptions⁸ Consequently an effective interdisciplinary collaboration betweenreception scholars and classicists is required so that reception studies couldbenefit from the formal analysis of classical scholarship and at the sametime a broadly conceived dialectical discipline of classics could be formed toconnect the interpretation of texts with their reception history⁹

This position is brought to the fore by Lorna Hardwick in the first sectionwhich forms a theoretical framework for the analysis of Homeric receptionShe argues that the in depth-study of formal structures and conventions providesinsight into the cultural power of Homeric reworkings This approach aims at rec-onciling the formal and aesthetic appreciation with the cultural interpretation ofreception thus contributing to a long-lasting debate among reception scholarssup1⁰From this viewpoint Lorna Hardwick focuses on the transformations of Homericpoetry in the light of the concept of lsquorepetitionrsquo which as developed by Deleuzeexcludes the possibility of exact replication She investigates the ways in whichlsquorepetition with a differencersquo appropriates Homeric formal qualities so that thereceiving work enables the reader to experience the processes shaping the con-tinuing dialogue between ancient and modern It is noteworthy that in the caseof Homeric receptions the formal arrangements of the receiving work often im-plicitly provide a lsquocommentaryrsquo on the source text thus offering insight intothe manner in which Homeric poetry is interpreted and remodelled As she

See Hardwick and Stray ndash Kallendorf ndash Bakogianni I ndash The va-riety of the activators of reception and the vigour of debates are suggestive of the lsquodemocraticrsquonature of classical reception analysis on this wide-ranging topic see recently HardwickHarri-son (eds) On the latter position see Martindale xiii and his fresh assessment twenty years later inMartindale cf also Brockliss ChaudhuriHaimson LushkovWasdin ndash See for instance Goldhill ndash and Martindale ndash

The Contexts of Homeric Reception 3

has pointed out in an earlier study reception (and in this case Homeric recep-tion) involves lsquoa necessary interplay between invention and critiquersquosup1sup1 Hencethe formal analysis of the source text the receiving work and the mediatingworks is significant in evaluating the aesthetic qualities of each productionand in investigating the relationships among them in the light of their varyingcontexts

The role of reception as a form of lsquocommentaryrsquo is reiterated in the secondsection by Margarita Alexandrou who argues that Hipponaxrsquos engagementwith the Odyssey functions as a commentary in that it sheds light on Odysseanelements which are only implicit in the Homeric oeuvre Marginality and grotes-query run through Hipponactean poetry underlined by the fact that events andpersona were partly modelled on the Odyssey to create a sustained metapoeticengagement with the Homeric epos which serves both to undermine the epicand to undercut the authority of the third person narrator This complex processgenerates an unusually rich intertextuality which raises interesting questionsabout audience response and the contexts of Hipponaxrsquos poetry

From the Archaic subversion of the epic we move on to explore Homeric ech-oes in the equally Archaic poetry of kleos and praise The reception of Homer insepulchral epigrams of the Archaic period is investigated by Andrej Petrovicwho looks into two Iliadic passages associated with funerary epigrams by an-cient scholiasts and raises the question whether a distinct relation between Ho-meric lsquoepigrammaticrsquo passages and early epigrammatic production can be iden-tified His case study involves the close analysis of two sixth-century BCsepulchral epigrams which appropriate Homeric structural and stylistic ele-ments and thus seem to have been ideologically and formally chiselled afterthe Iliadic lsquoepigrammaticrsquo passages Likewise Margarita Sotiriou discusses Pin-darrsquos appropriation of formal thematic and conceptual elements from the eighthbook of the Odyssey in his Fourth Olympian Ode to praise his patron by compar-ing him with heroic exempla Investigating the performative context of the odeshe argues that Pindar refigures the Homeric scene and the πεῖρα motif in partic-ular in order to present himself as a lsquopersona projected by the poemsrsquo and shapehis distinct identity as a lsquoprimary narratorrsquo announcing his patronrsquos success withtruthfulness and thus establishing the reception of his ode by his audienceHence the poetrsquos multifaceted dialogue with his source text provides insightinto Pindaric poetics performance and audience response

The epic narratorrsquos bestowal of kleos and its reception by Herodotus arebrought forward by Chris Carey who delves into the complexity of the historianrsquos

Hardwick

4 Ioanna Karamanou

appropriation of Homeric elements Herodotus is placed at a crossroads as heselects lsquothose bits and pieces of the oral memory of the Archaic period that fithis own literary and ideological agendarsquosup1sup2 whilst aligning himself with his con-temporary Ionic intellectual milieu His complex relationship with epos is prom-inent in the seventh book locating the Persian Wars within the larger context ofhostilities between East and West for which the epic treatment of the Trojan Warserves as an equivalent Herodotusrsquo interplay with epic is suggestive of the his-torianrsquos emulation with his source text as he claims equivalent or greater statusfor his own narrative by presenting this Persian invasion as exceeding all of theearlier East-West confrontations

The third section looks across strands in Homeric reception within philo-sophical and rhetorical discourse Philosophy and oratory are brought togetherin this part of the volume on the basis of the theoretically propounded essentialinteraction between knowledge and eloquencesup1sup3 Athanasios Efstathiou consid-ers the implications of the use of Homeric quotations based on the oral learningof poetry in Aeschinesrsquo extant speeches pointing out that Homer is employed asan authority with the purpose of validating the oratorrsquos argumentation and per-suasiveness At the same time these lsquoHomeric argumentsrsquo form indicators of theaudiencersquos paideia and lsquohorizon of expectationsrsquo showcasing the cultural con-texts of mid-fourth century Athens and the pivotal role that Homeric poetryplayed in civic processes Eleni Volonaki then reiterates the key notion of Homer-ic kleos (mainly discussed in the second section) and its ideological transplanta-tion into the genre of funeral oration To praise their contemporary achieve-ments orators appropriate epic paradigms and transform the concept of aretē(virtue) which becomes imbued with the democratic values represented by thecitizen soldier and is associated with the collective glory of the anonymousgroup within the context of the polis in contrast to the epic praise of individu-ality

The reconfiguration of the Homeric notion of aretē is similarly brought to thefore in Platorsquos Hippias Minor forming the focus of the analysis by Ioannis Pery-sinakis This discussion provides a case study on the ancient philosophical re-ception of poetry as it stresses the challenge posed to the values representedin the Homeric epics by Platonic thought which subjected the poetic mythosto logos and rejected mimēsis for not educating children on aretē This chaptershowcases the transformation of Homeric virtue into the Platonic conception

Rose See for instance Pl Phdr e-c Arist Rh andashb a CicTusc ndash De or esp ndash Quint Inst ndash


of excellence being particularized in sophia (wisdom) and having dynamis (abil-ity) as a prerequisite Subsequently Kleanthis Mantzouranis reflects on the im-pact of Aristotlersquos response to the epic paradigms of martial valour As he pointsout the philosopherrsquos use of Homer is a purposeful act of reception aiming toillustrate by means of concrete examples the forms of courage he describesand to reinforce his argument by adducing the authority of the poet whichcould be paralleled to a certain degree with the rhetorical practice previouslyexamined by Athanasios Efstathiou Aristotle uses Homer as a benchmark refin-ing and developing the epic representation of valour in order to elucidate hisown conception of genuine courage The implications of the selection ofHomer as a source text by the Neoplatonic philosopher Iamblichus are evaluatedby Christina-Panagiota Manolea Iamblichus chose to incorporate Homeric ele-ments in his own discussion of important philosophical matters either directlyor indirectly drawing on his master Porphyry and on Plato by taking into ac-count his audiencersquos familiarity with Homer Nonetheless as she observes thephilosopher appropriates epos when he considers it fit to his argumentationsince his aim is not to explain Homer as his teacher Porphyry did but to enrichhis own Neoplatonic philosophical exegesis

The fourth section highlights the transformation of epic style and motifs aswell as the perception of Homer as a cultural authority from the Hellenistic pe-riod to Late Antiquity Maria Kanellou discusses the refiguration of the Homericmotif of praising female appearance through comparison to the archetypal beau-ty of Aphrodite in Hellenistic epigrams She observes that the transformation ofthis motif has been shaped through a nexus of cross-generic religious and po-litical factors leading to the literary deification of queens by the Ptolemaiccourt poets and the heroization of mere mortals The authority of Homeric poetryas a source text is investigated by Karim Arafat who argues that Pausaniasrsquo af-finity with Homer seems to emerge from his perception of the poet as an arche-typal periegete Pausaniasrsquo agenda with respect to his approach of the Homericepics differs from that of his contemporaries as for instance Philostratus andmay also shed light on the reception of Homer as a means of defining the cultur-al background and intellectual trends of the second sophistic SubsequentlyMaria Ypsilantirsquos inquiry into the appropriation of Homeric vocabulary metreand imagery in the Paraphrase of St Johnrsquos Gospel by Nonnus of Panopolis raisesissues of genre culture and audience response within the Christian milieu ofLate Antiquity She points out that Nonnusrsquo hexameter rephrasing of the Gospelembellishes Johannine prose highlights and interprets theological notions anddoctrinal concepts by addressing an audience both well-versed in the epic tradi-tion and interested in religious matters

6 Ioanna Karamanou

The fifth section brings telling instances of Latin transformations of Homericpoetry to the fore The chapter by Helen Peraki-Kyriakidou provides an apt tran-sition from the preceding section to the focus of this one since it showcases thesignificance of the cross-generic interplay between Hellenistic poetry and Ho-meric epos for the formation of Latin pastoral The author stresses that Virgilwhose main source text in the Eclogues is Theocritusrsquo bucolic poetry entersinto a fertile dialogue with Homer regarding the style function and symbolismof plant-catalogues which are at the same time naturally imbued with Theocri-tean features of the pastoral genre Subsequently Sophia Papaioannou delvesinto Virgilrsquos appropriation of the core feature of Homeric orality in the ekphrases(descriptiones) developed in the Aeneid She argues that Virgil is particularlyaware to emphasize the complex intertextuality as the cornerstone at the foun-dation of the structure of the Aeneid accordingly the poet seems to suggest thateach descriptio may be subjected to multiple possible readings due to the flex-ibility of the descriptive technique of visualization which is an equivalent to theprocess of motif transference that predominates in Homeric orality

The metapoetic significance of Virgilrsquos refashioning of the Odyssean Cyclopsepisode in the Achaemenides scene of the Aeneid is investigated by Charilaos Mi-chalopoulos This chapter contextualizes the impact of this reworking on Virgilrsquoswider poetological programme of Homeric reception through which he providesa self-definition of his own poetry and its position in the course of continuity andchange within the epic tradition At the same time the intellectual processes in-volved in Virgilrsquos strategies of transforming Homeric poetry are indicators ofHomerrsquos cultural and ideological assimilation in Rome The similarly Odysseanfigure of Scylla forms the intertext in the narrative of the pseudo-VirgilianCiris Boris Kayachev sets out to explore the implicit allusion to the Homeric Scyl-la haunting the Ciris as an intertextual Doppelgaumlnger of her Roman equivalentThis stealthy intrusion of the Homeric intertext could provide insight into the po-etological agenda of the Ciris and into allusion as a form of literary receptionThis section closes with the examination of the cross-generic transformationof Homeric love themes in Roman elegy by Andreas Michalopoulos It is stressedthat Propertius and Ovid draw parallels between the poetic persona and Homericheroes in their representation of the militia amoris motif In metapoetic termsthe epic system of values is transfigured and filtered through the elegiac-eroticsystem of values while the genre of elegy is self-defined by means of its compar-ison and emulation with epos

The sixth section brings forward the impact of Homeric transmission on dif-ferent scholarly and cultural traditions such as Latin scholarship and the edi-tion of Serbian traditional poetry Robert Maltbyrsquos essay pursues the idea pro-pounded by Lorna Hardwick and subsequently by Margarita Alexandrou that


commentary is and should be perceived as a form of reception by investigatingthe function of Homeric quotations in Serviusrsquo commentary on Virgilrsquos AeneidHe focuses on six comparisons of passages in Virgil with their Homeric sourcetext pointing out that the main criteria applied to evaluate Virgilrsquos receptionof Homer are narrative credibility and stylistic appropriateness which have along scholarly tradition stretching back to the Alexandrian scholia via earlierLatin commentators Robert Maltby brings forward the notion of the receiving au-thorrsquos emulation with his source text also stressed by Chris Carey Charilaos Mi-chalopoulos and Andreas Michalopoulos by suggesting that Servius is willing toconcede that on occasion Virgil manages to surpass his model text From thepurely philological implications of the reception of Homeric scholarship wenow move on to explore its cultural power as well Ivana Petrovic draws atten-tion to the impact of 18th and 19th century Homeric scholarship on the perceptionof Serbian oral traditional poetry She demonstrates that the views of the Germanscholar Friedrich August Wolf who regarded the Iliad and the Odyssey as a col-lection of popular songs shaped the conditions of preservation and assessmentof Serbian oral poetry This is a case of cultural exchange involving the appropri-ation of the renowned figure of Homer to bestow authority to the collection ofSerbian folk poems and also his use as a shield to counter the ban on the circu-lation of this collection in Europe where traditional Serbian poems were seen aspolitically charged material The latter fact showcases a significant dimension ofclassical reception which is the potential of ancient texts to be employed as ameans of countering censorship and enabling socio-political concerns to be con-veyed through the neutral medium of classical culturesup1⁴

The two last sections of this volume delve into the transformations of Homer-ic material in the performing arts theatre film and music The seventh sectionengages with the theatrical reception of epos over a wide time-span extendingfrom Greek and Roman drama to European and Modern Greek theatre KaterinaMikellidou explores the intertextual nexus between the Homeric Nekyia and itsAeschylean version in the fragmentarily preserved Psychagogoi pointing out thatAeschylus opens a persistent dialogue with his source text and as in severalaforementioned cases of Homeric reception he establishes a network of compet-itive dynamics As well as regularly recalling the Odyssean archetype the Ae-schylean adaptation challenges it through a process of lsquonormalizationrsquo of thehero bringing him closer to the ordinary man which is divergent from Homerrsquostreatment of necromancy unfolding the full proportions of Odysseusrsquo boldness

For such examples see Hardwick ndash van Steen ndash Hardwick ndash

8 Ioanna Karamanou

The tragic refiguration of prominent Odyssean motifs is similarly illustrated inDaniel Jacobrsquos essay offering a close analysis of the literary processes whichshape the transformation of the archetypal reunion of husband and wife inthe Odyssey at the end of the Alcestis This intertextual relationship can be deci-phered on the basis of the thematic and structural pattern of nostos which has apivotal position in both the Odyssey and the Alcestis Nonetheless its receptionin the Alcestis is a complex process in that the flexible dynamics of the nostosmotif result in considerable deviations from the source text thus providing lsquoapalimpsest in which parts of the earlier text may be read through the overwrittentextrsquo Likewise Ioanna Karamanou sets out to explore the cross-generic transfor-mation of Homeric material into tragedy in the lsquoTrojan trilogyrsquo of Euripides inthe light of fifth-century cultural contexts which have shaped the dramatic refa-shioning of the source text Examining less explored aspects of the Euripideanreception of Homeric ideology from the standpoint of his tragic rhetoric in theformal debates of the Alexandros and the Trojan Women she argues that thedramatist engages in a dialogue with Homeric ethics by embedding his epic ref-erents within agonistic contexts Euripides exploits the dynamics of his tragicrhetoric to juxtapose aspects of Homeric thought to his contemporary ethicsthus showcasing the dialectic as well as the tension between the ideology ofepos and fifth-century values

Moving on to later theatrical receptions of Homer Varvara Georgopoulou in-vestigates the reception history of Andromachersquos persona and the cultural proc-esses shaping this figurersquos dramatic transformation The ancient Greek (Euripi-des) and Latin tragic treatments of Andromachersquos legend (Seneca) constitutekey stages in the theatrical reception of this Homeric figure bringing to thefore dominant themes such as war-violence militarism and gender issueswhich are then reiterated in later theatre French Classicism (Racine) the Inter-war period (Giraudoux) and Modern Greek theatre (Akis Dimou) These theatricalreworkings of Andromachersquos figure take place within diverse contexts and undervarying historical and cultural conditions which shape the treatment of theaforementioned themes and their ideological implications The interrelation be-tween classical reception studies and theatre research is brought forward by Kyr-iaki Petrakou who offers her perspective on the performance history and criticalreception of the parodic treatments of the Odyssean legend in Modern Greek the-atre By employing essential tools of critical analysis of theatre performancesuch as theatre criticism and audience response she delineates the relationshipbetween the theatrical transformation of epos and the socio-political and ideo-logical forces shaping the cultural identity of Postwar Greece This archetypalmyth is subversively employed often as a means of political allegory alludingto the intrigues of political power and the misleading rhetoric of persuasion


used by the media In these plays among which Iakovos Kambanellisrsquo OdysseusCome Home has a pivotal position Odysseus is transformed into the bearer of acontemporary anti-myth suggesting the illusion of humanity about leadershipand touching on crucial ideological issues arising from Postwar circumstances

From the theatrical receptions of Homer we move on to the cinematic andmusical refigurations of epos in the eighth section Pantelis Michelakisrsquo inquiryinto the reception history of Homer in silent cinema showcases how these pro-ductions engage with a range of narrative modes technological means and spec-tatorial practices available to early cinema raising questions about the historio-graphical and methodological implications of this research for the reception ofHomer in film and popular culture He revisits the fundamental feature of Ho-meric orality also highlighted in the chapters by Athanasios Efstathiou SophiaPapaioannou and Ivana Petrovic to argue that early film does not merely repre-sent the orality of Archaic Greek epic but also helps define it The generic diver-sity of these films breaks down the canonical work of Homer into componentparts reconfigured within a number of culturally contingent cinematic modes in-cluding not only action and romance but also trick cinematography fantasy andparody At the same time the materiality of these filmswhich survive in multipleprints differing in terms of preservation conditions overall length number andorder of scenes challenges the fixity of the cinematic artwork in ways invitingcomparison with the multiformity of Homeric texts The filmic transformationsof the Homeric material are similarly explored by Anastasia Bakogianni who at-tempts to lsquounmaskrsquo elements of Michael Cacoyannisrsquo implicit dialogue with eposwith regard to narrative and themes in his cinematic reception of Euripidesrsquo Elec-tra Trojan Women and Iphigenia in Aulis Her counter-reading of Cacoyannisrsquo tril-ogy argues for the pivotal role of the viewerrsquos lsquohorizon of expectationsrsquo condi-tioned by the spectatorrsquos familiarity with the Homeric epics which determinesthe threads that one can lsquodiscoverrsquo in this production and are differently experi-enced by each viewer and within varying contexts As she points out the trilogyis permeable to such interpretations not least because of the popularity of thegenre of epic in cinema on which Cacoyannis fruitfully drew

The last section closes with Hara Thliverirsquos survey on the recent and so farunexplored Odyssey by the leading Greek composer Mikis Theodorakis Hiswork draws freely on the key Odyssean motif of nostos mdashalso discussed by Dan-iel Jacobmdash to represent the completion of the composerrsquos personal nostos Theo-dorakisrsquo artistic affinity with Homer also emerges from the fact that throughouthis eighty-year career he managed to elevate poetry to a continuing narrative ofnational Greek myth His Homerically oriented song-cycle thus provides an in-centive to identify the reception of the Odyssean nostos pattern in popular dis-course by investigating how ancient symbols may feed collective memory and

10 Ioanna Karamanou

national awareness and construct cultural identity in conjunction with the com-poserrsquos literary and artistic milieu

The lines of inquiry that have been sketched out indicate that the points ofconvergence and divergence between the Homeric poems and their receptionsare to a great extent conditioned by the generic and cultural contexts of boththe source text and the receiving work The approach to reception as a form oflsquocommentaryrsquo reiterated in the chapters of this volume sheds light not only onthe receiving work but also on those very aspects of the source text whichhave attracted attention in its subsequent reworkings In more specific termsHomeric values and patterns are reframed within different contexts elucidatingthe complex dialectic as well as the tension between source text and receptionThis investigation also yields insight into the ideological forces shaping thecross-generic and cross-cultural transplantation of epic concepts into the receiv-ing work Homerrsquos archetypal figure is regularly employed as an authority withthe purpose of validating narrative rhetorical argumentation and philosophicalexegesis but also as a means of outwitting censorship Key features of epos asfor instance its orality are appropriated in metapoetic terms as well as beingreconfigured within performative contexts The receiving authorrsquosartistrsquos trendtowards emulation with the source text often functions as a means of genericself-definition providing insight into hisher literary or artistic agenda All thesame Homeric concepts are also liable to be subversively employed as in thecase of parody or to be challenged from the standpoint of their philosophicalreception

Overall the varied strategies of refiguring the Homeric epics form indicatorsof the generic and cultural conditions defining the receiving work and of the lsquoho-rizon of expectationsrsquo of readers and audience At the same time the wide-rang-ing lsquomigrationrsquo of Homeric material through time and across place as shaped byideological forces suggests that Homeric reception holds cultural power beinginstrumental in the construction of new cultural identities


Part I Framing

Lorna Hardwick

Homer Repetition and ReceptionlsquoSlow-striding Achilles who put the hex on HectorA swallow twitters in Troy Thatrsquos where we startrsquo

This is an extract from the opening sequence of Derek Walcottrsquos The Odyssey AStage Versionsup1 When I saw the play staged in its opening run at Stratford-upon-Avon the audience laughed at these lines Probably laughter was on several levelsbut at least some of it was because spectators knew both that Achilles was lsquoswift-footedrsquo and that the wound to his heel accounted for the actorrsquos limp across thestage One characteristic of Walcottrsquos use of classical material is the way that hemanipulates it to create an irreverent counter-text The swallow twittering inTroy slyly reminded the spectators of chaos theory and also of the trauma that en-sued from Troy Here however my point is that Walcott continued to use the Ho-meric form the formulaic epithet It was part of the joke in which audience recog-nition was combined with a play on words Achilles made Hector famous via thehexameters of the Iliad In terms of epic poetics the epithet lsquoslow-striding is a goodexample of substitution where the singer takes a phrase and changes a singlewordsup2 In Walcottrsquos riff Homer and Caribbean vernacular intersect

This essay aims to bring consideration of formal elements back to the centreof analysis of classical receptions The artificial polarities between studies basedon aesthetics and those based on cultural history and its contexts have some-times precluded study in depth of the role of formal structures and conventionsas a nexus between the ancient text and its audiences and between the ancienttext and its subsequent receptionssup3

If the relationship between the ante-text and its receptions is to be genuinelydialogical that is if the ancient text and its transmission and appropriationshave something to say to one another and if each influences the way that theother is read then ways have to be found of enabling close reading of the ancienttext and the modern to stake out a field of exchange Steiner calls this relation-ship one of lsquoreciprocityrsquo However reciprocity is just the fourth stage of his her-meneutic model a model that is marred by the language of violence which heuses for the second stage ndash an image of violation of the ante-text by the new

Walcott See further Hainsworth For discussion of the aestheticscultural history debates see MartindaleThomas (eds)

I do however draw on the initial stage in Steinerrsquos model that of trust ndash trustthat the ante-text has something of value to offer⁴

The hermeneutic process has been described in different ways Julia Gaisserhas written persuasively of lsquoaccretionsrsquo qualities and associations that adhere tothe ante-text in the course of its subsequent migrations re-readings and rewrit-ings She describes how perceptions of the texts and of their meaning are alteredthrough time They become lsquopliable and sticky artefacts gripped moulded andstamped with new meanings by every generation of readers and they come tous irreversibly altered by their experiencesrsquo⁵ Equally important in my vieware the dynamic processes through which poetry travels and survives and be-comes an active agent through time place language and culture This lsquoiterabil-ityrsquo of poetry is one of the key aspects that reception scholars have to handle asthey struggle to find ways of describing and explaining how and why ancienttexts continue to resurface and to act as artistic and cultural catalysts Differentapproaches have characterised the process in different ways Pucci drawing onDerrida has explored the capacity of ancient texts to produce semantic andemotional effects even when the original social and historical co-ordinates areoccluded or misunderstood by the subsequent readers and spectators⁶ Puccirsquosdiscussion was grounded in theatre poetry Poetic responses to Homer are notonly a central strand in ancient tragedy but also carriers of the energy that en-ables the richness and moral and psychological complexities of the performancepoetry of the Homeric poems to engage with the new situations into which theyare transplanted⁷ Elizabeth Cook in her prose poem Achilles included a seduc-tive sensory communication of lsquoA game of Chinese whispers A hot word throwninto the next lap before it burns It has not been allowed to set Each hand thatmomentarily holds it weighs it before depositing it with a neighbour also inad-vertently moulds it communicates its own heatrsquo (Cook 2001 104)

Scholars have rightly turned away from lsquouniversalistrsquo models that kidnap po-etic energy and write backwards in order to permanently inscribe values that arelargely invented restrospectively But the problems of explaining and interpretingtranshistorical and transcultural movements are real enough and have to be con-fronted afresh if classical reception research is to be more than an accumulationof case studies that do not go beyond the particularities and specificities inwhich they are embedded

Steiner ndash Gaisser Pucci Hardwick

16 Lorna Hardwick

In this essay I suggest that the reception histories of the Homeric epics pres-ent case studies that are not only important in themselves but also in combina-tion benefit from an approach that combines analysis of the formal elements ofthe ancient texts with close reading of what has been done with them In thatway Homeric receptions can make a special contribution in offering paradigmsfor other areas of classical reception There are two main reasons for this Firstlythe formal elements of epic mdashsuch as for example formulaic epithets similesring compositions proems codas and focalised narrativesmdash provide productiveopportunities for close reading of what happens when the formal aspects of theHomeric poems are transmitted and adapted in other literary traditions Second-ly they also provide a way into the many receptions of Homer which are eithernot directly lexically-based or use the text in inventive ways Sometimes formalaspects persist even when the interaction is not primarily lexical The tensionsbetween formal and non-formal aspects of Homeric reception may provide con-trasts not just between different receptions but also sometimes within differentaspects of the same work

To make a start in exploring this challenging area I shall focus on one keyarea the practice of repetition Philosophers such as Deleuze have used the con-cept of repetition to counter any assumptions that exact replication can ever bepossible repetition is always repetition with a difference⁸ Much has been writ-ten by scholars on the importance of cumulative technique in Homer⁹ and thedirections and tones of the expansiveness that it creates both within thepoems and in interactions with listeners and readers This expansiveness occursboth within the Homeric poems and between the poems and their receptions Forexample in the Iliad the image of the reapers which at 1167ndash71 is part of a sim-ile that holds in stark contrast the corn harvest and the mutual destruction of thetwo armies is elaborated at 18550ndash60 in the scene of harvest plenty on theshield of Achilles The image of the reapers has echoes in different directionswithin the poemWriters responding to Homer can transplant that poetic move-ment although they may contextualise it in a different waysup1⁰

Both within the Homeric poems and in subsequent literature embedded rep-etition grows into the poetics of difference Poets such as Derek Mahon have self-reflexively exploited Heraclitusrsquo metaphor of the river in which it is never possi-ble to step into the same river twice Not only the river but also the wader isnever quite the same

Deleuze Kirk vol i Reynolds

Homer Repetition and Reception 17

Nobody steps into the same river twiceThe same river is never the sameBecause that is the nature of waterSimilarly your changing metabolismMeans that you are no longer you[hellip]You will tell me that you have executedA monument more lasting than bronzeBut even bronze is perishableYour best poem you know the one I meanThe very language in which the poem was written and the idea of languageAll these things will pass away in time(Mahon lsquoHeraclitus on Riversrsquo in Mahon 1979 107)

Mahonrsquos allusion here is to Horacersquos claim in Odes 3301 that lsquoExegi monumen-tum are perenniusrsquo (lsquoI have executed a monument more lasting than bronzersquotrans West 2002 259) but an analogy might equally be made with the notionof kleos in Homer the claim that the reputation of the heroic warriors andtheir lsquogood deathsrsquo sung by the poets will outlive them One might replyldquoyes but in different ways in different traditionsrdquo and as Mahon suggests ina constantly changing poetic

I want to try to keep the axes of repetition and difference in a creative ten-sion and to trace some examples of how lsquorepetition with a differencersquo uses andadapts Homeric formal qualities with the result that the poetry that emergeshelps readers and scholars to experience and to analyse the continual processof dialogue between ancient and modern In his recent book David Hopkinshas called this lsquoConversing with Antiquityrsquo He proposes a reading processwhich works both backwards and forwards a process in which reception (andtranslation) is never a lone encounter between two parties lsquothough acts of recep-tion are necessarily made in and by individual minds those minds are them-selves already full of the imaginings intuitions and emotions of other humanmindsrsquosup1sup1 My approach is perhaps less gentle less urbane it recognises thesharp edges and the difficulties and disturbances even the conflicts that mayarise from these encounters

Homeric reception involves a variety of processes translation transplanta-tion re-imagining rewriting re-performance Sometimes these overlap Oftenthe formal aspects of lsquorepetitionrsquo serve as a metaphor for agencies that transferpoetic energy across time language and place As a basis for discussion I haveselected four aspects of the Homeric poems and shall briefly mention examples

Hopkins Italics original

18 Lorna Hardwick

of each that bear on the topic of lsquorepetitionrsquo The four areas are formal elementsiconic episodes performance themes

a Formal elements

Formal elements that we have become accustomed to identify with distinctiveHomeric poetics include epithets similes and focalised narrative Separatelyand in combination each of these has an impact in recent literary receptionsshaping readersrsquo perceptions of what is specifically Homeric about the new writ-ing The aesthetic and cultural power of the new writing both draws on Homerand also remodels Homer The formal intertextuality becomes a distinctivepart of the poetics of the new writer who is both writing from his or her literarytradition and aiming to create a new dimension to it

Homeric similes have been drawn into new work in ways that play with per-ceptions of both the ancient and the modern For instance in Patrick KavanaghrsquoslsquoEpicrsquo (1951) the Irish poet Kavanagh (who was to be an important influence onSeamus Heaney and Michael Longley) transposes into a context of disputesabout agricultural land in rural Ireland the simile from Iliad 12421ndash25 inwhich there is a stalemate between the two opposing sides In so doing hedraws on the translation by EV Rieu that he had recently read lsquothey werelike two men quarrelling across a fence in the common field with yardsticks intheir hands each of them fighting for his fair share in a narrow striprsquosup1sup2

This is interesting because Kavanagh does not refer to the specific simile norto the ancient context of the Achaian and Trojan armies A reader who did notknow the Iliad (or at least not very well) might miss the repetitionsup1sup3 Kavanaghworked from the local to the global In this case the global was lsquothe year ofthe Munich botherrsquo that is the events preceding World War II which werealso exercising his mind as he wrote Only later in the poem does he allude tolsquothe ghost of Homerrsquo that helped him to see the links between local mattersand the world stage Some of Kavanaghrsquos readers would spot the reversal ofthe Homeric simile others would merely have a generalised conception ofHomer as a lsquopoet of warrsquo In either case it is the formal movement that is impor-tant

There are many notable examples of the localglobal connection being madethrough the use of short (often very short) Homeric similes in Derek Walcottrsquos

Rieu See further Hardwick


Omeros (1990)sup1⁴ Such use of similes is part of Walcottrsquos poetic technique whichexploits a variety of classicizing devices including an ironic katabasissup1⁵ For lon-ger and more expansive similes we can turn to Michael Longley who often in-cludes a very close translation as part of his sonnets into which he interpolateshis own specificities of place and linguistic register drawing on any disjunctionthat is part of the Homeric simile An example is his exploitation of the poppy asthe image of the death of Gorgythion in lsquoA Poppyrsquo (2000)sup1⁶ In contrast with Ka-vanagh the classicist Longley expects his readers to be aware of this He writeslsquoan image Virgil steals hellipand so do Irsquo thus proclaiming his own status alongsideVirgil as a poet energised by Homer (Longley 2006 255)

However my argument about the importance of formal elements does notdepend just on the examples of transposition of similes A whole range of fram-ing and detailed devices is involved In a recent discussion of formalism in Ho-meric reception Simon Perris argues that Homeric receptions pointedly use pro-ems and codas to position themselves with respect to genre theme and literarytradition and that this is a highly charged literary manoeuvre that establishes orrejects a relationship with Homeric epicsup1⁷ Perrisrsquo discussion ranges over exam-ples from poetry (Logue and Walcott) to science fiction and the novel Formalopening and closing devices as much as similes position the new works bothin relation to Homer and in relation to other works This suggests that compar-ison between new works (including between genres) is important in allowingconsideration of how they relate to one another as well as to the Homericante-text Hopkinsrsquo concept of lsquoconversingrsquo has lateral trajectories as well as di-achronic The triangularity model involved in reading comparative relationshipsallows close reading and formal analysis to operate without constraining therange of meanings or positioning the ancient text as a closed arbiter of meaningand cultural value

b Iconic episodes

These are episodes that lsquorecurrsquo (sc are repeated) in many receptions of HomerThey draw on knowledge of the story of the Iliad or the Odyssey includingstock scenes that are repeated within the poems themselves and also appeal

See Hardwick for discussion of the relationship between Walcottrsquos strategy in Omeros and the tree-felling simile used in the narrative of the death of Sarpedon in Iliad ndash Hardwick Discussed in Taplin Perris

20 Lorna Hardwick

to a wider audience that may have more generalised perceptions about what sortof poet Homer is Sometimes the lsquorepetition with a differencersquo involves the se-quence and arrangement of lines For example Michael Longley lsquoCeasefirersquo(1995) which images the supplication scene between Priam and Achilles inIliad 24 moves to the very end of the poem and after the meal of reconciliation

I get down on my knees and do what must be doneAnd kiss Achillesrsquo hand the killer of my son(Longley 2006 225)

Longleyrsquos lines thus represent a coda to this variant on the stock scene of sup-plication rather than a kind of proem and so perhaps bring home to readerswhat they will have to do in order to live in peace across the sectarian divideat the time of a truce in the north of Ireland

Recent examples which have taken Homeric repetition with a difference farbeyond the circle of classicists have featured the slaughter of the suitors and thehanging of the maids in the Odyssey Michael Longley lsquoThe Butchersrsquo (1991)transposed the slaughter to modern Ireland during lsquoThe Troublesrsquo (Longley2006 194) Derek Walcott in The Odyssey A Stage Version (1993) had Penelopeprevent the hanging of the maid probably because Walcott could not stomachthe apparent aesthetic validation of a treatment of house slaves that resonatedwith the history of slavery in the Caribbean In Walcott the simile associatedwith the fluttering of the maids as they hung (Odyssey 22465ndash72) is transferredto Penelope as an image of her suffering lsquothey tried to strangle lovehellipShe flut-tered She played dead but her warm heart still beatrsquo (Walcott 1993 158)

The hanging of the maids has come to represent a topos in the history of op-pression It underlies the hangings of women in the futuristic fundamentalistpatriarchy depicted in Margaret Atwoodrsquos The Handmaidrsquos Tale (1986) and ofthe maids in her novella The Penelopiad (2005) which was subsequently adapt-ed for the stage and premiered by the Royal Shakespeare Company The publish-ed play text has an image of the mains on the cover (Atwood 2007) In the stageversion the play ends with Penelopersquos vision of the dead maids who return tohaunt her and Odysseus lsquoWe had no voicewe had no namewe had no choic-ehellipwe took the blameit was not fairrsquo But they resist Penelopersquos grasp

I hold out my arms to them my doves my loveliest ones But they only run awayRun isnrsquot quite accurate Their legs donrsquot move Their still-twitching feet donrsquot touch theground(Atwood 2007 scene 32 p 82)


c Performance

Atwoodrsquos staged Penelopiad differed in significant respects from the book ver-sion that preceded it notably the arguments presented for and against the hang-ing of the maids (lsquoThe Trial of Odysseusrsquo)sup1⁸ Performing Homerrsquos performance po-etry rather than reading it on the page brings together rhapsode players andaudience in ways that are sometimes mediated by expectations about Greek the-atre but which also draw on the interactions that the Homeric poems set up be-tween poem and listeners In her introductory remarks to the Edinburgh Festivalrehearsed readings from her work Achilles (Edinburgh Book Festival 2003 12 Au-gust) Elizabeth Cook paid tribute to the actor Greg Hicks because of his experi-ence of classical performance She said that what made Homer a poet for thepresent was not just the material shared between antiquity and modernity(fishspearsshields) but rather the physiology and chemistry of the bodywhich enabled communication of emotions that enabled moderns to have a rap-port with the ancients These elements were to the fore in Verse Theater Manhat-tanrsquos 2003 tour of Christopher Loguersquos lsquoAccountrsquo of the Iliad War Music (present-ed by an all-female cast) I was able to interview the company after theirperformance in Bristol in March 2003 One actor commented (on Loguersquos text)that lsquoitrsquos a very muscular texthelliptherersquos not a huge thought process between feel-ing and action So I know for myself that the more I could invest in it physicallythe betterhellipto understand and really wrap myself around these charactersrsquo Sheadded that lsquowe had worked with very heavy shields and swords during the fightsso that we learned the weight of these weapons so that when we didnrsquot have themwe had the physical memory of what it was like to move with thatrsquo (italics added)This placed great demands on the audience because in the actual performanceweapons were not used lsquoDuring rehearsal we just had to keep trusting theyrsquoregoing to see what wersquore going for without us holding the actual spearrsquo

Performance poetry ancient and modern brings the physical memory of theaudience into play This adds an extra dimension to what Elizabeth Minchin hasdiscussed in her 2007 monographsup1⁹ (This is a companion work to her Homer andthe Resources of Memory [2001] which considers the implications of cognitivetheory to the Homeric epics) In her 2007 book Minchin explores the relationshipbetween discourse and memory which she stresses is multifaceted including in-formation stored by the senses and also lsquoworld knowledgersquo that is informationabout the physical environment the social world and the skills needed in those

See Atwoodrsquos comment in Atwood viindashviii Minchin

22 Lorna Hardwick

contexts (Minchin 2007 9) This she argues supports the bard providing scriptsfrom episodic memory (eg on preparing meals harnessing horses departingguests) What carries these into the poems are the formal aspects of stylisationand poetic language One element cues the next and carries into compositionThey embrace not only physical acts but also speech acts Minchinrsquos analysis car-ries this further and she shows how rhythm repetition and memory are inter-twined in the generation of lsquoanswersrsquo (opcit 96 ff) The answers examined byMinchin are mainly those invited in conversation They involve the respondenttaking the words and phrases of the question posed and reusing them in hisor her answer (for instance when Apollo asks Hermes whether he would wishto be in Aresrsquo position in Od 8335ndash37) I suggest that this may be a fruitful anal-ogy to use in discussing Homeric receptions The rewriter responds to the ante-text by including the material that has triggered his or her response And as Min-chin points out (opcit 107) poetic and everyday conversational practices oftenconverge

d Themes

The handling of such themes as war and peace in Homeric receptions would re-quire a paper in itself The assumption that such situations are repeated through-out history enables the themes in Homer to be used as a field for creative inter-pretation and reflection War as a theme that links Homer with subsequenthuman experience and has affinities with theatrical performance in that it re-quires the bodily co-presence of fighters (military practitioners commonly referto the area of combat as the lsquotheatrersquo) Metaphors and experiences of war are sig-nificant activators of the links between the poetry of the Iliad and modern read-ers and listeners Homeric epic provides experiential parallels and psychologicaltriggers that enable war poetry to communicate across generations contributinga physical and emotional force to the rhythm repetition and memory describedby Minchin In her recent study of literary representations of war from the Iliadto Iraq Kate McLoughlin comments

lsquoThe reasons that make warrsquos representation imperative are as multitudinous as thosewhich make it impossible to impose discursive order on the chaos of conflicthellipto keepthe record for the self and others (those who were there and can no longer speak for them-


selves and those who were not there and need to be told to give some meaning to massdeath to memorialisehellipto provide cathartic relief to warn and even through the warningto promote peacersquosup2⁰

Multi-faceted aspects of Homeric repetition and reception ndash formal performativeand thematicmdashhave been brought together in a new poem by Alice Oswald enti-tled Memorial (2011) which Oswald describes as a lsquotranslation of the Iliadrsquos at-mosphere not its story generated by the Iliadrsquos enargeia (which she glossesas lsquobright unbearable realityrsquo) To communicate that enargeia she strips awayHomeric narrative to reveal a poem made of similes and short biographies of sol-diers which she thinks derive from the Greek tradition of lament poetry So herpoem presents a lsquokind of oral cemeteryrsquo an attempt to remember peoplersquos namesand lives She paraphrases the biographies but translates the similes Each is re-peated as if in a lament (with a sometimes incantatory effect) and is also trans-posed away from its place in Homerrsquos poem a kind of parataxis She wrote lsquoI usethem as openings to see what Homer was looking atrsquo (Oswald 2011 2) The trans-positions add to the memorial a lament for those whose names were only record-ed in Homer with little or no comment They are in some ways subversive of thestress on iconic episodes that is found in so many receptions of Homer So herethere is repetition with a difference to make a new poem but it is a repetitionthat also draws on the structures in the Homeric poem itself

Oswaldrsquos text starts with a list of names of those killed in the Iliad Thenames take up seven and a half pages They are not in alphabetical order ason most memorials but in the order of their passing So the poem begins prosai-cally lsquoThe first to die was Protesilausrsquo (opcit 13) The descriptions of the menand their deaths use material that is in Homer but they are interwoven with sim-iles taken from different parts of the poem Unlike Logue who uses differentnames so that there is a disjunction from Homer that can disorientate the readerOswald retains the names but expands on their deaths by associating them withthe refrains provided by similes that are repeated In the Catalogue of Ships inthe second book of the Iliad Protesilaus is introduced as the first leader to die(2695ndash702) there is an allusion to his widow who tears her cheeks with griefand then the focus returns to his successor as leader Oswald reworks thislsquoHis wife rushed out clawing her facersquo and lsquoPodarcus his altogether less impres-sive brotherTook over command but that was long agoHersquos been in the blackearth now for thousands of yearsrsquo Time is rewritten both forwards and back-wards Then a nine-line simile is repeated twice to give Protesilaus the memorialthat he does not achieve in Homer

McLoughlin

24 Lorna Hardwick

Like a wind-murmurBegins a rumour of wavesOne long note getting louderThe water breathes a deep sighLike a land ndash rippleWhen the west wind runs through a fieldWishing and SearchingNothing to be foundThe corn stalks shake their green heads(Oswald 201114)

There are echoes of the simile at Iliad 2144ndash52 when the assembly of Greeksloses heart and begins to leave for home but there is also a foreshadowing ofGlaukosrsquo simile of the leaves at Iliad 6146ndash51 in which he likens the genera-tions of humanity to those of the leaves which are scattered by the wind butthe trees from which they are shaken produce new leaves in the next season Os-wald holds the two similes in tension by the use of the phrase lsquoshake their greenheadsrsquo for the corn-stalks that can provide no comfort but nevertheless image thepromise of new life In Homer the formulaic epithet applied to the grain-givingfield in 2548 (ζείδωρος ἄρουρα) is associated with Erechtheus and autochthonyOswald takes up the sequence of associations in the next section which refers toEchepolus lsquoknown for his cold seed-like concentrationrsquo and to Elephenor whodies trying to reclaim his corpse In contrast with Homer in Oswald both attracta short simile in lament again repeated

Like leavesSometimes they light their green flamesAnd are fed by the earthAnd sometimes it snuffs them out(opcit 15)

The shaking heads of the corn stalks of the previous simile are given a greaterambivalence by juxtaposition with the one that follows it in Oswald

I hope I have shown that lsquorepetitionrsquo in its various guises also involves move-ment and difference At its most effective it is also developmental The formalstructures in Homer and their transplantation into a new work provide waysof marking and responding to lsquotime tensionsrsquosup2sup1 as well as bringing the repressedto the fore The most influential aspects of Homeric epic such as iconic episodesthemes and the poetics of performance need to be considered through the formalstructures and practices that transmit and embed them I suggest that examina-

I borrow the insight from Taplin


tion of repetition and difference both formal and narrative yields significant in-sights into how the Homeric poems are subsequently conceived and reconceivedIf I am right in my claims that the study of the migration of iconic episodes andthemes in Homer necessarily involves formal elements then the relationship be-tween the textual study of the Homeric poems and the lsquoidea of Homerrsquo that per-sists in the popular imagination (eg Homer as a poet of war) also becomes partof a lateral conversation rather than a polarity This is exemplified in Oswaldrsquospoem There is surely rich work to be done to trace the propensities that differentformal elements take with them when they are repeated and varied in new con-texts

Finally I would like to comment briefly on the issues raised for the lsquoethics ofreceptionrsquo a strand of debate in contemporary studies that has particular impli-cations for the status and interpretation of the Homeric poems and the recep-tions that they have inspired A recent article by the translation studies scholarLawrence Venuti was called lsquoThe Poetrsquos Version or An ethics of translationrsquosup2sup2 Inthis article Venuti revisited some of his early work on lsquodomesticatingrsquo and lsquofor-eignisingrsquo models for translation He argues that lsquothe poetrsquos versionrsquo is a sec-ond-order creation that mixes translation and adaptation and that this is a twen-tieth-century phenomenon that is distinct from early modern notions oflsquoimitationrsquo Part of his argument is about the critical impact of creative rework-ings on the receiving culture a relationship that he addresses in terms of ethicsHe complains that lsquothe poets who practise it have not always been forthrightabout what they have donersquosup2sup3 There are several things wrong with this state-ment For a start poets do what poets will do Practising the art of poetrydoes not necessarily require the provision of a commentary on their work (de-spite the usefulness of such metapoetical material as authorial prefaces or theextensive interviews given by poets such as Seamus Heaney and Derek Walcott)However my main disagreement with Venuti is that in the case of rewritings ofHomer the commentary is in the poetry A lsquocommentaryrsquo is actually often implic-itly contained in the new text in the formal arrangements chosen by the newwriter These are not a mystery closed to those (including the new writer) whomay not know Homeric Greek but are transparent both on the page and onthe stage They at minimum provide the raw material for comparisons and atmaximum introduce an element of self-reflexivity

Thus attention to the formal aspects of the relationship between the ante-text the new text and the mediating texts both implies respect for the aesthetics

Venuti Venuti

26 Lorna Hardwick

of each of the contributions (recognizing the fluidity of recombinations in all theliterary traditions that are involved) and as a result enables comparisons withinand between texts Adaptations of form both signal relationships and complicatethem whether the exchanges take place in conversational mode (as Hopkinsterms it) or in challenging mode (as Logue practises it and as Oswald explores)Much is talked about the lsquonew philologyrsquo that classical reception research re-quires I think it is important that formal analysis and comparison is part ofthe scrutiny not solely of literary receptions but also of those that exploreother genres Such investigations imply greater collaboration between receptionscholars and specialists in other areas of Classics The Corfu conference offeredus a range of examples and approaches and as we heard about them in the var-ious panels we experienced a central strand of Homeric poetics and its recep-tions ndash repetition with a differencesup2⁴

I would like to thank the organisers for devising this conference and I am grateful to the Ion-ian University for its warm welcome and hospitality to visitors from overseas in November It was an honour and a delight to be in the company of such a gathering of Homer scholars



Margarita Alexandrou

Hipponax and the OdysseySubverting Text and Intertext

Reception of a text can take multiple forms citation imitation opposition re-modelling parody Of all these modes parody is both the most indicative of au-thority of the target text and the most interesting play with poetic authority as itis arguably the most metapoetic of all literary devices The lsquosubversiversquo receptionof the Homeric Odyssey by the sixth-century BC iambic poet Hipponax is onesuch case of a play with poetic authority that has already been explored asparodysup1 (on parodic treatments of Odysseus in later periods of time see Petrakouin this volume)

My aim in this paper is to investigate the engagement of Hipponax withHomer and to revisit the subtle intra-textual and inter-textual dynamics betweenthe receiving and the source texts and their respective genre iambos and epos Ihope to show that the Odyssey is firmly embedded in the conceptualization ofHipponaxrsquos own iambos that the epos is there not only as a hypotextsup2 of parodicallusion but as an intertext that is employed particularly at moments where thepoetic agenda is articulated In order to deconstruct and analyze the complexityof Hipponaxrsquos reception of the source text I will examine briefly some notablefeatures of his poetry that single him out amongst archaic poets

Hipponax represents the latest and in a sense most distilled phase of archaiciambos Active in a different geographical and chronological area in comparison tothe older exponents of the genre Archilochus and Semonides Hipponax distanceshimself from the mainstream iambos in many respects by narrowing down its

I am indebted to Professor Chris Carey for his insightful comments on this paper For parody in Hipponax see Degani ndash Pogravertulas Miralles and Pogravertulas ndash Rosen Carey ndash Parody is a multifarious phenomenontherefore a useful but perhaps limited term for the complex intertextual and intergeneric engage-ment at play here in Hipponax My aim here is not to deny the importance of parody in Hippo-nax but to shed some further light on its presence and role The complex nature of Hipponaxrsquosparody fits recent accounts that see parody of one text as revealing of the hypertextrsquos own fic-tional practices and therefore acting as meta-fiction On parody as literary criticism see Dentith and on parody as metafiction see Rose and Genette () coins the term to indicate the text upon which the secondary work is modelled(the secondary text itself is called hypertext) The intertextual relationship of the hypertext to thehypotext is not necessarily parodic

scope and taking some of its features to extremessup3 Through his poetry he creates afictional or semi-fictional world a very narrow low and circumscribed worldwithin which he situates himself and other low characters This world presentedby his poetry is one dominated by ugly people burglars beggars and gluttonsand humorous episodes of sexual and scatological activity of a farcical and grotes-que nature Recurrent characters and situations across his poems create a sense ofcoherence a character named Bupalus is regularly vilified as an enemy and Areteanother recurring figure appears to be a woman of sexual license⁴ even a char-acter named Hipponax regularly figures as a brawler burglar beggar or sexualpredator sometimes impotent a character involved in all kinds of humiliatingactivities⁵ The Hipponactean narrator (implicitly distinct from the Hipponax char-acter) is also an outsider and situates himself among the dregs⁶

Hipponaxrsquos love for ugliness marginality and grotesquery is reflected inboth diction and form his linguistic register achieves a degree of cruditywhich outstrips his predecessors and his Ionic dialect contains elements ofLydian⁷ His invective is distinctive in the lack of any wider element of reflectionor justification for his attacks and he constitutes a new and lsquouglierrsquo turn for iam-bos even in his use of metre He uses the choliambicscazon metre (an iambicmetre which ends in a spondee rather than an iambos) a lsquolamersquo metre as itsname suggests whose ending creates a rhythmically limping effect compatiblewith the lsquouglyrsquo and unorthodox character of Hipponaxrsquos poems

As I shall argue the extent to which Hipponax uses lsquouglinessrsquo⁸ (in languagetheme metre social register construction of the poetic persona) and the way inwhich the Homeric intertext is introduced in this world creates more than just a dif-ference within the standard generic range already offered by the lsquoless elevatedrsquo iam-bosiambic agenda His use of ugliness is embedded in a larger (meta)poetic strat-

General important studies on Hipponaxrsquos iambography are West ndash and ndash De-gani and Miralles-Pogravertulas Brown ndash Carey ndash For gen-eral recent discussions of iambos see Bartol Carey Kantzios Rotstein The name Bupalus occurs in the corpus eleven times frr W W W W W W W a W W (also perhaps in frr W W though the text is veryuncertain) and the name Arete four frr W W W W Another female characterCypso with the name perhaps being an obscene distortion of the name Calypso seems to appeartwice in the corpus in frr W and W (in the second instance the text is uncertain) See frr W and W On the distinctiveness of the Hipponactean narrator see Morrison mainly ndash Seealso Carey ndash On Hipponactean language see most recently Hawkins By lsquouglinessrsquo I mean the marked deviation from social physical aesthetic poetic moral ide-als and norms which invites the alienation of the readeraudience

32 Margarita Alexandrou

egy which uses intertextual dynamics to make an implicit statement about earlyGreek poetic genres and also achieves as we shall see below complex effects interms of characterization of the primary narrator and the received text

A selection of a number of Hipponactean fragments can illustrate the constantmultilayered engagement with the OdysseyWhereas at first glance they appear to belowlife accounts of frauds sexual encounters fights or drinking events they seemhowever to be bringing Odyssey to the foreground in a number of ways⁹

Hipponax uses the Odyssey primarily to outline the profile of the iambistnarrator himself as it is evident in the following hymnic style poems

Ἑρμῆ φίλrsquo Ἑρμῆ Μαιαδεῦ Κυλλήνιεἐπεύχομαί τοι κάρτα γὰρ κακῶς ῥιγῶκαὶ βαμβαλύζω hellipδὸς χλαῖναν Ἱππώνακτι καὶ κυπασσίσκονκαὶ σαμβαλίσκα κἀσκερίσκα καὶ χρυσοῦστατῆρας ἑξήκοντα τοὐτέρου τοίχου (fr 32 W)sup1⁰

Hermes dear Hermes son of Maia CyllenianI pray to you for I am shivering violently and terriblyand my teeth are chatteringhellipGive Hipponax a cloak tunic sandals felt shoesand 60 gold staters on the other side

ἐμοὶ γὰρ οὐκ ἔδωκας οὔτέ κω χλαῖνανδασεῖαν ἐν χειμῶνι φάρμακον ῥίγltεοgtςοὔτrsquo ἀσκέρηισι τοὺς πόδας δασείηισιἔκρυψας ὥς μοι μὴ χίμετλα ῥήγνυται (fr 34 W)

For you havenrsquot yet given me a thick cloakas a remedy against the cold in winternor have you covered my feet with thick felt shoesso that my chilblains not burst

The speaker claims to be operating from a state of great poverty and makes anumber of bold requests to Hermes The distinctive tone here resides both inthe ironic irreverence of the narrator and also the intimate relationship that isimplied to exist between the narrator and god Hermes reminiscent of Odysseusrsquorelationship with his divine patron Athena (and occasionally Hermes see also

By that time the Homeric epics must have already been the most recognizable Greek culturalartefacts The poet could therefore rely on his audience to engage in the triangular process nec-essary for successful intertextuality All Hipponactean fragments are quoted according to West IEG

ndash translations arefrom Gerber with minor adjustments

Hipponax and the Odyssey Subverting Text and Intertext 33

below discussion of fr 79 W) Moreover the request for a cloak especially enhan-ces identification with Odysseus and simultaneously leads to an undercutting ofthe iambist by recalling Od 1678ndash85sup1sup1 where Telemachus at Eumaeusrsquo placepromises to give a cloak sandals and food to Odysseus In the requests of theirreverent narrator in the Hipponactean fragment lurks no less irony than inthe episode with the disguised king Odysseus in Odyssey 16

Another instance of identification of the Hipponactean narrator with Odys-seus occurs in fr 73 W with the narrator being involved in a boxing matchwhich is described in graphic detail and recalls strongly Odysseusrsquo boxingmatch with Irussup1sup2

ὤμειξε δrsquo αἷμα καὶ χολὴν ἐτίλησενἐγὼ δεγ[ ]οἱ δέ μltεο ὀgtδόντεςἐν ταῖς γνάθοισι πάντες ltἐκgtκεκινltέαgtται (fr 73 W)

helliphe pissed blood and shat bilebut Ihellip and all the teethin my jaws have been dislodgedhellip

A Hipponax character distinct from the Hipponactean narrator is often involvedin low narratives and is also modelled on the figure of Odysseus We are betterserved in this respect by fr 79 W that preserves a more substantial narrativeHere the Hipponax character is assimilated to Odysseus again by evoking recog-nisable incidents from the Odyssey

ἀ ]λοιᾶσθα[ιτῆς ] ἀνοιΐης ταύτη[ςτὴ ]ν γνάθον παρα[

]ι κηρίνους ἐποι[ 5]κἀνετίλησε[]χρυσολαμπέτωι ῥάβδωι ]αν ἐγγὺς ἑρμῖνος

Ἑρμῆς δrsquo ἐς Ἱππώνακτος ἀκολουθήσαςτο ]ῦ κυνὸς τὸν φιλήτην 10

]ὡς ἔχιδνα συρίζει]αξ δὲ νυκτὶ βου[hellip()][]καὶ κατεφράσθη[]δευς κατεσκη[

Od ndash ἀλλrsquo ἦ τοι τὸν ξεῖνον ἐπεὶ τεὸν ἵκετο δῶμα ἕσσω μιν χλαῖνάν τε χιτῶνά τε εἵματακαλά δώσω δὲ ξίφος ἄμφηκες καὶ ποσσὶ πέδιλα πέμψω δrsquo ὅππῃ μιν κραδίη θυμός τε κελεύει Od κάπτων ἀμφοτέρῃσι χαμαῖ δε κε πάντας ὀδόντας γναθμῶν ἐξελάσαιμι For a dis-cussion of the relation between Hipponax and the Homeric Odysseus see Rosen ndash


ἐμερ]μήριξε τῶι δὲ κ[η]λητ[ῆι 15]ς παῦνι μυῖαν [

ὁ δrsquo αὐτίκrsquo ἐλθὼν σὺν τριοῖσι μάρτυσινὅκου τὸν ἔρπιν ὁ σκότος καπηλεύειἄνθρωπον εὗρε τὴν στέγην ὀφέλλοντα ndashοὐ γὰρ παρῆν ὄφελμα ndash πυθμένι στοιβῆς 20

hellip to be cudgelledhelliphellip of this foolishnesshelliphellip(striking) his jawhelliphellipmade of waxhelliphellipand he shat uponhelliphellipstaff gleaming with goldhelliphellipnear the bed postAnd Hermes providing an escort to the house of Hipponaxhellipthe dog-stealerhellip helliphisses like a viperhelliphellip(Hipponax deliberating) at nighthelliphellipand devisedhelliphelliphellippondered and to the charmerhelliphellipsmall() (like) a flyhellipWith three witnesses he went at onceto the place where the swindler sells wineand found a fellow sweeping the roomwith a stock of thorn since no broom was at hand

This obscure and quite complicated narrative is typically Hipponactean in style inthat it is broadly realistic vivid and racy concerning probably an act of theft inwhich a number of characters are involved (Hermes and the Hipponax characterat l 9 the recurring Bupalus perhaps at l 12 and three witnesses at l 17) Hermesrsquointervention betrays that his narrative is more than just a story about lowlifes andinvites us to notice the interaction with epos and see this as a parallel to Athenarsquosdivine patronage to Odysseussup1sup3 Hipponax seems to act as the hero of his own nar-rative with his own divine patron and is simultaneously also a lowlife trickster thispresentation has a bearing on Odysseussup1⁴ One recalls also specifically Od 10275ndash301 where a disguised Odysseus meets Hermes on his way to Circe and the godgives him the potion that will later protect him from her

Moreover Hipponax lsquopopulatesrsquo his poetry with lsquoOdysseanrsquo characters (AreteCypso)sup1⁵ Their presence and the very fact that they are taken from the fairytale

See Carey On Odysseus as the archetypal trickster see for instance Pucci See above n


world of Odysseusrsquo adventures described in the Odyssey is in marked contrast to thearguably different kind of ugly fairytale world suggested by the Hipponactean con-texts

Frr 13 and 14 Wwhich probably formed parts of a single poem present a drink-ing party of people of the low orders (notice that they drink wine from a milk pail)Arete is presiding over this party so the scene parodically recalls the Phaeacian Are-tersquos presence and presiding role in Alcinousrsquo palace in Od 753ff

ἐκ πελλίδος πίνοντες οὐ γὰρ ἦν αὐτῆικύλιξ ὁ παῖς γὰρ ἐμπεσὼν κατήραξε (fr 13 W)

drinking (plural) from a pailfor she had no cup since the slave had fallen on itand smashed it

ἐκ δὲ τῆς πέλληςἔπινον ἄλλοτrsquo αὐτός ἄλλοτrsquo Aρήτηπρούπινεν (fr 14 W)

they were drinking from the pail nowhe and now Arete were drinking a toast

Less straightforward in its Odyssean overtones but also significant is fr 12 W inwhich the recurring figures of Bupalus and Arete seem to be involved in whatlooks to be an act of theft or fraudsup1⁶ Apart from Arete here being set in yet anotherlowlife story parody is enhanced on another level Despite the low content we haveuse of high style language (Ἐρυθραίων παῖδας δυσώνυμον cf eg Il 6255 δυσώνυ-μοι υἷες Aχαιῶν) which creates this mock stylistic effect typical of Hipponaxsup1⁷Here(at least in what is preserved from this poem) one steps back from very specific en-gagement with Odysseus to a more pervasive sort of epic feel

τούτοισι θηπέων τοὺς Ἐρυθραίων παῖδαςὁ μητροκοίτης Βούπαλος σὺν Aρήτηιdaggerκαὶ ὑφέλξων τὸν δυσώνυμον daggerἄρτον (fr 12 W)Bupalus the mother-fucker with Aretefooling with these words (by these means) the Erythraeanspreparing to draw back the damnable loaf

The majority of scholars read this passage as an erotic one see Masson ad loc Degani ad loc Rosen However for reasons that are beyond the scope of this paper I take itas a narrative of an act of stealing We sporadically find other mock epic diction in the Hipponactean corpus eg fr a W frWand W Wand W (which are specifically parodying the hymnic form) see also fr W and fr W


Apart from similar fleetingsubtle evocations of the Odyssey in the scazonpoems there is some scanty evidence that Hipponax may have composedmore substantial mock-epic narratives as suggested in frr 74ndash77 W

οδυ[[

ω[[ (fr 74 W)

hellipOdysseushellip

timesndash υ ]ωλῆν[timesndash υ ]ζ ων φυκι[timesndash ]αν αὐτὸν ὅστις ε[timesndash ]ἐπεὶ τὸν ψωμὸ[ν

]ερεῦσι τὴν γενὴ[ν (fr 75 W)helliphellipseaweedrazor-fishhelliphelliphim whohelliphellipsincewhen the nibbleshelliphellipthey ask questions about hismy familyhellip

timesndash υndash ]υψου[timesndash υ (ndash) ]αιηκας[timesndash υ ]επλοωσεν[times ]ασιος ὥσπερ βου[

]υτο φρενώλης τ[ 5times ]θεν διδάξων γ[timesndash ]ο κορσιππ[timesndash υ ]λυκρον κ[timesndash υ ]εκτης[timesndash ]ενειδα[ 10

timesndash υ ]αλλα τ[ (fr 77 W)

hellip(C)ypso ()helliphellip(Ph)aeacians()helliphelliphelliplike (Bupalus)helliphellipfrenziedhelliphellip(came) to predicthelliphelliplotus roothellip

Although the condition of these fragments is desperate they seem to have con-stituted either a single poem or adjacent poems as parts of a single Odysseannarrative sequence (on grounds of content and position on the papyrus) Hippo-nax seems to mainly draw again his refashioned material specifically on the


Phaeacian rhapsodies of the Odysseysup1⁸ A number of narrative details would fit adistorted version of Odysseusrsquo adventures related in a very condensed mannerreferences to seaweed (fr 752 W) to the Phaeacians asking questions about fam-ily (fr 755 W) and to τὸν ψωμό[ν (lsquomorselrsquo or lsquonibblesrsquo in fr 754 W) may pointeither to the Cyclops incident (linguistically) or may involve a distorted allusionto the Phaeacian dinner of Odysseussup1⁹

The transformation of the Homeric model seems substantial firstly there isperhaps admixture with other contemporary themes and characters (perhaps areference to Bupalus in fr 774 W) Secondly the poem would appear to bequite long for the Hipponactean standards though still much shorter than theepic Thirdly it may have moved quite rapidly between incidents which wouldmake it visibly different from epic and may have also displayed some of thechanges of scene and pace that we find elsewhere in Hipponaxsup2⁰

The third person singular narrative raises important questions regarding thenarrator either the regular Hipponactean narrator tells the story of an Odysseusas an extra-diegetic narrator or even Odysseus himself assumes the role of thenarrator as in the Odyssey and narrates a distorted version of his well-known ad-ventures This in turn makes one wonder if Odysseus here was modelled on thecharacter of Hipponax (as Hipponax is elsewhere modelled on Odysseus)

The most crucial indication here for our understanding is that fr 74 W preserveswhat seems from the papyrus to be a title relating to Odysseus or Odyssey (οδυ[)most likely the only Hipponactean title preserved in the whole of the corpus Itmay be that the distinctive Odyssean mythical content of this poem justified the at-tribution of a title as well as its scale In fact if indeed frr 74ndash77 W belonged to afirst person narrative entitled Ὀδυσσεύς we are probably indeed before a little mockmini-epicsup2sup1 The mock-epic content of this set of fragments and the title could evenpoint to a type of performance different than that of the rest of the Hipponactean

See Rosen ndash who regards Odysseus as figuring as a satirist already in Homerand then becoming a favourite iambic and comic theme The occurrence of διδάξων (fr W) suggests that we may even have a reference to a prophe-cy Perhaps the pronounced narrative element of iambos in comparison to the rest of lyric ac-knowledged by Bowie ndash allowed Hipponax to elaborate in this kind of reception ofthe epic as narrative element is a distinctive feature of the epos as well and this enabled theHipponactean narrator to align or contrast himself with the Homeric one Of course it may also be that Hipponaxrsquos predilection for the Odyssey reflects the penchantof the author and of his generic agenda for mythological narratives in general For a more de-tailed discussion of this set of fragments along with another set of Hipponactean fragments(frr ndash W) that seem to relate mythical narrative see Alexandrou


material perhaps festive rather than sympotic something which has a bearing onthe implications of the narrative style and intertextsup2sup2

Parodic transformation of the Homeric model by Hipponax takes also anoth-er form It accommodates the hexameter and Homeric formulae Fr 128 W con-stitutes a satire of the grandiose Homeric metre used to satirize the exceedingappetite of a voracious glutton but also constitutes a very concentrated parodyof the beginning lines of the Odysseysup2sup3

Μοῦσά μοι Εὐρυμεδοντιάδltεαgt τὴν ποντοχάρυβδιντὴν ἐν γαστρὶ μάχαιραν ὃς ἐσθίει οὐ κατὰ κόσμονἔννεφrsquo ὅπως ψηφῖδι lt gt κακὸν οἶτον ὀλεῖταιβουλῆι δημοσίηι παρὰ θῖνrsquo ἁλὸς ἀτρυγέτοιο (fr 128 W)

Tell me Muse of the sea swallowingthe stomach carving of Eurymedontiades who eats in no orderly mannerso that through a baneful vote determined by the peoplehe may die a wretched death along the shore of the undraining () sea

Hipponax however departs from Homerrsquos word-order to enhance the parodic ef-fect and parades a number of Homericepic motifs the invocation to the Musethe interposition of the first person the request to sing the epic dialectal formsthe long compound Homeric style words in appropriate metrical positions theuse of Homeric formulae and allusion to Charybdissup2⁴ It may be that hexametricalparody was a significant strand in the corpus which is unfortunately lost to ussup2⁵

In frr 72 W and 16 W we seem to digress from the Odyssey and have a refer-ence to the famous Rhesus story in Iliad 10

ἐπrsquo ἁρμάτων τε καὶ Θρεϊκίων πώλωνλευκῶν daggerὀείους κατεγγὺςdagger Ἰλίου πύργωνἀπηναρίσθη Ῥῆσος Αἰνειῶν πάλμυς (fr 725ndash7 W)

There is much dispute in scholarship about the performance of Hipponactean poetry I incline tothe view that much of the material is sympotic and that public performance was possible only forpart of the corpus For the different views on Hipponactean performance see West OCD sv lsquoiambicpoetry Greekrsquo (for festive performance) and Bowie (for sympotic performance) Fr W mentioning Cypso scans in hexameter and enhances the possibility that theremay have been more poems written in hexameters designed to be parodies of the epos as inthe case of fr W or maybe we had poems with a mixture of rhythms For comic parody of the epic invocation see also Archil fr W τὸν κεροπλάστην ἄειδεΓλαῦκον See below the testimonium of Athenaeus Β


(while sleeping near) the towers ofIlium by his chariot and white Thracian foalsRhesus sultan of the Aeneianswas despoiled of themhellip

ἐγὼ δὲ δεξιῶι παρrsquo Aρήτηνκνεφαῖος ἐλθὼν rsquoρωιδιῶι κατηυλίσθην (fr 16 W)

with a heron on the right I went to Aretein the dark and took up lodging

However it seems suggestive that the two clear references of Hipponax to theIliad come from the Doloneia which takes us back to the Odysseus territoryagain and his famous dolos set against Rhesus This could imply that Hipponaxrsquosinterest may have been Odysseus (including Iliadic references to him) and notexclusively or predominantly the Odyssey and that the accident of the traditionmay have distorted our perspectivesup2⁶

In fr 16 W Hipponax draws on the portent and prodigies of Homeric narra-tive (Il 10274 ff) and the military language more generally in a predictably eroticcontent The reference to the heron takes us firmly to the Doloneia againsup2⁷

Lastly Homeric echoes are also present in the more serious strand of Hippo-naxrsquos corpus If the highly disputed with reference to their authorship Strasbourgepodes were actually composed by Hipponax as I take them then they further at-test to his reception of Homeric language and imagery in compositions that conformto the lyric composed for the aristocratic hetereiasup2⁸ More specifically in fr 115 W itis the figure of Odysseus who seems once again to be the main intertext the poemanticipates a fateful castaway end for an enemy drawing on the archetypal cast-away Odysseus recalling also Homeric linguistic syntactical and stylistic elements

κύμ[ατι] πλα[ζόμ]ενοςκἀν Σαλμυδ[ησσ]ῶι γυμνὸν εὐφρονε[ 5Θρήϊκες ἀκρό[κ]ομοι

λάβοιεν ndash ἔνθα πόλλrsquo ἀναπλήσαι κακὰδούλιον ἄρτον ἔδων ndashῥίγει πεπηγότrsquo αὐτόν ἐκ δὲ τοῦ χνόουφυκία πόλλrsquo ἐπέχοι 10

It is certainly reasonable to suppose that this reference to the Iliad was not isolated seeSteiner ff who has argued that Hipponax seems to have drawn his diction and imageryfrom the Iliad also in the case of fr W See the discussion of Pogravertulas On this see most recently the thorough discussions of Nicolosi and Carey ndash who take the Strasbourg Epodes as Hipponactean


κροτltέοιgt δrsquo ὀδόντας ὡς [κ]ύων ἐπὶ στόμακείμενος ἀκρασίηιἄκρον παρὰ ῥηγμῖνα κυμαhellipδουταῦτrsquo ἐθέλοιμrsquo ἂν ἰδεῖνὅς μrsquo ἠδίκησε λ[ὰ]ξ δrsquo ἐπrsquo ὁρκίοις ἔβη 15τὸ πρὶν ἑταῖρος [ἐ]ών (fr 1154ndash 16 W)

hellipdrifting about on the waveAnd at Salmydessus may the top-knottedThracians give him nakeda most kindly reception- there he will have full measure of a multitude of woeseating the bread of slaves-stiff from cold As he comes out from the foammay he vomit much seaweedand may his teeth chatter while he lies on his face like a dogat the edge of the surfhis strength spenthellipThis is what Irsquod like him to experiencewho treated me unjustly by trampling on his oathshe who was formerly my friend

Despite the scantily preserved Hipponactean corpus it is possible to distinguisha number of different strands long narratives of the narratorrsquos demi-monde ac-tivities poems imitating the hymnic style long mythological narratives as wellas hexametric ones and perhaps even more mainstream lyric compositions inall of them strikingly there lurks the Odyssey and the figure of Odysseus

What Hipponaxrsquos interaction with epos creates is quite remarkable We arebefore a two-directional receptive process which is revealed and conveyed bysetting up contrasting worlds His engagement with epos has an impact on ourperception both of the speaker and of the narrative (as more than just lowlife sto-ries) and also functions as commentary on the Odysseyepos since it sheds lighton elements of the Odyssey that are only implicit in the epos (for reception aslsquocommentaryrsquo on the source text see Hardwick in this volume) On such a read-ing Hipponaxrsquos love for lsquouglinessrsquo goes beyond a simple selection within therange of opportunities offered by the genre We note a tendency to subvertepic by means of substituting ugliness cowardice and low status for all that isimplicit in the very notion of the heroic epic We also note the fundamental am-biguity which underlies this engagement in that the appeal to epic simultane-ously underlines the antinomian character world and storyline of the Hipponac-tean narrator The intertextual play thus creates a text which is subversion inboth directions it serves both to undermine epic and also to undercut the au-thority of the third person narrator Just as the epic looks slightly preposterousin the way in which it is brought into a new context the speaker himself is


placed under question as he presents himself as a trickster and a low-life beingable however to compose most sophisticated allusive fiction and blur two po-etic traditions This complex two-directional effect generates an unusually richand demanding intertextuality which in turn raises interesting questionsabout audience and context of the Hipponactean poetry

It therefore emerges that the reception of the Homeric epos by Hipponaxamounts to (among other things) an exercise in poetics The increased levelboth of fictionality and appropriation of and interplay with earlier poetry giveshis work a pronounced metapoetic dimension as wellmdashan aspect which has re-ceived only limited attention from recent scholarship mostly focusing on the per-vasive presence of parody of the Homeric epossup2⁹

This sense of Hipponaxrsquos unusual poetic stance and the pervasive presenceof parody is reflected also in the tradition which credits him with its invention(Ath 15698b)sup3⁰ though the claim of the invention is suspect the point aboutparody remains suggestive for the way Hipponax was read in later ages

Πολέμων δrsquo ἐν τῷ δωδεκάτῳ τῶν πρὸς Τίμαιον περὶ τῶν τὰς παρῳδίας γεγραφότων ἱστορῶντάδε γράφει lsquoκαὶ τὸν Βοιωτὸν δὲ καὶ τὸν Εὔβοιον τοὺς τὰς παρῳδίας γράψαντας λογίους ἂνφήσαιμι διὰ τὸ παίζειν ἀμφιδεξίως καὶ τῶν προγενεστέρων ποιητῶν ὑπερέχειν ἐπιγεγονόταςεὑρετὴν μὲν οὖν τοῦ γένους Ἱππώνακτα φατέον τὸν ἰαμβοποιόν λέγει γὰρ οὗτος ἐν τοῖςἑξαμέτροις

Polemon inquiring into the composers of parody writes as follows in the twelfth book of hislsquoAddress to Timaeusrsquo lsquoI should say that both Boeotus and Euboeus who composed parodiesare skilled in words because they play with double meanings and although born later out-strip the poets who preceded them It must be said however that the iambic poet Hipponaxwas the founder of the genre For he speaks as follows in hexameters

The importance of the Odyssey in Hipponaxrsquos work may actually have been moreprofound than the texts allow us to evaluate as is revealed by the fact that itseems to have been built into what was probably Hipponaxrsquos poetic initiationAccording to an anecdote by Choeroboscus in one of his poems Hipponax re-lates a meeting of him with an old woman named Iambe who is washing woolby the shoresup3sup1

For parody as metafiction see references in n Aristotle in Poet a contrary to the above testimonium calls Hegemon of Thasos theinventor of parody but by this he probably means that Hegemon made parody a profession SeeGerber n For discussion of this anecdote see Rosen b ndash Brown ndash Brown ndash and Fowler who adds to the line quoted by Choeroboscus two more linesfound in a fourteenth century manuscript On Iambe and her relation to iambos see West


εἴρηται (scil ἴαμβος) ἤτοι ἀπὸ Ἰάμβης τῆς Κελεοῦ θεραπαίνης ἥτις τὴν Δήμητρα λυπουμένηνἠνάγκασε γελάσαι γέλοιόν τι εἰποῦσα τῷ ῥυθμῷ τούτου τοῦ ποδὸς αὐτομάτως χρησαμένη ἢἀπὸ Ἰάμβης τινὸς ἑτέρας γραός ᾗ Ἱππῶναξ ὁ ἰαμβοποιὸς παρὰ θάλασσαν ἔρια πλυνούσῃ συν-τυχὼν ἤκουσε τῆς σκάφης ἐφαψάμενος ἐφrsquo ἧς ἔπλυνεν ἡ γραῦς

ἄνθρωπrsquo ἄπελθε τὴν σκάφην ἀνατρέπειςκαὶ συλλαβὼν τὸ ῥηθὲν οὕτως ὠνόμασε τὸ μέτρον ἄλλοι δὲ περὶ τοῦ χωλιάμβου τὴν ἱστορίανταύτην ἀναφέρουσι γράφοντες τὸ τέλος τοῦ στίχου

τὴν σκάφην ἀνατρέψεις (Choerob in Heph 31)

It derived its name (scil iambos) either from Iambe Celeusrsquo maidservant who compelled thegrieving Demeter to laugh by saying something in jest and spontaneously using the rhythm ofthis metre or from some other Iambe an old woman whom Hipponax the iambic poet met asshe was washing wool by the sea and heard her say as he touched the trough at which the oldwoman was washing

lsquoSir be gone you are upsetting the troughrsquoAnd grasping what had been said he named the metre after her But others refer this narra-tive to the choliambus writing as the end of the line

lsquoyou will upset the troughrsquo

If it is accurately presented by our later source this story was probably a combi-nation of a highly adapted version of Archilochusrsquo own initiation scene (his veryfamous meeting with the Muses inspired by Hesiodean Dichterweihe)sup3sup2 with theHomeric meeting of Odysseus and Nausicaa by the shore (Od 6149ff) The sig-nificance of this is twofold on the one hand this was probably also a program-matic statement by Hipponax on his relation to the Odyssey a fact which showshow highly influential the Homeric intertext was to his poetry to have presuma-bly even influenced his own story of poetic initiation The kind of distortion ofthe Homeric story perhaps also illustrates that the use of the Homeric intertextwithin his poetry in general was of a similar kind distorted allusive parodic(and perhaps sustained throughout much of the corpus) Particularly importantin the passage is the substitution of the ugly old woman of low status for thebeautiful young virgin princess

If Hipponax had actually used both forms (iambic and scazon) attested bythe anecdote in his possible relation to the Iambe incident then it is as if heis almost enacting a double ἀνατροπή this sense of turning over of the troughwittily points to the fact that he is inverting the rhythm of his predecessor(from iambic to scazons) We may be here before a highly metapoetic moment

ndash Richardson ff Brown ndash Rosen ndash Rotstein ndash Mnesiepes inscription SEG (E col ii ff= Arch Test Tarditi) see Miralles ndash Clay ndash On the ancient tradition of Dichterweihe see Kambylis West ndash


as what is evidently at issue is to define the genre and his oeuvre in relation tothe genre by enacting an adjustment of the rhythm associated with the genrewhile aligning his genre and his oeuvre with the Odyssey

Thus what one gets in Hipponax arguably amounts to a poetics and aesthet-ics of the ugly The case of Hipponactean reception of Homer brings to mind thecase of the geographically and chronologically adjacent Margites which is an-other example of epic subversion of a different kind however (as it focuses onan intellectual anti-hero rather than a moral anti-hero which is the case ofthe Hipponactean narrator) suggesting that we should see this multilayered en-gagement with other texts (and especially epos) in Hipponax as something prob-ably generated by chronology and geography In the Margites features such asits length its extra-diegetic third person narrative and its epic metre suggest af-finities with epic and define it generically up to a point On the other hand cer-tain aspects of narrative technique the juxtaposition of high and low the paro-dic tone and the importance of an anti-hero align it with the Hipponacteaniambos Even rhythmically some of the effects are suggestive of Hipponax TheMargites begins with hexameters and then moves to iambics if this is happeningconstantly then it lacks the fluency of the Homeric hexameter and has a haltingquality to it which aligns it once again with the Hipponactean scazon and thevarious asynartetic metres that one gets in iambos The Margites thereforeseems to be placing itself ambiguously in terms of genre categories it hasvery strong literary cultural affinities with Hipponax something which com-bined with the geographical proximity is very suggestive indeed of the factthat what one gets a glance into with Hipponax is both the distinctive oeuvreof a single poet as well as the product of a cultural milieu

Hence one can see that a careful reading of the scanty corpus of Hipponaxcould be quite insightful We are dealing with an archaic poet who is stretchingthe boundaries of Greek iambos Greek poetic fiction and idea of aesthetics to ex-tremes His poetry has a metapoetic dimension which is both highly self-awareas a kind of writing and to some extent is an experiment with form in extractinga particular aspect of the iambos turning it into the essence of the corpus andsetting up a mirror for epic poetry

In conclusion the complexity and allusiveness of his poetry justifies why itaroused the fascination of Hellenistic poets such as Callimachus and Herodaswho were as Hipponax himself very fond of intertextual play and unusualmodes of poetry Hipponax has therefore arguably been characterized occasion-ally as a lsquoproto-Hellenistic poetrsquo However as he was wronged by the tradition(his work has been very fragmentarily preserved) we can only glimpse whatcould probably have been a most fascinating reworking of the Homeric Odyssey


Andrej Petrovic

Archaic Funerary Epigram andHectorrsquos Imagined Epitymbia

From its very beginnings Greek epigram displays literary features associated withepic language metre and motifs A glance through some 460 verse-inscriptionsfrom the period between the eighth and fifth century BC reveals a wealth of lexe-mic morphological dialectal syntactical and even narrative elements whichearly Greek epigram shares with the Iliad and the Odysseysup1 epigram whose lit-

I would like to express my gratitude to the organizers of the conference the beacons of Greekfiloxenia dear friends and editors of this volume Ioanna Karamanou and Athanasios Efstathioufor their support criticism and patience as well as my thanks to the audience at the IonianUniversity in Corfu for their suggestions and observations As always I am deeply grateful toIvana Petrovic for her critique encouragement and the many insightful remarks which sheprovided on several drafts of this paper My earlier Durham colleague Don Lavigne contributedgreatly to this paper in many ways in particular concerning the form of the argument Theanonymous reviewers have both corroborated this paper and have helpfully suggested severalimprovements and clarifications I am indebted to all of them but I should like to highlight inparticular an Italian readerrsquos knowledgeable contribution to my comments on scholia

Finally I owe much to serendipity a chance encounter of Jenny Strauss Clay and IvanaPetrovic at a Berlin conference made the author of these lines realize that Jenny and I wereworking on exactly the same Iliadic material simultaneously Even if we relied on differentapproaches the findings of our papers agree and complement each other to a great extent I amdeeply indebted to the generosity of Jenny Strauss Clay who shared her persuasive and refinedpaper (lsquoHomerrsquos Epigraph Iliad 787ndash91rsquo forthcoming in Philologus) with me in advance of itspublication and suggested several improvements to mine I acknowledge my debt to this cha-riessa amoibē in the main text and the footnotes Abbreviations of epigraphic corpora follow the guidelines of SEG The standard edition ofverse-inscriptions of this period is CEG DAA FH GV and LSAG (with Poinikastas httppoinikastascsadoxacuk) remain useful resources for the study of early Greek verse-in-scriptions Much work remains to be done on the intersection and interaction between epos andepigram here I am pointing out a selection of the most influential and useful studies Bowie discusses narrative traits in early Greek epigram and their similarities with epos Gutz-willer discusses Homeric echoes in heroic epitaphs of the Classical age Skiadas

analysed the influence of Homer on later literary epigram Harder is concerned with epiclegacy and the appropriations of Trojan myths within Hellenistic epigrams Truumlmpy in-vestigates the language and dialect of early dedicatory and sepulchral verse-inscriptions Tsa-galis (a ndash) explores the imagery of Attic sepulchral epigram of the fourth centuryBC also in the light of epic influences MuthPetrovic investigate the impact of Homericideology on Archaic monumental representations and epigrams

erary history starts in the last quarter of the eighth century BCsup2 and epos theoldest orally transmitted genre seem to have been closely connected in multipleways during the first three centuries of Greek literary historysup3

In this paper I shall explore the early traces of intertextual references be-tween the two genres and collect remnants of epigrammatic language explicitlyrecognized as such by the ancient commentators of the epics Then I shall inves-tigate aspects of the appropriation of epic passages in the funerary epigrams ofthe Archaic period Did passages from the Homeric epics which were understoodin antiquity as lsquoepigrammaticrsquo leave traces on the inscriptional material of theArchaic period My aim is therefore to look into the surviving epigrammatic ma-terial of the Archaic period with the purpose of throwing more light on elementsof distinctly Homeric (as opposed to the more general and infinitely more elusiveepic) tradition identifiable in early Greek sepulchral epigram

However there are several underlying methodological issues which imposelimits to the scope of the conclusions one can reach if two entities clearly dis-cernible as separate (as epigram and the Homeric epics are) demonstrate thesame properties at the same time (eg formulas)⁴ and possess the same features(eg hexameter) need we analyse their notional influence or their notional con-currence Did they impinge on each-other or did they both draw from the samereservoir an epic reservoir once fresh and luscious now dry and dusty The like-liest answer seems to be that both possibilities may have occurred even if com-plex difficulties associated with contingencies of early Greek literature hinderany simple solution⁵ ndash especially so when it comes to the relationship betweenlost epic traditions Homeric epics and archaic sepulchral epigram

Therefore I shall investigate their marked that is distinctive features by fo-cusing first on Homeric passages with traits of verse-inscriptions and then onverse-inscriptions in particular sepulchral with distinctive Homeric features

Haumlusle ( ‐) labelled it for that reason as lsquothe oldest literary genre of European historyrsquo Allusions to the epics occur as early as in eighth-century BC verse-inscriptions see CEG

(lsquoDipylon vasersquo) CEG (lsquoIschia cuprsquo) and the discussion in FantuzziHunter ndash On the genesis fixation and transformations of Homeric texts in the Archaic period see Nagy ndash On the alleged formulaic character of early Greek epigram see BaumbachA Pet-rovic I Petrovic ndash on methodological approaches in the study of epigrammatic recep-tion see FantuzziHunter ch and Hunter The situation is as complex in the case of the reception of Homer in non-inscriptional earlyGreek poetry for a discussion see the bibliographical survey in Giangrande In a recenttalk at Oxford (Stesichorus conference March ) Adrian Kelly argued that it is only with Ste-sichorus that we find the first unambiguous case of literary reception of the Iliad and the Odys-sey whilst epic traits identifiable in earlier authors stem from a shared pool of epic traditionsFor an insightful discussion see Scodel

46 Andrej Petrovic

as far as these can be found The reason for the focus on sepulchral epigram asobject of the present investigation is first and foremost the nature of genres rec-ognized in epics as lsquoepigrammaticrsquo and the corresponding epigrammatic materialsurviving from the Archaic period as ought to become immediately obvious

a Epigrams in Homer

The history of Greek epigram is inextricably intertwined with epic also becauseboth the Iliad and the Odyssey contain passages six in number which were readin antiquity with epigrammatic conventions and functions in mind In 1975 OnofrioVox gathered and analysed five such passages from the Iliad Ancient commentatorsexplicitly labelled all five as lsquoepigrammaticrsquo⁶ identifying them variously as lsquoepi-gramsrsquo and lsquoepigrammaticrsquo or even using the generic term lsquoepikedeiarsquo sometimesused of funerary epigrams In 2005 David Elmer added to the material assembledby Vox an Odyssean passage relating Ich-Rede of Athena disguised as Menteswhich was also labelled as an lsquoepigramrsquo by a scholiast (1180ndash81)

Of the six epic lsquoepigramsrsquo three come from teichoskopia scenes (Il 3156ndash583178ndash80 3200ndash02)⁷ These textual segments along with the newcomer lsquotheepigramrsquo of AthenaMentes are in form and function closely reminiscent of epi-

For explicit references in the scholia see below See also Scodel Dinter ( ndash)discusses further lsquoepitaphic gesturesrsquo in the Iliad and points out that the portrayal of Iphionrsquosdeath adheres to epigraphic conventions (Il ndash) See Elmer lsquoHelenrsquos epigramsrsquo followed by ancient labels in square brackets (a)Il ndash lsquoοὐ νέμεσις Τρῶας καὶ ἐϋκνήμιδας Aχαιοὺς τοιῇδ᾽ ἀμφὶ γυναικὶ πολὺν χρόνονἄλγεα πάσχειν αἰνῶς ἀθανάτῃσι θεῇς εἰς ὦπα ἔοικενrsquo[τρίγωνον ἐπίγραμμα πρῶτος Ὅμηροςγέγραφε τὸ ldquoοὐ νέμεσις Τρῶαςrdquo ἀφrsquo οἵου γὰρ τῶν τριῶν στίχων ἀρξόμεθα ἀδιάφορον ScholiaAT] (b) Il ndash οὗτός γ᾽ Aτρεΐδης εὐρὺ κρείων Aγαμέμνων ἀμφότερον βασιλεύς τ᾽ ἀγαθὸςκρατερός τ᾽ αἰχμητήςδαὴρ αὖτ᾽ ἐμὸς ἔσκε κυνώπιδος εἴ ποτ᾽ ἔην γε [ὡς ἑνὶ λόγῳ ἐπιγραμματικῶςαὐτὸν δηλοῖ Scholion T] (c) Il ndash lsquoοὗτος δ᾽ αὖ Λαερτιάδης πολύμητις Ὀδυσσεύς ὃςτράφη ἐν δήμῳ Ἰθάκης κραναῆς περ ἐούση εἰδὼς παντοίους τε δόλους καὶ μήδεα πυκνά [ἐν βραχεῖτὸ ἐπίγραμμα πάντα ἔχει μετὰ ἐπαίνων δὲ περὶ ἑκάστου ἐκτίθεται διὰ τὸ προσπεπονθέναι τῷἙλληνικῷ Scholia AbT] Three passages relating to Helen are found in the third book of theIliad gathered within some lines and displaying characteristics which are shared to an ex-tent by both early inscriptional and later literary epigram These are the features due to whichVox ( ) believed that the poems cannot function as epigrams qua epigrams (i) in two ofthe cases [(a) ndash and (c) ndash] the epigrams were understood by critics ancient andmodern as lsquotrigōna epigrammatarsquo that is lsquothree angled epigramsrsquo such three-liners whose po-etic architecture allows for verses to be read in any sequence (be it a-b-c or a-c-b or any of theother four possibilities and (ii) all three have descriptive features unattested in the epigraphiccontext of the early period For a critique of these views see Elmer ndash

Archaic Funerary Epigram and Hectorrsquos Imagined Epitymbia 47

grammatic Beischriften as Elmer persuasively demonstrated Such epigrams areexplanatory (this is to avoid the anachronistic use of the term lsquoekphrasticrsquo) in na-ture and used to accompany works of art from the Archaic period onwards Ishall leave aside the Beischriften because they were recently the subject of El-merrsquos detailed investigation and because both the epigraphic and the literarymaterial of the Archaic period furnish only limited comparanda for this epigram-matic subgenre⁸

Instead I shall focus on the remaining two Homeric passages both of whichcan be read as funerary epigrams stemming from Hectorrsquos imagination⁹ Theseare an epitaphion for a fallen warrior envisaged by Hector (Il 789ndash90) andan epitaphion imagined both for Hector and as I suggest for his widow(Il 6460ndash61) I shall suggest that they both employ generic features that we rec-ognize in archaic sepulchral epigrams for fallen warriors and ladies of high birthrespectively Furthermore I shall argue that certain archaic epigrams may wellhave been composed with Hectorrsquos imaginary epigrams in mind

b Hector as Composer of a Sepulchral Epigram

I shall start with the most famous of the epic lsquoepigramsrsquo an Iliadic passage inwhich Hector challenges the Greeks to select the best and strongest amongthem to fight a duel with him Even though his opponent is only yet to be select-ed and Hectorrsquos victory uncertain he already envisages his victory and a tombwith a monument which will preserve the kleos of this duel (784ndash91)sup1⁰

τὸν δὲ νέκυν ἐπὶ νῆας ἐϋσσέλμους ἀποδώσω ὄφρα ἑ ταρχύσωσι κάρη κομόωντες Aχαιοί σῆμά τέ οἱ χεύωσιν ἐπὶ πλατεῖ Ἑλλησπόντωι καί ποτέ τις εἴπησι καὶ ὀψιγόνων ἀνθρώπων νηῒ πολυκλήϊδι πλέων ἐπὶ οἴνοπα πόντον

lsquoἀνδρὸς μὲν τόδε σῆμα πάλαι κατατεθνηῶτοςὅν ποτrsquo ἀριστεύοντα κατέκτανε φαίδιμος Ἕκτωρrsquo

ὥς ποτέ τις ἐρέει τὸ δrsquo ἐμὸν κλέος οὔ ποτrsquo ὀλεῖται

See Elmer the closest parallels for such epigrams are those from the chest of Kypselos(allegedly coming from the sixth century BC) quoted by Pausanias For a recent analysis also inrespect to their relationship to epics see Borg (with further literature) To the functionalparallels adduced by Elmer one could add interesting cases of sepulchral epigrams used as Beis-chriften on vases of the Classical period (see Gutzwiller ndash) See Elmer lsquoAn overtly sepulchral character distinguishes the two epigrams of the ldquoHec-toradrdquorsquo For an analysis of graves (and material objects) as transmitters of historical memory (lsquoar-chaeology of the pastrsquo) in the epics see Grethlein ndash with ndash on graves aslsquotime-marksrsquo and spatial marks

48 Andrej Petrovic

But his corpse I will give back among the strong-benched vessels so that the flowing-hairedAchaeans may give him due burial and heap up a mound upon him beside the broad passageof Hellespont And some day one of the men to come will say as he sees itone who in hisbenched ship sails on the wine-blue water

lsquoThis is the mound of a man who died long ago in battlewho was one of the bravest and glorious Hector killed himrsquo

So will he speak some day and my glory will not be forgotten(trans based on Lattimore 1951)

Do these lines refer to inscribed texts The epigrammatic character of Hectorrsquoswords projected onto the sēma of a fallen warrior was recognized as such by an-cient scholiasts possibly already in the Hellenistic period the bT scholia on theIliad parts of which are of Alexandrian and parts of late antique origin statethat Hector as if he has already won the duel is writing (epigraphei) his praiseson the grave This praise the scholiast remarks is self-praise rather than praiseof the fallen and takes the form of an epikedeion even before there is a corpse (τὸἐπικήδειον πρὸ τοῦ θανάτου διατιθείς)sup1sup1 Since epikedeion is a term used of se-pulchral epigrams and sepulchral elegies and dirges alikesup1sup2 and given that thescholiast associates it with Hectorrsquos act of writing on the grave it follows thatthe scholiastrsquos contemporaries envisaged it as an actual inscribed funerary text

Scholium T on the other hand picking up the first words of the lsquoepigramrsquo(ἀνδρὸς μὲν τόδε σῆμα) asserts that these words are uttered lsquoin contrast to thediscovery of the scriptrsquosup1sup3 which would imply that vv 89ndash90 do not designatean actual inscription However this statement ought not to be taken at facevalue as what the scholiast is apparently attempting to do is to correct the (wide-spread) view that the passage indeed was a reference to an inscribed monu-

Cf Dickey ndash on the date and origin of the bT scholia b(BCEE)T (ad Il )ἀνδρὸς μὲν τόδε σῆμα ὡς ἤδη νενικηκὼς ἐπιγράφει τῷ τάφῳ daggerτὸνdagger ἐπινίκιον οὐκ ἐπὶ τεθνηκότιἀλλrsquo οὐδὲ γιγνωσκομένῳ τῷ μέλλοντι μονομαχεῖν τὸ ἐπικήδειον πρὸ τοῦ θανάτου διατιθείς Seealso scholia b and T ad v for a criticism of Hectorrsquos behaviour and his characterization asvain boastful and barbarian See LSJ sv Plu Mor a and IMEGR T ad ἀνδρὸς μὲν τόδε σῆμα πρὸς τὴν τῶν γραμμάτων εὕρεσιν I need to stress here mydebt to the anonymous reader who pointed out deficiencies in my original (and as I came torealise unlikely) interpretation of the preposition πρός lsquoCredo che si debba mantenere il signi-ficato letterale contro in contrasto con lrsquoinvenzione della scrittura e seguendo le indicazioni diH Erbse nellrsquoed e nellrsquoapparato mettere questo scolio in rapporto con lo schol Ariston Il a relativo alle famose tavolette incise affidate da Preto a Bellerofonte (Aristonico [Aristarco]interpreta grapsai come xesai encharaxai ldquoincidererdquo ldquointagliarerdquo) Drsquoaltra parte la conclusionedi Petrovic resta valida lo schol T Il conferma e contrario lrsquoesistenza dellrsquoaltra interpreta-zione antica (secondo la quale Ettore ha in mente un vero e proprio epitymbion inciso)rsquo


ment as scholia bT clearly state there would have been no need for the scholiastto state that Hectorrsquos epigram was composed lsquoπρὸς τὴν τῶν γραμμάτων εὕρεσινrsquohad it not been believed at least by some that Hector envisaged an actual in-scription Hence this remark together with the use of the verb epigraphei inthe bT scholia confirms that the scholiastsrsquo contemporaries could well conceiveHectorrsquos words as an actual sepulchral inscriptionsup1⁴

Modern scholars too have recognized the epigrammatic character of Hec-torrsquos utterance conducting studies in terms of the function of the passage withinthe Iliadic narrative the origin of epigrammatic intimations in epics and genre-specific characteristics of the passagesup1⁵ In a forthcoming essay Jenny StraussClay investigates epicrsquos awareness of writing revisits previous scholarship andtackles the vexed issues of literacy in Homer Her persuasive conclusion isthat lsquo[Hectorrsquos epitaph] attests not only to the existence of writing but also toa sophisticated understanding of its potential how writing can be exploitedand even subverted and manipulated in shaping a narrative In addition itsgoal coincides with the aim of the Iliad itself the conferring of kleos on the her-oes of long agorsquo If Hectorrsquos epitaph attests the existence of an epitaphic traditionknown to Homer and bears testimony to Hectorrsquos particular spin (Strauss Clayrsquosexploitation subversion and manipulation) then like in a game of ping-ponglet us take a look at its possible impact on the epigrammatic habit of the Archaicperiod if Hectorrsquos words were understood in antiquity as an epikedeion did theyleave any trace in the early epigrammatic material

The reasons for the ancient conceptualization of 789ndash90 as a sepulchralepigram are transparent the form of a hexametric two-liner for an inscribed ep-itymbion is very common in the archaic period and this will change only in mid-sixth century BC under the influence of elegy (and the emergence of Panathe-naea) when elegiac distichon will become a prevalent formsup1⁶ In terms of con-

Ivana Petrovic points out to me that scholia T might also be implying here that Homer knewabout epigram as a genre but since he is referring to a time when script was not yet inventedthis would render Hectorrsquos statement an anachronism Furthermore the scholium might be im-plying that Homer composed epigrams before they were even invented according to the tradi-tion that viewed Homer as the originator of all literary genres I can offer only a selection of relevant literature here on these issues in general see Scodel and Elmer (with observations on the relative chronology of the Homeric passages viz theemergence of sepulchral epigram in the Archaic period) On its function in the Iliadic narrativeBing ndash Nagy ndash and epitymbic language appropriated by theepics from the Near-east along with the script FH generic characteristics Thomas On the formal characteristics of archaic and classical epigram see Petrovic ndash On thecircumstances of the change to elegiac disticha as a dominant form see Wallace ndash

50 Andrej Petrovic

tent the Iliadic passage contains a master-model of early epitymbic expressionline one contains the statement that X is dead and line two denotes the circum-stances under which X died The formulas and the language employed by Hectorcorrespond closely to inscriptions on tombs of warriors of the Archaic and Clas-sical period name of the deceased in the genitive followed or preceded by τόδεσῆμα praise of the heroic death (ἀριστεύοντα) and an outline of the circumstan-ces of his deathsup1⁷

For these reasons several scholars pointed to one particular inscriptionalepigram that seems to be picking up on Hectorrsquos words Hans-Martin Lumppwas as far as I can see the first one to argue that the late seventh-century BCsepulchral epigram from Corcyra the well-known Arniadas epigram containsa direct allusion to the Iliadic passage (CEG 145 = FH 25)

σᾶμα τόδε Aρνιάδα χαροπὸς τόνδrsquo ὄλε|σεν Ἄρεςβαρνάμενον παρὰ ναυσ|ὶν ἐπrsquo Aράθθοιο ῥοϝαῖσιπολλὸ|ν ἀριστεύltϝgtοντα κατὰ στονόϝεσσαν ἀϝυτάν

This is the marker of Arniadas This man fierce-eyed Ares destroyedbattling by the ships beside the streams of the Aratthosachieving great excellence and the battle-roar that brings mourning(trans Bowie 2010 356ndash57)

Is this a direct allusion to Hectorrsquos words or is this epigram indebted more gen-erally to the epic tradition Taking a cue from Lumpp Anthony Raubitschek de-scribes the epigrams as being lsquoextraordinary similarrsquo to Hectorrsquos words and con-cisely states that a comparison provides a lsquogeneral overlaprsquo between the textssup1⁸The views of Paul Friedlaumlnder and Herbert B Hoffleit that the epigram lsquois themasterpiece among hellip sepulchral [epigrams] in epic mannerrsquo appear more appro-priate and are confirmed by the findings which Ewen Bowie advanced in hisanalysis of epic elements in the poemsup1⁹

As it happens χαροπός is never used as an epithet of Ares in the epics andas Christos Tsagalis points out it is in direct contrast with the usual epithetsknown from the epics and early Greek poetry more generallysup2⁰ The general over-lap between the poems seems to be exhausted in the generic marker σᾶμα τόδε

See Thomas on the narrative technique in early epigram Bowie Lumpp Raubitschek ndash (lsquoausserordentliche Aumlhnlichkeitrsquo lsquoein Vergleich [zeigt]weitgehende Uumlbereinstimmungenrsquo) FH (who consider possible influences of Eumelos) Bowie ndash lsquoit is hard notto see here some impact of performed battle poetry whether hexameter epic or hortatory elegyrsquo Tsagalis a ndash See also Hunter ndash with n for a refutation ofLumpprsquos views


the mention of Ares as a slayersup2sup1 and ἀριστεύltϝgtοντα thus rendering any closeassociation of this epigram with the Iliadic passage somewhat fragile

There is however another famous epigram adduced as a parallel but not fur-ther discussed by Raubitscheksup2sup2 which may indeed provide a very close comparisonto Hectorrsquos words This epigram both alone-standing and in its monumental contextis strongly influenced by the Iliadic ideology as Muth Petrovic recently arguedsup2sup3 Inmy view it shows particular resemblance to the passage from the seventh book ofthe Iliad This is the grave-complex of Croesus which consists of an over-life-sizedrepresentation of a naked warrior placed on a basis on which two verses of the epi-gram are inscribed in four lines I print the text in metrical transcription followedby representation of the text as inscribed on the basis (Athens ca 530 BC [CEG 27 =IG Isup3 1240 GV I 1224 SEG 24 70])

στεθι καὶ οἴκτιρον Κροίσο παρὰ σ εμα θανόντοςhόν ποτrsquo ἐνὶ προμάχοις ὄλεσε θορος Ἄρες

Halt and show pity beside the monument of dead Croesuswhom raging Ares once destroyed in the front rank of the battle(trans Baumbach A Petrovic I Petrovic 2010 14)

στεθι ∶ καὶ οἴκτιρον ∶ Κροίσοπαρὰ σεμα θανόντος ∶ ℎόνποτrsquo ἐνὶ προμάχοις ∶ ὄλεσεθορος ∶ Ἄρες

It is worth exploring the texts in isolation before we move on to a comparison of theCroesus epigram in its monumental setting with the epic passage The parallels be-tween Hectorrsquos imagined epitymbion for the anonymous opponent and the inscrip-tion from the grave of Croesus are striking the structure of the second line of eachepigram is identical The first two words which dislocate death into a timeless di-mension (hόν ποτrsquo)sup2⁴ are followed by praise of the heroic death of the warrior(ἐνὶ προμάχοις vs ἀριστεύοντα) After these the verb denoting killing follows(ὄλεσε vs κατέκτανε) and both lines end with the names of the slayers with iden-tical grammatical disposition in the verse ie as grammatical subjects θοῦρος Ἄρεςand φαίδιμος Ἕκτωρ) Furthermore in terms of diction every single word from the

On the epic parallels for this technique see below Raubitschek regards it as lsquoeng verbundenrsquo with the Iliadic passage MuthPetrovic see below On this see Young ndash Day ndash

52 Andrej Petrovic

Croesus epigram is attested in the epics together with the epithet of Ares (θοῦρος)which predominantly appears in the same sedes in Homeric versessup2⁵

But this is not where the similarities end One of the reasons Hectorrsquos wordsattracted the interest of ancient readers and modern critics is that he composed asepulchral epigram for the opponent he was about to kill as a monument (sēma)to himself rather than the deceased Thus he is modifying the most elementaryfunction of an epitymbion A focus on the slayer rather than the slain is alsopresent in the case of the Croesus epigram and not only because of the markedposition of the name of the slayer at the end of the verse Susanne Muth undIvana Petrovic have recently argued that the Croesus monument together withthe inscription on its base intentionally incites an interpretative ambiguity inits receptionsup2⁶ The supra-human representation of a naked muscular body cap-tured mid-motion is placed on a base on which the name of the god θοῦροςἌρες appears in a single line separated from the rest of the poem Its legibilityis further facilitated through use of interpunction separating the epithet fromthe name of the god As MuthPetrovic stress for a recipient ancient as wellas modern the first impulse may well be to interpret the statue as a representa-tion of the divinity rather than of the fallen warriorsup2⁷ By this token the statuewith its inscription might be taken to reflect at first glance the functional mod-ification attested also in Hectorrsquos epigram instead of being a geras thanontōn asa recipient would infer from its position and original surrounding the monu-ment appears initially to be a representation of the war-god

Upon reading the epigram however although the recipient will be promptedto adjust his understanding of the monument some similarities will persist theidentity of the representation might become less puzzling but the extraordinaryemphasis on the slayer remains Being killed by Hector like being killed by Aresis understood on its own as a source and verification of the virtue of the fallenIn such a constellation MuthPetrovic argue Croesus appears himself as a Ho-meric hero ndash as a man similar or equal to divinities who correspondingly couldbe conquered and felled only through divine agency

If the Croesus epigram reflects both epic ideology and language to the pointthat it is modeled upon Hectorrsquos imagined epitymbion as seems likely in myview then the substitution of Hector with Ares is a logical and appropriate

Ares accompanied with the epithet θοῦρος appears eleven times in the Iliad (not attested inthe Odyssey) of which it is found seven times at the end of the hexameter ( ) MuthPetrovic MuthPetrovic ndash On idealized representations of fallen warriors in archaic Atticsee Day ndash and on the reception of the Croesus epigram Lorenz ndash


one Ares as a slayer of Croesus provides a convenient and appropriate metaphorfor the death of a warrior on the battlefield which is well attested in the Iliadicnarrative when a warrior is felled by a human enemy he is described as havingbeen killed by Ares himselfsup2⁸ Furthermore Hector is represented as a (literal) in-carnation of Ares since Ares is described as entering Hectorrsquos body ndash the onlymortal whose body the god of war entered in the Iliad Ἕκτορι δ᾽ ἥρμοσετεύχε᾽ ἐπὶ χροΐ δῦ δέ μιν Ἄρης δεινὸς ἐνυάλιος πλῆσθεν δ᾽ ἄρα οἱ μέλε᾽ ἐντὸς ἀλκῆς καὶ σθένεοςsup2⁹ Hence Croesusrsquo appropriation of Hectorrsquos epigram can ren-der Hector as Ares not just for the sake of appropriate epic convention but alsobecause Hector was at least temporarily the embodiment of Aressup3⁰

c Andromache as a Sepulchral Epigram andAndromachersquos own Sepulchral Epigram

In a moving scene towards the end of the sixth book of the Iliad Hector sinisterlypredicts the fall of Troy the deaths of its defenders and the subsequent enslave-ment of his wife addressing Andromache directly with the following words(Il 6459ndash65)

καί ποτέ τις εἴπῃσιν ἰδὼν κατὰ δάκρυ χέουσανlsquoἝκτορος ἧδε γυνὴ ὃς ἀριστεύεσκε μάχεσθαιΤρώων ἱπποδάμων ὅτε Ἴλιον ἀμφεμάχοντοrsquo

ὥς ποτέ τις ἐρέειmiddot σοὶ δrsquo αὖ νέον ἔσσεται ἄλγος χήτεϊ τοιοῦδrsquo ἀνδρὸς ἀμύνειν δούλιον ἦμαρἀλλά με τεθνηῶτα χυτὴ κατὰ γαῖα καλύπτοι πρίν γέ τι σῆς τε βοῆς σοῦ θ᾽ ἑλκηθμοῖοπυθέσθαι

and once someone is to say having seen you weepinglsquoThis is the wife of Hector who kept excelling in battle

See Il and Redfield ndash Cf also Il where Diomedes states

that lussa enters Hectorrsquos body Note that the Arniadas epigram discussed above (CEG ) ap-propriates the same technique Il ndash There is a further possibility in her forthcoming paper Jenny Strauss Clay takes into account mysuggestion and remarks lsquoHowever ndash although all such matters are speculative ndash the presence of Aresattested also in the Arniadesrsquo epitaph as well as the Iliadrsquos faccedilon de parler might allow for the pos-sibility that Hector has inserted his name in the place traditionally reserved for Ares Such a possi-bility would I think strengthen the claim for the need for a written label whereby Hector identifieshimself as the slayer of the Greek whom his epigraph has consigned to anonymityrsquo

54 Andrej Petrovic

among the horse-taming Trojans when they fought about Ilionrsquoso will one say once and grief will beset you anew lacking this man here to avert the day ofslavery But let the heaped up soil cover my corpse before I should hear your shrieks as theycarry you off(trans based on Lattimore 1951)

Ruth Scodel as well as several scholars afterwards has observed that in thisscene Andromache is assigned the function of a living memorial of Hectorrsquos vir-tue and that she represents in a way a living female mnēma an encapsulationof the memory of the fallen herosup3sup1 When analysed in the context of the Iliadicnarrative this is indeed likely to be the case Hector imagines for himself onlya sepulchral mound there is no mention of a sēma he envisaged for his oppo-nent in the epigram from book seven and it is only his wife who is hoped to pre-serve the memory of his virtue

Commenting on the words Ἕκτορος ἥδε γυνή lt ὃς ἀριστεύεσκε μάχεσθαιgtscholia bT remark cursorily that the line displays epigrammatic features or epi-grammatic character ἐπιγραμματικὸν ἔχει τύπον ὁ στίχοςsup3sup2 This comment maywell be motivated by the use of the deictic following a genitive and could be in-terpreted as a variation on the formulaic expression we might expect on Hectorrsquosmonument such as Ἕκτορος τόδε σῆμα or similar as Scodel remarkssup3sup3

Nevertheless when observed in isolation and outside the Iliadic context thelines uttered by Hector could also be conceptualized as an epitymbion not nec-essarily only for himself but also for Andromache Hector does mention his ownenvisaged death but only after he has composed the lsquoepigramrsquo ndash an epigram thathe introduced with a vivid depiction of Andromachersquos enslavement and a gloomyvision of her future toilssup3⁴ Given that enslavement in Homeric ideology corre-sponds closely to social death and enslavement of aristocratic women to lsquoblame-

See the discussion in Scodel and Elmer and esp lsquoHectorrsquos auto-epitaph atndash by which he transforms Andromache into his funeral monument ndasha stēlē that is theplace of writingrsquo GraziosiHaubold commentary ad loc See b(BCE)T ad v (Erbse) Here too I would like to acknowledge the encouragementof the anonymous reviewer and simultaneously express my regret that the scope of the contri-bution does not allow me to pursue her his suggestion further lsquoPotrebbe essere utile analizzareanche lo schol ex a (che nei manoscritti egrave direttamente congiunto al b cf Erbse ap-parato) dove se capisco bene si commenta lo stile del verso omerico facendo riferimento pro-prio alla concisione e allrsquoallusivitagrave tipiche dello stile epigrammaticorsquo On this see Scodel ndash Elmer Il ndash ὅσσον σεῦ ὅτε κέν τις Aχαιῶν χαλκοχιτώνων δακρυόεσσαν ἄγηται ἐλεύθερονἦμαρ ἀπούρας καί κεν ἐν Ἄργει ἐοῦσα πρὸς ἄλλης ἱστὸν ὑφαίνοις καί κεν ὕδωρ φορέοις Μεσση-ΐδος ἢ Ὑπερείης πόλλ᾽ ἀεκαζομένη κρατερὴ δ᾽ ἐπικείσετ᾽ ἀνάγκη


less catastrophersquosup3⁵ it is in my view possible that the scholiast had in mind someof the famous epitymbia for ladies of noble birth when he remarked on the epi-grammatic character of the first line of Hectorrsquos utterance

The fact that Andromachersquos life would be characterized entirely through herrelationship to her husband is no obstacle to this interpretation I adduce twostriking examples of such depiction of queens and aristocratic women in se-pulchral epigrams The first case involves one of the most famous epitymbia ofthe Archaic period This is the epigram composed for Archedike of Lampsakosdaughter of Peisistratusrsquo son Hippias the last tyrant of Athens and wife of thetyrant of Lampsakos Aiantides As a noble-woman she is praised for havingbeen a daughter a wife and a mother of tyrants (in the neutral rather than pe-jorative sense) The epigram was quoted by both Thucydides and Aristotle andwas hence available and very likely familiar to Hellenistic (and later) scholiasts(EG Sim 26a = Petrovic 2007 Ep 12)sup3⁶

ἀνδρὸς ἀριστεύσαντος ἐν Ἑλλάδι τῶν ἐφ᾽ ἑαυτοῦἹππίου Aρχεδίκην ἥδε κέκευθε κόνιςἣ πατρός τε καὶ ἀνδρὸς ἀδελφῶν τ᾽ οὖσα τυράννωνπαίδων τ᾽ οὐκ ἤρθη νοῦν ἐς ἀτασθαλίην

Archedike daughter of the man who excelled in Hellas of his day of Hippias is covered bythis soil She who was a daughter wife sister and mother of tyrants did not raise her mindto arrogance

The second example is the sepulchral epigram for no lesser a figure than Olympiaswife of Philip II and mother of Alexander the Great quoted only by Plutarch withoutany further remarks regarding the queen in Mor 747fndash748a (Quaest Conv)

τῆσδε πατὴρ καὶ ἀνὴρ καὶ παῖς βασιλεῖς καὶ ἀδελφοίκαὶ πρόγονοι κλῄζει δrsquo Ἑλλὰς Ὀλυμπιάδα

Her father and husband and son were kings as were her brothersand ancestors Hellas calls her Olympiassup3⁷

It is difficult to determine whether this epigram was a genuine inscription or alater literary compositionsup3⁸ The deictic τῆσδε would certainly favour the formerpossibility Furthermore given that Plutarch had a keen epigraphic interest firm-

On female enslavement in Homer see the overview in Hunt ndash Th Arist Rh (=b) see also Isid Pelus and Petrovic com-mentary on epigram no For a discussion of this epigram see Fantuzzi ndash On issues of authenticity of the couplet see Carney and (Olympias)

56 Andrej Petrovic

ly believing in the reliability of inscriptional evidence and extensively praisedthe virtues of epigraphy in the very work from which the sepulchral epigram de-rives there is little that might stand in the way of its authenticitysup3⁹

Yet what matters here the most is that in this epigram toowe encounter theportrayal of queens conveyed through their relationship to the excellence of themen who surround them the sepulchral inscriptions of Archedike and Olympiasdo not encapsulate their own achievements or virtues but rather commemoratethe virtue of their closest male kin as in the case of Andromachersquos commemo-ration through Hector Thucydides famously quipped that womenrsquos greatest vir-tue was not to be talked about by men neither for good nor ill (2452) and thesesepulchral epigrams show that this was the case in their death as well ndash womenare not to be talked about save as a reason to talk about their men

Concluding remarks

Alexandrian and later scholiasts who labelled and analysed passages from theIliad as epigrammatic or sepulchral in nature are very likely to have had solidknowledge of epigrammatic collections and anthologies with their developed ge-neric typologies This may have prompted their use of terminology such asἐπικήδειον and ἐπιγραμματικὸς τύπος and epigrammatic extrapolations of Ho-meric passages ndash sepulchral epigrams were for them of course both inscription-al and literary artifacts with clearly defined generic conventions and forms

However I hope to have highlighted the possible early impact of these pas-sages on Greek Archaic sepulchral epigrams the Croesus and Archedike epi-grams seem to closely resemble Hectorrsquos lsquoepigramsrsquo the epigrams for Croesusand Archedike do not seem to be simply drawing from the linguistic and literarypool of general lsquoepicrsquo traditions but rather appear to be ideologically and for-mally chiselled after respective Homeric passages Therefore in my view the an-swer to the question of whether the Croesus and Archedike epigrams mirroranonymous authorsrsquo awareness of Hectorrsquos epigrams ought to be a blunt yes

How early does emulation of Hectorrsquos epigrams in verse-inscriptions start Wecannot know for certain whether epigrammatic sections in the Iliad entered the epicnarrative during the later period of its fixation when sepulchral epigrams were no

On Plutarchrsquos use of inscriptions generally and in the Quaestiones Convivales see Liddel ndash I wonder if Plutarch who in the Quaestiones Convivales explicitly acknowledgesfamiliarity with the work of Polemon Periegetes derived the sepulchral epigram for Olympiasfrom Polemonrsquos On the epigrams according to a city (FHG III Tndash)


longer a novelty or whether they belonged to the earlier stages in the evolution andfixation of the epics The epitaphia for Archedike and Croesus (coming from latesixth century) postdate the Peisistratid redaction of the epics⁴⁰ and are thus morelikely to reflect epic passages than to have provided models for them

Were there any earlier models that did We cannot know this In MadelineMillerrsquos beautiful novel The Song of Achilles the shadowy soul of Patroclusfinds no peace until a sepulchral inscription is set up on his tomb HomerrsquosIliad on the other hand provides us only with shadows of sepulchral inscrip-tions yet the epic echoes attested in the language and form of sepulchral epi-gram are resounding

See Nagy ndash and ndash on possible modi and chronologies of textualization

58 Andrej Petrovic

Margarita Sotiriou

Performance Poetic Identity andIntertextuality in Pindarrsquos Olympian 4

The relation of Pindarrsquos lyric tradition to the epic past has been since years asubject of philological research Frank Nisetichrsquos Pindar and Homer publishedin 1989 and one year later Gregory Nagyrsquos Pindarrsquos Homer The Lyric Possessionof an Epic Past both illustrate the function of the heroic tradition in Pindarrsquosmelic environmentsup1

In what follows I shall attempt to provide a new suggestion about Pindarrsquoscreative adaptationsup2 of the Homeric flavour in his Olympian 4 and the subtle wayin which he develops his epic model carefully preserving traditional elements ofthe Homeric athletic scenes or intentionally varying specific aspects of them inorder to serve his own epinician purpose I shall also attempt to reveal the rela-tionship between intention and expression and explore the manner in whichPindar reworks the Homeric source text in order to praise lavishly the victoras well as to present himself in public as a lsquoprimary narratorrsquo and a skillful pro-fessional lsquopanegyristrsquo

Pindarrsquos Olympian 4 celebrates Psaumis from the Sicilian state of Camarinasup3

and his Olympic victory in chariot-race (452 BC)⁴ It is a rather short ode chorallyperformed (l 9) in Olympia immediately after the end of the contest⁵

Very special thanks to Dr Ioanna Karamanou and Dr Athanasios Efstathiou for their invitationto give a paper (from which this contribution developed) at the International Conference Ho-meric Receptions in Literature and the Performing Arts organized by the Department of HistoryIonian University in Corfu (7ndash9 November 2011) I am deeply indebted to Dr Ioanna Karamanouand Dr Sophia Kapetanaki for the many important linguistic improvements that they suggested All Pindaric citations are taken from the edition of Snell Maehler For Homer I used theedition of Allen (Oxford) For further bibliography concerning Homeric reception in the epiniciansongs of Pindar cf Sotiriou On the same issue in general with the latest bibliographicalreferences see Graziosi a ndash Cf the definition of the term lsquoadaptationrsquo in Hardwick On a detailed overview of the political history of the state see Hornblower ndash Gerber Schmitz ndash Gelzer The performance place of the Ode has been since years a subject of contro-versial discussion See particularly Gerber ndash who insists on the performance of theOde during a festive procession in honour of Zeus in Camarina In favour of a choral perform-ance of the Ode instead of a solo see the convincing argumentation of Calame ndash

Ἐλατὴρ ὑπέρτατε βροντᾶς ἀκαμαντόποδοςΖεῦ˙ τεαὶ γὰρ Ὧραιὑπὸ ποικιλοφόρμιγγος ἀοιδᾶς ἑλισσόμεναί μ᾽ ἔπεμψανὑψηλοτάτων μάρτυρ᾽ ἀέθλων˙ξείνων δ᾽ εὖ πρασσόντωνἔσαναν αὐτίκ᾽ ἀγγελίαν ποτὶ γλυκεῖαν ἐσλοί˙ 5ἀλλ᾽ ὦ Κρόνου παῖ ὃς Αἴτναν ἔχειςἶπον ἀνεμόεσσαν ἑκατογκεφάλαΤυφῶνος ὀβρίμουΟὐλυμπιονίκανδέξαι Χαρίτων ἕκατι τόνδε κῶμον

χρονιώτατον φάος εὐρυσθενέων ἀρετᾶν 10Ψαύμιος γὰρ ἵκειὀχέων ὅς ἐλαίᾳ στεφανωθεὶς Πισάτιδι κῦδος ὄρσαισπεύδει Καμαρίνᾳ θεὸς εὔφρωνεἴη λοιπαῖς εὐχαῖς˙ἐπεί νιν αἰνέω μάλα μὲν τροφαῖς ἑτοῖμον ἵππωνχαίροντά τε ξενίαις πανδόκοις 15καὶ πρὸς ἁσυχίαν φιλόπολιν καθαρᾷγνώμᾳ τετραμμένον

Driver most high of thunder with unwearied foot Zeuson you I am calling for your Horaiin their circling round have sent me with song on varied lyreas a witness of the most lofty gamesWhen guest-friends are successfulgood men are immediately cheered at the sweet news 5And so son of Cronus you who rule Aetnawindy burden for hundred-headedTyphos the mightyreceive an Olympic victorand for the sake of the Games this celebrationlongest-lasting light for deeds of great strength 10For it comes with the chariot of Psaumiswho is crowned with olive from Pisa and is eager to arouse gloryfor Camarina May heaven look kindly

on his future prayersfor I praise him very earnest in his raising horsesdelighting in receiving guests from everywhere 15and devoted to city-loving Hesychiawith a sincere mind(trans Race 1990 with minor adjustments)

The mythical narrative creates the epilogue of the Ode (ll 19ndash27) The story refers tothe Argonaut Erginus (l 19)who won the race of armour at the Games put on by thewomen of Lemnoswhen the Argonauts stopped there Mocked by the Lemnians be-

60 Margarita Sotiriou

cause of his grey hair during the prize-giving by the queen of the island HypsipyleErginus proudly declared himself capable to win also in other disciplines⁶

οὐ ψεύδεϊ τέγξωλόγονmiddot διάπειρά τοι βροτῶν ἔλεγχοςmiddotἅπερ Κλυμένοιο παῖδαΛαμνιάδων γυναικῶν 20ἔλυσεν ἐξ ἀτιμίαςχαλκέοισι δ᾽ ἐν ἔντεσι νικῶν δρόμονἔειπεν Ὑψιπυλείᾳ μετὰ στέφανον ἰώνmiddotlsquoοὗτος ἐγὼ ταχυτᾶτι˙χεῖρες δὲ καὶ ἦτορ ἴσον φύονται δὲ καὶ νέοις 25ἐν ἀνδράσιν πολιαὶθαμὰκι παρὰ τὸν ἁλικίας ἐοικότα χρόνον rsquo

I shall not tinge my praise with a liethe trial to the end is the (true) test for menThis it was that released son of Clymenusfrom the dishonour of the Lemnian women 20After winning the race in bronze armourand going to Hypsipyle to receive his crown he saidlsquoYou have seen me in speedmy hands and spirit are equally strong Even young menhave often grey hair 25before the time they are (normally) expected to appearrsquo

In 1994 the German scholar Thomas Schmitz drew attention to a nexus of affin-ities between the Pindaric description and the Homeric presentation of the ath-letic games in Scheria in the eighth book of the Odyssey⁷ After a banquet accom-panied by Demodocusrsquo song (ll 1ndash96) Odysseus attends the athletic gamesorganized at Alcinousrsquo palace (ll 97ndash253) Laodamasrsquo exhortation to Odysseusto take part in the games and Euryalusrsquo mockery of him forced him to demon-strate his superiority by throwing the discus far away over the pegs

τὸν δ᾽ ἀπαμειβόμενος προσέφη πολύμητις Ὀδυσσεύς˙ 152lsquoΛαοδάμαν τί με ταῦτα κελεύετε κερτομέοντες

Odysseus always thinking answered him in this waylsquoLaodamas why are you provoking me like thisrsquo

[hellip] τὸν δrsquo αὖτrsquo Εὐρύαλος ἀπαμείβετο νείκεσέ τrsquo ἄντην 158

On the Argonaut myth see schol AR ndasha (Wendel) for the Games in Lemnos seePi P and schol Pi P (Drachmann) on the legend before Pindar see further Bras-well ndash Gerber Schmitz ndash

Performance Poetic Identity and Intertextuality in Pindarrsquos Olympian 4 61

And Euryalus answered him

[hellip]ἀλλὰ καὶ ὥς κακὰ πολλὰ παθών πειρήσομ᾽ ἀέθλωνmiddotθυμοδακὴς γὰρ μῦθος ἐπότρυνας δέ με εἰπώνltIMA ulgt185ἦ ῥα καὶ αὐτῷ φάρει ἀναΐξας λάβε δίσκονμείζονα καὶ πάχετον στιβαρώτερον οὐκ ὀλίγον περἢ οἵῳ Φαίηκες ἐδίσκεον ἀλλήλοισιτόν ῥα περιστρέψας ἧκε στιβαρῆς ἀπὸ χειρόςβόμβησεν δὲ λίθος˙ κατὰ δ᾽ ἔπτηξαν ποτὶ γαίῃ 190Φαίηκες δολιχήρετμοι ναυσίκλυτοι ἄνδρεςλᾶος ὑπὸ ῥιπῆς˙ ὁ δ᾽ ὑπέρπτατο σήματα πάντωνῥίμφα θέων ἀπὸ χειρός ἔθηκε δὲ τέρματ᾽ Aθήνηἀνδρὶ δέμας ἐικυῖα ἔπος τ᾽ ἔφατ᾽ ἔκ τ᾽ ὀνόμαζεν˙

lsquoEven so even with all I have been through I shall give your games a tryYour words are biting my heart and now you have got me goingrsquoHe jumped up with his cloak still on and grabbed a discuslarger than the others thicker and much heavierthan the one that the Phaeacians used for their contestsWinding up he let it fly and the stonelaunched with incredible force from his hand hummed as it flewThe Phaeacians ducked as the discus zoomed overheadand finally landed far beyond the other marksThe goddess Athena who looked like a man nowmarked the spot where it came down and she called out to him

[hellip]ὥς φάτο γήθησεν δὲ πολύτλας δῖος Ὀδυσσεύςχαὶρων οὕνεχ᾽ ἑταῖρον ἐνηέα λεῦσσ᾽ ἐν ἀγῶνι 200καὶ τότε κουφότερον μετεφώνεε Φαιήκεσσιmiddotlsquoτοῦτον νῦν ἀφίκεσθε νέοιmiddot τάχα δ᾽ ὕστερον ἄλλονἥσειν ἢ τοσσοῦτον ὀίομαι ἢ ἔτι μᾶσσοντῶν δ᾽ ἄλλων ὅτινα κραδίη θυμός τε κελεύειδεῦρ᾽ ἄγε πειρηθήτω ἐπεί μ᾽ ἐχολώσατε λίην 205ἢ πὺξ ἠὲ πάλῃ ἢ καὶ ποσίν οὔ τι μεγαίρωπάντων Φαιήκων πλήν γ᾽ αὐτοῦ Λαοδάμαντος

Odysseus cheered up at thisGlad to see a loyal supporter out of the fieldIn a lighter mood now he spoke to the PhaeacianslsquoMatch that if you can boys In a minuteI shall get another one out just as far or fartherAnd if anyone else has the urge to try mestep right up ndashI am angry nowndashI do not care if it is boxing wrestling or even runningCome one come all ndash except Laodamasrsquo


[hellip]πάντα γὰρ οὐ κακός εἰμι μετ᾽ ἀνδράσιν ὅσσοι ἄεθλοιεὖ μὲν τόξον οἶδα ἐύξοον ἀμφαφάασθαι˙ 215I am not weak in any athletic activityand I really know how to handle the bow[hellip]δουρὶ δrsquo ἀκοντίζω ὅσον οὐκ ἄλλος τις ὀϊστῷ 229

I am always the first to hit my man in the enemy lines no matter howmany archers are standing with me and getting shots(trans Lombardo 2000 with minor adjustments)

The verbal affinities between Pindar and his Homeric model are evident(i) While in Homer the mockery against the athlete occurs in the provocative

speeches of Laodamas and Euryalus in Pindar it is initiated by the crowdof Lemnian women (Od 8153 158 185 205 and Ol 420)

(ii) In both descriptions there is a reference to discipline Odysseus wins in dis-cus Erginus wins in race in armour They both claim that they are able towin also in other disciplines (Od 8206 also 8214 and Ol 4 24ndash25)

(iii) Both protagonists use demonstrative pronouns to highlight their triumph(Od 8202 and Ol 423)

(iv) Odysseus emphasizes his superiority in war as an archer (Od 8215ndash 18) anda spearman (Od 8229ndash31) while Erginus argues that his strength derivesfrom his spirit (l 24 ἦτορ)mdash a term that is often used in martial contexts⁸

(v) Odysseus and Erginus are probably middle-aged men In Homer the hero ad-dresses his competitors with the term νέοι (Od 8202) apparently because hewants to stress the age difference between him and the some twenty yearsyounger Phaeacians who seem to be at the same age with Telemachus Ac-cordingly Laodamas addresses him as ξεῖνε πάτερ (Od 8145)⁹ Erginus in Pin-dar expresses the same thought after testing his legs (Ol 423) he talks aboutthe power of his arms and heart Then he refers to the contrast between hisphysical power and his appearance with the following words ldquoEven youngmen have often grey hair before the time they are expected to appearrdquoWhile scholars have pointed out that the passage refers to young Erginuswho has prematurely grey hairsup1⁰ I strongly believe that the use of the Homerictext enables us to adopt an alternative interpretation of the Pindaric speechYouth is always associated with physical strength whereas old age is a syno-nym of weakness In this case the athletic test shows that older men (ie grey

Schmitz n Gerber Cf also Od ndash where Antilochus addresses Odysseus as ὠμογέρων (LSJ lsquofresh ac-tive old manrsquo) See also Stanford See for instance Schmitz ndash


haired) are often strong (ie ldquoyoungrdquo) whereas young men are often ldquoweakrdquo(ie ldquogrey hairedrdquo) Erginus is an eloquent example in support of this viewA young man can be as weak as an older one whereas an older man canbe as strong as a young one ldquoagainst the external sign of the agerdquo (l 27)Though the age reference is consciously cryptic such an interpretation high-lights a logically explained metaphorical sense of the passage The oldermen Erginus and Odysseus proved their strength against their younger com-petitors who have been as weak as the real grey haired mensup1sup1

(vi) Pindarrsquos reception of Homer also emerges from the so called πεῖρα motif(Ol 418 διάπειρα and Od 8184 πειρήσομαι ἀέθλων) indicating the proofof the physical strength in the athletic contest lsquothe trial to the end (διά-πειρα) is the true testproof for menrsquo (ἔλεγχος βροτῶν)sup1sup2 The term πεῖρα oc-curs several times throughout the eighth Book of the Odyssey in the form ofa verb (πειράω ldquoattempt endeavour try make proof or trial ofrdquo) or a nounthough it is sometimes referred to the young Phaeacians who participate inthe games the word is mainly associated with Odysseus and the proof of hisstrength during the contestsup1sup3

Pindarrsquos reworking of the motif deserves closer scrutiny Since years the majorityof commentators has claimed that the emphasis of the passage is on the ldquoperse-verancerdquo or ldquoendurancerdquo of the athlete as main factors (such as πόνος μόχθοςκάματος τόλμα) leading him to success according to his mythical exemplasup1⁴ Un-deniably Pindarrsquos use of the Homeric pattern has an important bearing on thequestion about the way he receives the epic material in a verbal and a conceptuallevel However I believe that the relation of the lyric creator to his source is nomore conventional as Schmitz and others have suggested It rather goes beyondthe simplicity of a verbal affinity or a phrasal echo which just confirms themeaning of the mythical narrative In that sense a second more crucial and rath-er cryptic level of Homeric reception in Ol 4 is detected through this motif whichhas not been sufficiently explored My purpose therefore is to investigate thismotif within the structural thematic and performative context of the Ode

Bowra Mader Krischer Schol Ol andashc b (Drachmann) Διάπειρα is a synonym of πεῖρα (Schol Nem eDrachmann) and in a way even stronger than merely πεῖρα (Τhom Mag Ecl δ ) In Plutarch(Thes ) in oratory ([D] Aeschin ) as well as in historiography(Hdt ) the term διάπειρα bears the meaning of lsquocrucial experiment trial proofrsquo Od In that sense Odysseus Erginus and Psaumis have proved their superiority during the ath-letic contest


Surprisingly the motif is not included in the mythical narrative of the Odesup1⁵ In-stead it is incorporated in an enunciative self-reference about Pindarrsquos encomiastictask and the principles of his art which functions as a proem to the mythical nar-rative (ll 17ndash18 οὐ ψεύδεϊ τέγξω λόγονmiddot διάπειρά τοι βροτῶν ἔλεγχος lsquoI shall nottinge my praise with lies the test till the end is the proof for the menrsquo)

Two other rather similar first person declarations occur in the poemsup1⁶ Atthe proem (ll 1ndash3) Pindar mentions that he has been personally sent here (μ᾽ἔπεμψαν hellip μάρτυρrsquo ἀέθλων) with his song as a witness to the games insteadof merely sending his song as a gift to the victorsup1⁷ The background of theimage is Homeric Twice in the Hymns (612ndash 13 and 3189ndash196) the Horaedaughters of Zeus and Themis are presented as dancing along with HarmoniaHebe and Aphrodite to the accompaniment of choral song and lyresup1⁸

Ὧραι κοσμείσθην χρυσάμπυκες ὁππότrsquo ἴοιενἐς χορὸν ἱμερόεντα θεῶν καὶ δώματα πατρός (612ndash13)

Adorned [hellip] with golden necklaces like those that grace the Horai wearing golden tiaraswhen they fly to the dance of the gods and their fatherrsquos house

Μοῦσαι μέν θrsquo ἅμα πᾶσαι ἀμειβόμεναι ὀπὶ καλῇὑμνεῦσίν ῥα θεῶν δῶρrsquo ἄμβροτα[hellip]αὐτὰρ ἐϋπλόκαμοι Χάριτες καὶ ἐΰφρονες ὯραιἉρμονίη θrsquo Ἥβη τε Διὸς θυγάτηρ τrsquo Aφροδίτηὀρχεῦντrsquo ἀλλήλων ἐπὶ καρπῷ χεῖρας ἔχουσαιmiddot (3189ndash96)

The Muses respond as one their rich voicessinging the immortal gifts of the gods[hellip] Then the rich-haired Graces gracious HoraiHarmonia Hebe and Zeusrsquo daughter Aphroditeall dance together joining hands at their wrists

(trans Rayor 2004 with minor adjustments)

The mythical narrative is inserted in the form of direct speech (oratio recta) According toDornseiff this technique indicates Pindarrsquos literary model as activating the audien-cersquos awareness of the source text in order to impart them information that is essential for theirknowledge and understanding Carey ndash lsquoin Pindar as distinct from other choral lyric poets references to thepoet are distributed throughout the poemrsquo Gerber ndash It is not necessary to assume that the poet has been actually present inthe location of the games The statement can be equally a rhetorical stance for the poetrsquos prom-inence in praising lavishly the victor and his success On the relationship between Horae and Graces see further Hes Op ndash Th ndashCypr fr Bernabeacute Cf also Orph H ndash Their cult in ancient Greece is discussed in Pirenne-Delforge ndash


The next lines (ll 4ndash5) are also devoted to Pindarrsquos personal relationship toPsaumis and their friendship in conjunction with his encomiastic tasksup1⁹ Thanksto Psaumisrsquo liberality the poet finds his place among other guests of thatcelebrationsup2⁰ Pindar frequently describes his task with terms such as ἀγγελίανor ἀγγέλλειν lsquoa conventional mode of discourse associated with athletic compe-tition the formal announcement of the athletersquos victoryrsquosup2sup1 Zeus is then invokedby the speaker lsquoto receive this victorious procession at Olympia a longest-shin-ing light of mighty deedsrsquo (ll 6ndash10) in order to sing Psaumisrsquo athletic aretā(ll 10ndash13) The sentence stops at a semi-colon and the point goes on with a caus-al ἐπεί (l 14) in the form of an emphatic first person statement (the second one ofthe poem) justifying Pindarrsquos encomiastic task lsquofor I praise him for his horse-manship hospitality and the civic harmony in the statersquo

At this point we come to the third and final first person statement of the Ode (l17 οὐ ψεύδεϊ τέγξω λόγον) In a brief personalized moral judgment introduced by anasyndeton Pindar stresses the truthfulness of his praise enhancing in this manner aprominent aspect of his personal style in artsup2sup2 The sentence stops at a semi-colonand the speaker goes on to the next clause to justify his declaration lsquobecause Ipraise him for his values I shall tell (you) the truth for (I tell you) the test tillthe end is the proof for the menrsquosup2sup3 The poet addresses his public not only to revealthe meaning of the following myth (l 19 ἅπερ) but also to establish once again thetechnique which he follows the medium of his poetrysup2⁴ Speaking of himself as aprofessional for the third time Pindar stands in the centre of his procession (l 9)in order to bring in public the message of glory thus securing the continuity ofhis addresseersquos fame This message embodies the epinician αἶνος which is in fact

Race ( ndash) noted that the poet is not the only one to personally feel joy at Psaumisrsquoachievement but ldquoin general all good men should take delight in his hostrsquos victoryrdquo Bundy Wells ndash Carey Cf also Pratt ndash who claims that Pindar always associates truthwith his own praise and lying with the blame of slanders Cf Denniston ndash who claims that one of τοιrsquos nuances is to reveal lsquothe speakerrsquosemotional or intellectual state (present or past) [hellip] With a proverb or general reflection far com-moner in serious poetry than in comedy or prose τοι is used to point the applicability of a uni-versal truth to the special matter in hand it forces the general truth upon the consciousness ofthe individual addressed ldquoDonrsquot forget pleaserdquo rsquo Cf the function of τοι according to Denniston lsquoits primary function is to bringhome to the comprehension of the person addressed a truth of which he is ignorant or tempo-rarily oblivious to establish in fact a close rapport between the mind of the speaker and themind of another personrsquo See also τοι in Pi I (in his address to the victor) and Ol (ad-dressing his own θυμός)


the justification of the truthsup2⁵ The common denominator of the first person state-ments in the poem is the reference to the public lsquoGood menrsquo (l 5 ἐσλοί ie thelocal people of the small Camarina or the panhellenic audience at Olympia) are de-lighted to hear the message of Psaumisrsquo victory as do the lsquomortalsrsquo (l 18 βροτῶν)who also expect Pindar to communicate the glorious event

Therefore the διάπειρα motif though Homeric in nature is refigured with re-gard to its function It is consciously placed at the peak of a series of the per-formative lsquoIrsquo right at the beginning of the mythical narrative which enables Pin-dar to reveal to the audience his professional profile as a lyric creator lsquohisdistinct identityrsquosup2⁶ The motif belongs then to the programmatic content ofthe poem at the hic et nunc of the epinician performance As with Odysseus Er-ginus and Psaumis Pindar proves his own superiority to the public He presentshimself as a lsquopersona projected by the poemsrsquosup2⁷ a speaker in singular accompa-nied by a group of dancers (l 9) whose task is to announce with truthfulnessPsaumisrsquo success and establish it through a mythical example

What is particularly significant for our interpretation is the manner in whichHomer presents Odysseus throughout his work Not only does the hero appear asan athlete who gains victories in different disciplines (discus spear archery) inthe athletic games in Scheria and later in Ithacasup2⁸ but also as a story-teller askillful narrator who communicates his past adventures to the Phaeacianssup2⁹This aspect of the hero is particularly interesting mainly because Odysseus un-like other Homeric professional singers such as Phemius or Demodocus is oftendepicted as a trickster an arch-liar whose descriptions often combine true andfictional elements of his past (on Odysseusrsquo refigurations see also Alexandrouand Petrakou in this volume)sup3⁰ It is exactly this aspect of Odysseus that Pindarwants to suppress and the combination of διάπειρα with the truth as a prelimi-nary remark in his narrative helps to convey such a view As a lsquoprimary narratorrsquohe aims at distinguishing himself from the Homeric Odysseus by providing im-

Nagy observes that the term sums up a moral message demonstrating the author-ity of its creator Cf also Race n Carey opcit In Il Odysseus appears as a spearman Odysseus narrates his wanderings and experiences to the Phaeacians in the four books of hisAπόλογοι (Od ndash) As regards this aspect of the function of the Homeric text in Pindar I amdeeply indebted to Lucia Athanassaki for our fruitful and stimulating private discussion on the sub-ject See Pucci Goldhill esp ch De Jong with further literature in n For Odysseus as a lying narrator cf also the interesting discussion of Pratt ndash


mediately the necessary guarantees about the truthfulness of his storysup3sup1 Eventu-ally he anticipates the false conclusions of his audience and then narrates hisstory suggesting analogies between past and present according to the commonepinician practice

Concluding remarks

The appropriation of Homer in Pindarrsquos Olympian 4 is developed in two levelsThe first one concerns the verbal affinities to the epic source and serves primarilyto praise the victor by comparing him with heroes of the pastsup3sup2 Pindarrsquos han-dling of Erginusrsquo myth is entirely Homeric in diction and subject-matter Glimp-ses of the Odyssey provide his audience with the factual data that define the cele-brated victory and enhance Psaumisrsquo glory by likening his accomplishment tothe exploits of the Homeric heroes Epic is refigured within Pindarrsquos mediumwhile Erginus (from the Argonaut myth) and Odysseus (from the Homeric Odys-sey) are treated as equivalent or lsquoparallel variantsrsquo to highlight the same idea thecomparison between the heroic past and the presentsup3sup3

The second level of Homeric reception is more crucial and complex It con-cerns the adaptation of a specific element of the Homeric narrative The so-calledπεῖρα motif sup3⁴ is now developed into one of Pindarrsquos prominent communicativestrategies The motif constitutes a medium of his epideictic rhetoric within a de-fined performative context Διάπειρα then belongs to lsquothe current composer-audi-ence interactionrsquo In a way it indicates Pindarrsquos lsquospeech-planrsquo according to theethnographic analysis of Wellssup3⁵ Thus the motif is not simply employed topraise the victor as it is till now commonly assumed but primarily to detectin public Pindarrsquos professional task and to underline the epinician bond betweenhim and his patron Like other terms in the Ode such as μαρτυρία ἀγγελία andαἶνος διάπειρα refers not only to the victor but also to the poet himself and to hislsquoovert and visiblersquo professional role while he comments openly upon his storysup3⁶

For Odysseus as lsquosecondary narratorrsquo among other Homeric characters see de Jong ndash GraziosiHaubold argued that Pindarrsquos epinicia must be explored as lsquoelaborateattempts to link the (suitably doctored) past and the present circumstance in which he performsrsquo Nagy ndash Behind the variation of the πεῖρα motif its function is revealed which mainly concerns theperformative context of the poem Wells ndash Pfeijffer ndash


Combined with the virtue of truthfulness in the frame of a gnomic authoritativedeclaration διάπειρα establishes the true message of victory while the poet at-tempts to lsquoconvincersquo his public by conveying the importance of the narratedeventsup3⁷ The matter is then not only about the narration of a story but alsoabout its reception by the public (διάπειρά τοι βροτῶν ἔλεγχος)sup3⁸

From a narratological point of view Pindar differentiates himself from theHomeric Odysseus He anchors himself in the present occasion of the celebra-tion creating ēthos Being conscious about the expectations of his audiencethe poet aims at persuading about the truth of his attitude and praise by narrat-ing the story of a similar situationsup3⁹ The Homeric reflection of the (δια)πειραmotif infuses Pindarrsquos speech with authority It is a poetic strategy showcasinga multilayered adaptation of the epic source text and the manner in which itis reworked to meet the needs of a lyric performance

Pfeijffer Carey It seems like the poet intrudes into his own story in order to add to it credibility and value TheOde is lsquoHomericrsquo not only in terms of its narrative but also with regard to its introduction which ismade in Homeric colours In the form of a gnomic authoritative declaration the Homeric πεῖραmotifcombined with the truth signals not only the mythical exemplum but the narrator as well Nagy mentions lsquoThe presence of heroic narrative in Pindar is the continuation ofa living tradition not the preservation of references to lost epic texts Recognizing the Homericsource text is essential for the understanding of the denotation of the text and for the appreci-ation of the poem as a meaningful work of artrsquo


Chris Carey

Homer and Epic in Herodotusrsquo Book 7

Herodotusrsquo relationship with Homer already a commonplace in antiquitysup1 isboth complex and shifting It is a clicheacute but like most clicheacutes true that Herodo-tus overtly place himself at a crossroads in European literary history While hisbroadly rationalizing approach to his world and his insistence on explainingcausation align him with developments in contemporary Ioniasup2 his programmat-ic opening also firmly aligns him with the epic herorsquos quest for and the epic nar-ratorrsquos bestowal of kleos aphthiton undying renown

῾Ηροδότου Ἁλικαρνασσέος ἱστορίης ἀπόδεξις ἥδε ὡς μήτε τὰ γενόμενα ἐξ ἀνθρώπων τῷχρόνῳ ἐξίτηλα γένηται μήτε ἔργα μεγάλα τε καὶ θωμαστά τὰ μὲν ῞Ελλησι τὰ δὲ βαρβάροισιἀποδεχθέντα ἀκλέα γένηται τά τε ἄλλα καὶ διrsquo ἣν αἰτίην ἐπολέμησαν ἀλλήλοισι

This is the exposition of the research of Herodotus of Halicarnassus so that events may not belost to mankind through time nor great and marvellous deeds some performed by Greeks andothers by barbarians may not lose their glory including the reason why they went to war witheach othersup3

The debt to epic is overtly advertised at the level of form It appears as a genericdebt in the archaizing dialect which Herodotus shares with other Ionian logogra-phers and in the presence of words otherwise attested only in poetry and as a spe-cifically Homeric debt in the pervasive presence of direct speech a feature whichAristotle singled out as especially associated with the Iliad and the Odyssey⁴ Moregenerally in locating the Persian wars within the larger context of hostilities be-tween East and West he associates his narrative closely with the Trojan War asthe salient predecessor of the westward aggression of 490 and 480 BC At thesame time as so often when one creative work engaged with another the encoun-ter with epic always carries an implied or explicit distancing⁵ Thus HerodotusrsquolsquoHomericrsquo dialect is resolutely Ionic it is a Kunstsprache but not the epic Ionic-

[Longin] De sublim μόνος ῾Ηρόδοτος ῾Ομηρικώτατος ἐγένετο Στησίχορος ἔτι πρότερον ὅτε ᾿Αρχίλοχοςhellip For Herodotusrsquo relationship with contemporary intellectual trends see in general Thomas Translations of Herodotus are based on the Loeb of ΑD Godley ndash with revisions ofmy own those of Homer ultimately are based on the Loeb of AT Murray ndash with myown (often radical) revisions Other translations are my own unless otherwise indicated Poet a See on this especially Pelling

Aeolic Kunstsprache And when he explicitly approaches Homer Herodotus point-edly distances himself from and questions the authority of the Homeric text

This complex relationship is omnipresent in Herodotus But it is not uni-formly present There are highs and lows of interaction Herodotusrsquo use ofHomer and of epic more generally reaches its highest point in book 7 which en-gages with the Homeric text to a degree unparalleled in the History My presentpurpose is simply to chart this engagement

The engagement with Homer first surfaces explicitly at sect20 with the assertionthat the invasion of 480 exceeded all of the early East-West confrontations puttogether

στόλων γὰρ τῶν ἡμεῖς ἴδμεν πολλῷ δὴ μέγιστος οὗτος ἐγένετο ὥστε μήτε τὸν Δαρείου τὸνἐπὶ Σκύθας παρὰ τοῦτον μηδένα φαίνεσθαι μήτε τῶν Σκυθέων ὅτε Σκύθαι Κιμμερίους διώ-κοντες ἐς τὴν Μηδικὴν χώρην ἐσβαλόντες σχεδὸν πάντα τὰ ἄνω τῆς ᾿Ασίης καταστρεψάμενοιἐνέμοντο τῶν εἵνεκεν ὕστερον Δαρεῖος ἐτιμωρέετο μήτε κατὰ τὰ λεγόμενα τὸν ᾿Ατρειδέων ἐς῎Ιλιον μήτε τὸν Μυσῶν τε καὶ Τευκρῶν τὸν πρὸ τῶν Τρωικῶν γενόμενον οἳ διαβάντες ἐς τὴνΕὐρώπην κατὰ Βόσπορον τούς τε Θρήικας κατεστρέψαντο πάντας καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν ᾿Ιόνιον πόντονκατέβησαν μέχρι τε Πηνειοῦ ποταμοῦ τὸ πρὸς μεσαμβρίης ἤλασαν αὗται αἱ πᾶσαι οὐδrsquo ἕτεραιπρὸς ταύτῃσι γενόμεναι στρατηλασίαι μιῆς τῆσδε οὐκ ἄξιαι

This was by far the greatest of all expeditions of which we know The one that Darius ledagainst the Scythians is nothing compared to this nor is the Scythian expedition whenthey invade Median territory in pursuit of the Cimmerians and conquered and held almostall the upper lands of Asia (for which Darius afterwards attempted to punish them) nor ac-cording to the reports the expedition led by the sons of Atreus against Troy nor the expedi-tion of the Mysians and Teucrians who before the Trojan war crossed the Bosporus into Eu-rope conquered all the Thracians and came down to the Ionian sea driving southward as faras the river Peneus Not all these nor all the others added to them equal this single expedition

Though Herodotus gives a list of the earlier invasions only one receives a com-ment on its source That is the Trojan War where (in a milder way than his sus-picion of Homer in book 2)⁶ he qualifies the reference to Troy with a disclaimerabout the tradition The comment is revealing Troy and epic are the main com-petitors for his theme and the passage insists that in scale and significance Her-odotusrsquo story dwarfs that of Homer The position of this assertion is highly signif-icant It is placed very early in (what for us is) book 7 of the History immediately

῾Ελένης μὲν ταύτην ἄπιξιν παρὰ Πρωτέα ἔλεγον οἱ ἱρέες γενέσθαι Δοκέει δέ μοι καὶ῞Ομηρος τὸν λόγον τοῦτον πυθέσθαιmiddot ἀλλrsquo οὐ γὰρ ὁμοίως ἐς τὴν ἐποποιίην εὐπρεπὴς ἦν τῷἑτέρῳ τῷ περ ἐχρήσατο μετῆκε αὐτόν δηλώσας ὡς καὶ τοῦτον ἐπίσταιτο τὸν λόγον

This is the way the priests narrate the arrival of Helen to the court of Proteus I think thatHomer heard of this account but seeing that it was not so well suited to epic poetry as the taleof which he made use he rejected it while showing that he knew it

72 Chris Carey

after the ratification of the decision to go to war but before the army begins tomobilize As such it serves as a second prooimion introducing a new and climac-tic phase in the narrative This book follows the specifically Athenian aristeia atMarathon in book 6which is the climax of the pre-invasion narrative In contrastto Marathon presented by Herodotus as a Persian punitive expedition againsttargeted enemies the invasion in book 7 is a threat to the whole of Greece Her-odotus has already signalled Dariusrsquo escalation of his ambitions from targetedtisis to a more general intention to take Greece⁷ and the prospect of a Persianconquest of Greece had figured as an implied counter-factual as early as book3 when Atossa playing the familiar role of tempter tries to divert Darius fromthe Scythian campaign to an attack on Greece⁸ But in the case of Xerxes the tar-get is from the start the whole of Greece And more than Greece For Herodotusthe ultimate goal is Europe⁹ This is for Herodotus a conflict on a scale unprece-dented in the history of the world not all the East-West conflicts combined equalit As such it is an epic contest and one which surpasses all epic narrative

In fact of course this prooimion is simply making explicit an engagementwith Homer visible to the original audience in the preceding narrative Thedream which tempts Xerxes draws on an established narrative role for dreamsin epic lyric and drama (and indeed in real life) as the prompters to actionOne text lurking in the background is almost certainly Aeschylusrsquo Persianswhose influence is palpable throughout book 7 But far more important as an in-fluence is the epic background The generic affinity with epic is visible in the be-haviour of the dream Unlike those dreams where people see something whileasleep (the more usual form in Herodotus) this dream is a figure who comesand stands over the sleeping Xerxes in the manner of epic apparition dreamssup1⁰

ndash ndash ταῦτα μὲν ἐπὶ τοσοῦτο ἐλέγετο μετὰ δὲ εὐφρόνη τε ἐγίνετο καὶ Ξέρξην ἔκνιζε ἡ ᾿Αρταβά-νου γνώμηmiddot νυκτὶ δὲ βουλὴν διδοὺς πάγχυ εὕρισκέ οἱ οὐ πρῆγμα εἶναι στρατεύεσθαι ἐπὶ τὴν ῾Ελλάδαδεδογμένων δέ οἱ αὖτις τούτων κατύπνωσε καὶ δή κου ἐν τῇ νυκτὶ εἶδε ὄψιν τοιήνδε ὡς λέγεται ὑπὸΠερσέωνmiddot ἐδόκεε ὁ Ξέρξης ἄνδρα οἱ ἐπιστάντα μέγαν τε καὶ εὐειδέα εἰπεῖνmiddot ldquoμετὰ δὴ βουλεύεαι ὦΠέρσα στράτευμα μὴ ἄγειν ἐπὶ τὴν ῾Ελλάδα προείπας ἁλίζειν Πέρσῃσι στρατόν οὔτε ὦν μεταβουλευό-μενος ποιέεις εὖ οὔτε ὁ συγγνωσόμενός τοι πάραmiddot ἀλλrsquo ὥσπερ τῆς ἡμέρης ἐβουλεύσαο ποιέειν ταύτηνἴθι τῶν ὁδῶνrdquo τὸν μὲν ταῦτα εἴπαντα ἐδόκεε ὁ Ξέρξης ἀποπτάσθαι

The discussion went that far then night came and Xerxes was pricked by the advice of Ar-tabanus Giving over the night to reflection he concluded that to send an army against Hellas wasnot his affair He made this second resolve and fell asleep then (so the Persians say) in the night hesaw a vision like this it seemed to Xerxes that a tall and handsome man stood over him and saidldquoAre you then changing your mind Persian and not intending to lead an expedition against Hellas

Homer and Epic in Herodotusrsquo Book 7 73

But there is a very specific intertext here in the account of the dream sent by Zeusto Agamemnon in book 2 of the Iliad a text which is regularly cited in thiscontextsup1sup1 The presence of other dreams in both the Iliad and the Odyssey indi-cates that they were a regular narrative motif in epic texts So we should avoidthe automatic assumption that an intertext which strikes us immediately withour very small sample of early Greek poetry would have been as obvious to aGreek with a whole tradition potentially available But in this case the similar-ities are striking and numerous enough to rule out coincidence

The position immediately invites comparison In both cases after a narrated orimplied interval in the hostilities a renewal of the fighting is prompted by a divinedream In Homer the dream is explicitly sent by Zeus This is a more tricky situationfor Herodotus to manage The historian never adopts the omniscient stance of theepic poet his account comes from researchsup1sup2 not as a gift from the Muses So divineorigin cannot be a narrative fact But the narrativewhile carefully avoiding anythingwhich might count as an explicit authorial validation of the dream figure stronglyinvites us to take it seriously as something supernatural This is achieved both withthe amount of space devoted to the narrative and with the subtle shift in focaliza-tion Though we begin with explicit distancing of author from story through the ref-erence to Persian sources (7121 λέγεται ὑπὸ Περσέωνsup1sup3) the demurrer is not repeat-ed Instead we are offered authorial statements of fact and a degree ofcircumstantial detail which further invites beliefsup1⁴

although you have proclaimed the mustering of the army It is not good for you to change yourmind and there will be no one here to pardon you for it but continue along the path you resolvedupon yesterdayrdquo With these words the figure seemed to Xerxes to flit away

For Herodotean parallels see 1341 381 21391 1413 5561 Stein (1889 ad loc) speaks oflsquodas nach homerischer Art gedachte Traumbildrsquo Macan 1908 remarks lsquothe analogy with thedream of Agamemnon Il 2 ad init has been often pointed outrsquo Immerwahr (1954 34) neveractually justifies his brisk lsquoit is also not very enlightening to compare the dreams to the famousdream of Agamemnon of Iliad 2rsquoWest (1987 264) is a little less brisk but ignores the similarity innarrative context and purpose (of the dream) See n17 below Il ndash The most succinct statement of method is μέχρι μὲν τούτου ὄψις τε ἐμὴ καὶ γνώμη καὶἱστορίη ταῦτα λέγουσά ἐστι τὸ δὲ ἀπὸ τοῦδε αἰγυπτίους ἔρχομαι λόγους ἐρέων κατὰ [τὰ] ἤκουονmiddotπροσέσται δέ τι αὐτοῖσι καὶ τῆς ἐμῆς ὄψιος

So far is said by my own autopsy and judgment and inquiry In what follows I will recordEgyptian accounts according to what I have heard and will add something of what I myselfhave seen See OphuisenStork ad loc The tacit narrator validation of the dream is marked by the narrative shift from subject impres-sion here (ἐδόκεε) to authorial statement ( ἔλεγε ἦλθε with Macan) and back ()

74 Chris Carey

The status of the dream is also boosted by the form taken by the dream fig-ure who has superhuman stature and beauty This is not unique (it happens inthe case of Hipparchus in book 5sup1⁵) But here the sense that we are in the pres-ence of something superhuman is further emphasized by the test which refutesthe rationalist incredulity of Artabanus As Harrison notessup1⁶ these doubts areclearly introduced into the narrative specifically to be quashed by the sequel Fi-nally its immediate context also aligns it with Homer Both are intimately tied tocouncils Agamemnonrsquos dream prompts two meetings a council of the elite anda general agora of the army Xerxesrsquo dream visions are interspersed with meet-ings of his council (this time three) Finally both are false The falsity of the Ilia-dic dream is explicit Zeus misleads Agamemnon with a dream which offers in-stant success though the aim is in fact to further the impact of Achillesrsquowithdrawal from battle Again it is more difficult for the historian to flag the in-tent to deceive and scholars have often been less ready to see the dream to Xerx-es as aimed at deceiving But the apparition emphatically tells Xerxes that thealternative to the expedition is ruin and diminution when in fact it is the expe-dition which will be ruinoussup1⁷ The dream means to deceivesup1⁸

However while visibly drawing on Homer the text also visibly goes beyondHomer Agamemnon receives a single dream vision Xerxesrsquo dream figure comesnot just once but three times There are two dreamerssup1⁹ And there are three coun-cils not two There is a process of expansion here which gives the Herodoteannarrative an element of hyperbole in comparison with its antecedent commen-surate with the claim which follows that this campaign was unprecedented inscale A unique expedition like this requires divine prompting on a scale unpre-cedented even in epic

The other visibly Homeric element is the expanded catalogue Catalogues ofcombatants are a recurrent and distinguishing feature of the invasion narrativeIt is interesting here to compare the account of Marathon Though a catalogue onthe Greek side is ruled out by the simple fact that only Athenians and Plataeansfight a Persian catalogue was always a possibility and Marathon receives noneIn contrast the invasion narrative is rich in catalogues They recur at 81ndash2 (Ar-

Harrison Contra egWest ndash lsquoDespite the widespread assumption that these dreams are sentto mislead the king there is no reason to question their message that it would be personally disas-trous for Xerxes to change his mind at this pointrsquo Nothing in the text suggests the latter and the netresult (contrary to the dream) is humiliation for Xerxes in the narrative if not in real life See especially Harrison ndash Dodson rightly refers to lsquothe dreams of Xerxes and Artabanusrsquo


temision) 43ndash48 (Salamis) and finally 928ndash32 (Plataea) But the present is byfar the longest Since only the Iranian contingents listed play any part in the sub-seqent account of the fightingsup2⁰ the list mainly serves to retard the narrative inorder to create suspense and to continue Herodotusrsquo emphasis on the unprece-dented scale of the army descending on Greece But again the epic intertext isan important part of the rhetoric For the detailed catalogue of forces at Doriscusthe obvious antecedent was the catalogue of ships in Iliad book 2 Again ofcourse we need to bear in mind that with so much more epic available to authorand audience intertexts which we perceive unhesitantly may have had less sali-ence There must have been many catalogues in epic war narratives But equallywe should note that the scale of Homerrsquos list invites comparison and that theEast-West axis of the conflict gives Iliad 2 a salience which is not the result ofmodern Homerocentrism nor of the accident of survival

There are of course some obvious differences Herodotus carefully integra-tes his catalogue into his narrative by locating it in the marshalling of the troopsat Doriscus So it has a natural role in his narrative He also lists his Greeks whenthey enter his narrative as fighters So there is no mechanical insertion of the Ho-meric motif Herodotus is also at pains to vary his model Thus where the Ho-meric text gives first place to the Greeks both in position and in scale (the Greeksin Homer receive 276 lines the Trojans 61) Herodotus reverses the relationshipHis Greeks as the more familiar combatants and the smaller force receive rela-tively little space and enter the narrative later (7202ndash03) while his Asiatics re-ceive in total approximately one sixth of the book

But as well as varying his model Herodotus outdoes it in the way he choosesto present his AsiaticsWhere Homer notes only in passing the polyglot nature ofhis Trojans and their alliessup2sup1 in a narrative which generally assimilates them cul-

Burn

Il ndashΝάστης αὖ Καρῶν ἡγήσατο βαρβαροφώνωνοἳ Μίλητον ἔχον Φθιρῶν τrsquo ὄρος ἀκριτόφυλλονΜαιάνδρου τε ῥοὰς Μυκάλης τrsquo αἰπεινὰ κάρηναAnd Nastes again led the Carians barbarian speakerswho held Miletus and the mountain of Phthires with its boundless leavesand the streams of Maeander and the steep peaks of MycaleCf Il31ndash9αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ κόσμηθεν ἅμrsquo ἡγεμόνεσσιν ἕκαστοιΤρῶες μὲν κλαγγῇ τrsquo ἐνοπῇ τrsquo ἴσαν ὄρνιθες ὣςἠΰτε περ κλαγγὴ γεράνων πέλει οὐρανόθι πρόmiddotαἵ τrsquo ἐπεὶ οὖν χειμῶνα φύγον καὶ ἀθέσφατον ὄμβρονcorr κλαγγῇ ταί γε πέτονται ἐπrsquo ὠκεανοῖο ῥοάων

76 Chris Carey

turally to each other and to the Greeks Herodotus is at pains to emphasize di-versity as well as scale Not only do these forces come from everywhere in theempire they are consistently exotic (with few exceptions) and often as differentfrom each other as they are from the Greeks It is in fact very unlikely that mostof these troops were marshalled by Xerxes or set foot in Greece and (as observedalready) almost all of them disappear from the subsequent narrative It is prob-able that the bulk of the troops were the Iranian core of the Persian army thePersians Medes and Saka (known to the Greeks as Scythians) Herodotusseems to be following a Persian source for the composition of the army contin-gents from the empire as a whole rather than a muster list for the invasion of480 This reflects in part the difficulty he experienced in obtaining informationspecific to the expedition He admits that he has no detailed source for scaleof the individual componentssup2sup2 and this in turn invites us to conclude that hedid not have access to a list of the forces engaged in the campaign But in fillingthe gap he has been influenced by Aeschylusrsquo understanding of the Persian armyas one which empties the empire of men and draws on peoples from everyregionsup2sup3 The effect (apart from increasing the emphasis throughout the narrative

corr ἀνδράσι Πυγμαίοισι φόνον καὶ κῆρα φέρουσαιmiddotἠέριαι δrsquo ἄρα ταί γε κακὴν ἔριδα προφέρονταιοἳ δrsquo ἄρrsquo ἴσαν σιγῇ μένεα πνείοντες ᾿Αχαιοὶἐν θυμῷ μεμαῶτες ἀλεξέμεν ἀλλήλοισινNow when they were marshalled each with their leadersthe Trojans advanced with clamour and cries like birdslike the clamour of cranes before heavenwho when they have fled wintry storms and rain beyond measurewith clamour fly toward the streams of Oceanbringing slaughter and death to the Pigmy menand in the early dawn offer grim battleBut the Achaeans advanced in silence breathing courageeager at heart to defend each other

ὅσον μέν νυν ἕκαστοι παρεῖχον πλῆθος ἐς ἀριθμόν οὐκ ἔχω εἰπεῖν τὸ ἀτρεκές (οὐ γὰρλέγεται πρὸς οὐδαμῶν ἀνθρώπων) σύμπαντος δὲ τοῦ στρατοῦ τοῦ πεζοῦ τὸ πλῆθος ἐφάνη ἑβδο-μήκοντα καὶ ἑκατὸν μυριάδες

I cannot give the precise number that each group contributed to the total for there is no one whotells us but the total of the whole land army turned out as one million and seven hundred thousand A Pers ndash πᾶσα γὰρ ἰσχὺς ᾿Ασιατογενὴςοἴχωκε νέον δrsquo ἄνδρα βαΰζεικοὔτε τις ἄγγελος οὔτε τις ἱππεὺςἄστυ τὸ Περσῶν ἀφικνεῖταιmiddot[hellip] θούριος Ξέρξης κενώσας πᾶσαν ἠπείρου πλάκα


on the dramatic disparity between the Greek and Persian forces) is again to stressthe unprecedented nature of the invasion So once more Herodotus uses Homericmotifs to recall and at the same time distance himself from Homer

Again it is worth stressing that this is not Herodotusrsquo only catalogue But ithas no equal in what precedes and even the catalogue of combatants in the cli-mactic battle of Plataea in book 9 is much smaller in scale and lacking in thecumulative exoticism of this catalogue This catalogue also advertises its Homer-ic origin in a way that the subsequent catalogues do not in its structural similar-ity to that of the Iliad it lists both contingents and commanders where subse-quent catalogues are happy to list contingents

There is one further aspect of the narrative of the decision to go to warwhich is worth stressing Xerxes too is shaped by Herodotus on the model ofthe epic hero with all its ambiguity in the grandeur of his ambitions and themotives which take him to war He is invited by Mardonius the ultimate tempterto think of the renown which he will win if he conquers Greecesup2⁴ as well as theterritory and the opportunity for revenge He himself stresses in council thatglory is one of the things he seeks In conversation with Mardonius he praisesthe life of action and risksup2⁵ in a manner which (as Angus Bowie has noted)would be fitting in the mouth of a Homeric herosup2⁶ And Herodotus stresses(not entirely correctly) that his decision to build the canal was down to hismegalophrosynēsup2⁷ The desire for glory was Persian as well as Greek And the

For the whole strength of Asiahas gone and yelps around the young manand no messenger or horsemanreaches the city of the Persians[hellip] Rushing Xerxes emptying the whole plain of the mainland ἀλλrsquo εἰ τὸ μὲν νῦν ταῦτα πρήσσοις τά περ ἐν χερσὶ ἔχειςmiddot ἡμερώσας δὲ Αἴγυπτον τὴν ἐξυ-βρίσασαν στρατηλάτεε ἐπὶ τὰς ᾿Αθήνας ἵνα λόγος τέ σε ἔχῃ πρὸς ἀνθρώπων ἀγαθὸς καί τις ὕστερ-ον φυλάσσηται ἐπὶ γῆν τὴν σὴν στρατεύεσθαι

For now you should do what you have in hand then when you have tamed the arrogance ofEgypt lead your armies against Athens so that you may have fair fame among men and othersmay beware of invading your land in future μεγάλα γὰρ πρήγματα μεγάλοισι κινδύνοισι ἐθέλει καταιρέεσθαι

Great causes are usually achieved with great risks Bowie ὡς μὲν ἐμὲ συμβαλλόμενον εὑρίσκειν μεγαλοφροσύνης εἵνεκεν αὐτὸ Ξέρξης ὀρύσσεινἐκέλευε ἐθέλων τε δύναμιν ἀποδείκνυσθαι καὶ μνημόσυνα λιπέσθαι παρεὸν γὰρ μηδένα πόνον λαβ-όντας τὸν ἰσθμὸν τὰς νέας διειρύσαι ὀρύσσειν ἐκέλευε διώρυχα τῇ θαλάσσῃ εὖρος ὡς δύο τριήρεαςπλέειν ὁμοῦ ἐλαστρεομένας

As far as I can determine by reasoning Xerxes ordered this digging out of pride wishing todisplay his power and leave a memorial though with no trouble they could have drawn their

78 Chris Carey

epic hero is not the only influence at work since Herodotusrsquo account of Xerxesrsquodecision also draws on Aeschylusrsquo version of his psychology in the Persians Butthe values of the epic hero as formulated resoundingly by Homer are there aspart of the (complex) presentation of Xerxes

αὐτίκα δὲ Γλαῦκον προσέφη παῖδrsquo ῾ΙππολόχοιοmiddotΓλαῦκε τί ἢ δὴ νῶϊ τετιμήμεσθα μάλισταἕδρῃ τε κρέασίν τε ἰδὲ πλείοις δεπάεσσινἐν Λυκίῃ πάντες δὲ θεοὺς ὣς εἰσορόωσικαὶ τέμενος νεμόμεσθα μέγα Ξάνθοιο παρrsquo ὄχθαςκαλὸν φυταλιῆς καὶ ἀρούρης πυροφόροιοτὼ νῦν χρὴ Λυκίοισι μέτα πρώτοισιν ἐόνταςἑστάμεν ἠδὲ μάχης καυστείρης ἀντιβολῆσαιὄφρά τις ὧδrsquo εἴπῃ Λυκίων πύκα θωρηκτάωνmiddotοὐ μὰν ἀκλεέες Λυκίην κάτα κοιρανέουσινἡμέτεροι βασιλῆες ἔδουσί τε πίονα μῆλαοἶνόν τrsquo ἔξαιτον μελιηδέαmiddot ἀλλrsquo ἄρα καὶ ἲςἐσθλή ἐπεὶ Λυκίοισι μέτα πρώτοισι μάχονταιὦ πέπον εἰ μὲν γὰρ πόλεμον περὶ τόνδε φυγόντεαἰεὶ δὴ μέλλοιμεν ἀγήρω τrsquo ἀθανάτω τεἔσσεσθrsquo οὔτέ κεν αὐτὸς ἐνὶ πρώτοισι μαχοίμηνοὔτέ κε σὲ στέλλοιμι μάχην ἐς κυδιάνειρανmiddotνῦν δrsquo ἔμπης γὰρ κῆρες ἐφεστᾶσιν θανάτοιο

ships across the isthmus he ordered them to dig a canal from sea to sea wide enough to float twotriremes rowed abreast

Like μεγαλοφροσύνη μηδένα πόνον λαβόντας captures the ambiguity of Herodotusrsquo presenta-tion for it hovers somewhere between needless labour and the readiness of the Pindaric athleteto undergo ponos for the sake of renown (O[5]15 69ndash11 87 922ndash3 1091ndash3 114 P873ndash80N132ndash3 41ndash2 548ndash9 624 714ndash16 1024 30ndash31 I145ndash6 445ndash7 522ndash5 57ndash9 610ndash11) Hero-dotusrsquo objection that it would have been feasible to drag the ships overland across the peninsula isonly superficially persuasive As Macan notes ad loc the Greeks occasionally moved small forcesshort distances in the way (Th 23 281 482) but it would be an enormous task to use this methodto move (and reinforce) a large fleet on a major expedition (despite Herodotusrsquo μηδένα πόνον λαβ-όντας) The canal would offer advantages for provisioning as well as movement of warships if itwas deep enough for barges or small cargo vessels Herodotus is not however entirely wrong TheChalouf stēlē (DZc Brosius 2000 no 52 p47 Kuhrt 2007 no 11 6 pp 485ndash6) says lsquoKing Dariussays I am a Persian From Persia I seized Egypt I ordered this canal dug from a river that is calledNile and flows in Egypt to the sea which begins in Persia Therefore this canal was dug as I hadordered and ships went from Egypt through this canal to Persia as I wishedrsquo The Egytian canalwas evidently a source of pride for Darius (as well as practical politics) and Xerxes was probablymotivated in part by a desire to emulate his father (as Stein 1889 notes)


μυρίαι ἃς οὐκ ἔστι φυγεῖν βροτὸν οὐδrsquo ὑπαλύξαιἴομεν ἠέ τῳ εὖχος ὀρέξομεν ἠέ τις ἡμῖν(Il 12309ndash28)

At once he spoke to Glaucus son of HippolochuslsquoGlaucus why is it you and I are honoured above otherswith pride of place and meats and filled wine cupsin Lycia and all men look on us as if we were immortalsand we have our allocated land by the banks of Xanthusgood land orchard and vineyard and fields for growing wheatSo now it is our duty in the forefront of the Lyciansto take our stand and go to meet blazing battleso that a man of the close-armoured Lycians may say of usldquoIndeed these are no inglorious men who are lords of Lyciathese kings of ours who feed upon the fat sheepand drink the exquisite sweet wine but there is noblevalour in them since they fight in the forefront of the LyciansrdquoFriend supposing you and I escaping this battleCould go on to live on forever ageless immortalI would not myself be fighting in the foremostnor would I send you into battle where men win gloryBut now seeing that the spirits of death stand close about uscountless and no man can turn aside or escape themlet us go on and give someone cause to boast or he to us(trans Lattimore 1951 adapted)

Like the other motifs it aligns the invasion with the themes of epic and stressesboth its significance and the climactic nature of the last three books There ishowever an irony in all of this Although I have stressed the unique salienceof epic in book 7 and the book does have a neat wholeness to it in the narrativearc that takes us from the decision to invade through to the first major encounterthe account of the invasion has to be read as a fluent whole the books are notfree-standing Xerxes will in the end prove to be entirely unheroicWhere the pre-Salamis narrative places emphasis on Greek fears and the Greek readiness toflee the decisive victory at Salamis transfers these emotions to Xerxes His re-sponse to defeat is to enact a flight which reverses the morale ratio betweenGreek and Persiansup2⁸

Ξέρξης δὲ ὡς ἔμαθε τὸ γεγονὸς πάθος δείσας μή τις τῶν ᾿Ιώνων ὑποθῆται τοῖσι ῞Ελλησι ἢαὐτοὶ νοήσωσι πλέειν ἐς τὸν ῾Ελλήσποντον λύσοντες τὰς γεφύρας καὶ ἀπολαμφθεὶς ἐν τῇ Εὐ-ρώπῃ κινδυνεύσῃ ἀπολέσθαι δρησμὸν ἐβούλευε (8971)

See ndash of the Greeks

80 Chris Carey

When Xerxes understood the calamity which had taken place he feared that some of the Ion-ians might advise the Hellenes or that they might decide themselves to sail to the Hellespontand destroy the bridges and he would be trapped in Europe and in danger of destruction heresolved on flight

The epic stance in book 7 is in part a preparation for this peripeteiaThe scale of the invasion is not the only reason for the dense indebtedness to

Homer in book 7 The other reason is the nature of the culminating battle of thebook at Thermopylae The tradition which Herodotus inherited already stressedthe dramatic disparity of the forces and the courageous choice made by theGreek fighters This is all there in the epigram for the fallen set up at the sitewith its emphasis on overwhelming odds (72281)

μυριάσιν ποτὲ τᾷδε τριακοσίαις ἐμάχοντοἐκ Πελοποννάσου χιλιάδες τέτορες

Against three million here foughtFour thousand from the Peloponnese

The poetic tradition had expanded this aspect Simonidesrsquo fragmentary lyric cel-ebration of the dead rings a number of changes on the epic notion of kleos ap-thiton immortal renown (PMG 531)

τῶν ἐν Θερμοπύλαις θανόντωνεὐκλεὴς μὲν ἁ τύχα καλὸς δrsquo ὁ πότμοςβωμὸς δrsquo ὁ τάφος πρὸ γόων δὲ μνᾶστις ὁ δrsquo οἶκτος ἔπαινοςmiddotἐντάφιον δὲ τοιοῦτον οὔτrsquo εὐρὼςοὔθrsquo ὁ πανδαμάτωρ ἀμαυρώσει χρόνοςἀνδρῶν ἀγαθῶν ὅδε σηκὸς οἰκέταν εὐδοξίαν῾Ελλάδος εἵλετοmiddot μαρτυρεῖ δὲ καὶ ΛεωνίδαςΣπάρτας βασιλεύς ἀρετᾶς μέγαν λελοιπὼςκόσμον ἀέναόν τε κλέος

Of those who died at Thermopylaethe fate is glorious fine is the destinythe tomb an altar for lamentation there is remembrance their pity is praiseA shroud like this not mouldnor all-conquering time will eraseThis precinct of brave men received as dweller renownthroughout Greece Witness is Leonidasking of Sparta who left behind the great ornament of valourand glory without end

The link with the heroic quest for kleos becomes explicit in Herodotusrsquo accountof the decision of Leonidas to send away the allies They had no enthusiasm for


the fight while for him it was not kalon to withdraw Herodotusrsquo own commenton the decision associates it firmly with the value system of the epic poems

ταύτῃ καὶ μᾶλλον τὴν γνώμην πλεῖστός εἰμιmiddot Λεωνίδην ἐπείτε ᾔσθετο τοὺς συμμάχους ἐόνταςἀπροθύμους καὶ οὐκ ἐθέλοντας συνδιακινδυνεύειν κελεῦσαί σφεας ἀπαλλάσσεσθαι αὐτῷ δὲἀπιέναι οὐ καλῶς ἔχεινmiddot μένοντι δὲ αὐτοῦ κλέος μέγα ἐλείπετο καὶ ἡ Σπάρτης εὐδαιμονίη οὐκἐξηλείφετο (72202)

I however firmly believe that when Leonidas perceived that the allies were dispirited and un-willing to share all risks with him he told then to depart For himself however it was not goodto leave if he remained he would leave a name of great glory and the prosperity of Spartawould not be erased

And again

ταῦτά τε δὴ ἐπιλεγόμενον Λεωνίδην καὶ βουλόμενον κλέος καταθέσθαι μούνων Σπαρτιητέωνἀποπέμψαι τοὺς συμμάχους μᾶλλον ἢ γνώμῃ διενειχθέντας οὕτω ἀκόσμως οἴχεσθαι τοὺςοἰχομένους (72204)

Considering this and wishing to win glory for the Spartans alone Leonidas sent away the al-lies rather than have them leave in disorder because of a difference of opinion

This sense of Leonidas as both distinct and superlative is prepared by his (re)-entry into the narrative at 7204

τούτοισι ἦσαν μέν νυν καὶ ἄλλοι στρατηγοὶ κατὰ πόλις ἑκάστων ὁ δὲ θωμαζόμενος μάλιστακαὶ παντὸς τοῦ στρατεύματος ἡγεόμενος Λακεδαιμόνιος ἦν Λεωνίδης ὁ ᾿Αναξανδρίδεω τοῦΛέοντος τοῦ Εὐρυκρατίδεω τοῦ ᾿Αναξάνδρου τοῦ Εὐρυκράτεος τοῦ Πολυδώρου τοῦ ᾿Αλκαμέ-νεος τοῦ Τηλέκλου τοῦ ᾿Αρχέλεω τοῦ ῾Ηγησίλεω τοῦ Δορύσσου τοῦ Λεωβώτεω τοῦ᾿Εχεστράτου τοῦ ῎Ηγιος τοῦ Εὐρυσθένεος τοῦ ᾿Αριστοδήμου τοῦ ᾿Αριστομάχου τοῦ Κλεοδαίουτοῦ ῞Υλλου τοῦ ῾Ηρακλέος hellip

There was a general for each contingent but the one most admired and the leader of thewhole army was a Lacedaemonian Leonidas son of Anaxandrides son of Leon son of Eur-ycratides son of Anaxandrus son of Eurycrates son of Polydorus son of Alcamenes son ofTeleclus son of Archelaus son of Hegesilaus son of Doryssus son of Leobotes son of Eches-tratus son of Agis son of Eurysthenes son of Aristodemus son of Aristomachus son of Cleo-daeus son of Hyllus son of Heracles

Though he commands a conventional Greek army Leonidas is set apart not justby the elementary fact that he alone of the Greeks is singled out for naming atthis point (unlike the Persian catalogue)sup2⁹ but by the elaborate genealogy and

The effect is repeated in the announcement of his death at where after noting that

82 Chris Carey

by his presentation as an object of aweamazementadmirationsup3⁰ In his singu-larity he resembles Xerxes (71872)

ἀνδρῶν δrsquo ἐουσέων τοσουτέων μυριάδων κάλλεός τε εἵνεκα καὶ μεγάθεος οὐδεὶς αὐτῶν ἀξιο-νικότερος ἦν αὐτοῦ Ξέρξεω ἔχειν τοῦτο τὸ κράτος

Of all those tens of thousands of men for beauty and grandeur there was not one worthierthan Xerxes himself to hold that command

The way the spotlight singles out both leaders presents the encounter almost asa duel one which (at least at the level of kleos) Leonidas will win

It is of course true that Leonidas is not simply assimilated to the Homerichero There are complications to his motivationsup3sup1 which reflect the fact thatthese events belong to contemporary history not epic Herodotus was too firmlyaware of the unrecoverability of the past to be seduced by a facile assimilation ofthe war to the heroic worldsup3sup2 But it is equally true that Leonidas is presented inglorious isolation by the narrative despite the fact that until they run out ofweaponry the Spartans fight a recognizably contemporary (if slightly unconven-tional) battle against the Persians not a series of individual encounters of thestylized Homeric kind And it is also true that the Greeks saw at the time andcontinued to see in Thermopylae a remarkable example of courage and devotionboth to country and to duty

The dialogue with epic is also visible in the account of the fighting Thedeath of Leonidas occasions the first of two instances of the epic motif of thefight over a prize corpse The second is the fight over the corpse of Masistiosat Plataea in book 9 (223ndash232) Even here however book 7 is distinctive inthat Herodotus has the fighting ebb and flow four times with the Greeks inthe ascendant until the arrival of Ephialtes

Ξέρξεώ τε δὴ δύο ἀδελφεοὶ ἐνθαῦτα πίπτουσι μαχόμενοι ltκαὶgt ὑπὲρ τοῦ νεκροῦ τοῦ Λεωνί-δεω Περσέων τε καὶ Λακεδαιμονίων ὠθισμὸς ἐγίνετο πολλός ἐς ὃ τοῦτόν τε ἀρετῇ οἱ ῞Ελ-ληνες ὑπεξείρυσαν καὶ ἐτρέψαντο τοὺς ἐναντίους τετράκις Τοῦτο δὲ συνεστήκεε μέχρι οὗοἱ σὺν ᾿Επιάλτῃ παρεγένοντο (72251)

Leonidas died ἀνὴρ γενόμενος ἄριστος Herodotus withholds the names of the other Spartanswho died with him while insisting that he knows the names He is also selected for separate mention in Simonides PMG cited above Pelling notes that even in deciding to lay down glory for Sparta Leonidas acknowl-edges that the alternative risks having his mixed force quarrel and disperse Real life is moregrimy than the heroic ideal See also Baragwanath who notes the way his suspicionsof Theban medizing undercut the heroic atmosphere She also notes () the way Leonidas likemany characters in the History seems to mirror the intellectual curiosity of the narrator See especially


Two brothers of Xerxes fought and fell there There was a great struggle between the Persiansand Lacedaemonians over Leonidasrsquo body until the Hellenes by their prowess rescued it androuted their enemies four times The battle went on until the men with Epialtes arrived

It is difficult not to sense a contest such as the fight over Patroclus behind the his-torical narrativesup3sup3 Fighting over bodies was not just a literary device of course Andbattles ebb and flow especially hard-fought battles like this one The body of acommander has a value which justifies a fight to deny it to the enemy just as itscapture has enormous implications for morale This is not invention The questionhowever is (as often) not lsquowhat happenedrsquo but lsquowhat are we told and howrsquo Thenarrator is free to include or exclude to extend and contract to elaborate or notand this kind of narrative detail is normally withheld by Herodotus Its inclusionhere recalls narrative moments in Homer or epic more generally and gives Leonidassomething of the stature of a Homeric warrior The impression is enhanced by theplay with Leonidasrsquo name The effect of the word play is to summon up the lionof the Homeric simile the ideal symbol of the warrior at his most courageousand lethal The play lurks behind the oracle at 72204

ὑμῖν δrsquo ὦ Σπάρτης οἰκήτορες εὐρυχόροιοἢ μέγα ἄστυ ἐρικυδὲς ὑπrsquo ἀνδράσι Περσεΐδῃσιπέρθεται ἢ τὸ μὲν οὐχί ἀφrsquo ῾Ηρακλέους δὲ γενέθληςπενθήσει βασιλῆ φθίμενον Λακεδαίμονος οὖροςmiddotοὐ γὰρ τὸν ταύρων σχήσει μένος οὐδὲ λεόντωνἀντιβίηνmiddot Ζηνὸς γὰρ ἔχει μένοςmiddot οὐδέ ἕ φημισχήσεσθαι πρὶν τῶνδrsquo ἕτερον διὰ πάντα δάσηται

Il ndashοὐδrsquo ἔλαθrsquo ᾿Ατρέος υἱὸν ἀρηΐφιλον ΜενέλαονΠάτροκλος Τρώεσσι δαμεὶς ἐν δηϊοτῆτιβῆ δὲ διὰ προμάχων κεκορυθμένος αἴθοπι χαλκῷἀμφὶ δrsquo ἄρrsquo αὐτῷ βαῖνrsquo ὥς τις περὶ πόρτακι μήτηρπρωτοτόκος κινυρὴ οὐ πρὶν εἰδυῖα τόκοιοmiddotὣς περὶ Πατρόκλῳ βαῖνε ξανθὸς ΜενέλαοςhellipNor did Atreusrsquo son Menelaus dear to Aresfail to note Patroclus slain by the Trojans in the fightHe went through the front ranks armed in flaming bronzeand bestrode him as its mother stands over a calflowing plaintively for her first-bornwho has not known motherhood beforeSo over Patroclus strode fair-haired MenelausCf Boedeker 2003 34ndash36

84 Chris Carey

For you inhabitants of spacious Spartaeither your great and glorious city is wasted by Persian menor if not that then the boundary of Lacedaemonwill mourn a dead king from Heraclesrsquo lineThe might of bulls or lions will not check himwith opposing strength for he has the might of Zeus I affirmhe will not stop until he rends one of these utterly

It also emerges at 72252 with the mention of the lion at his tomb Herodotus didnot invent this The lion predates him and indicates that the etymological playwith the first two syllables of his name was traditional But he did choose to in-clude the implied symbolism of Leonidas as lion

The rapprochement with the Homeric hero may also apply the treatment of thebody by Xerxes where Herodotus goes out of his way to emphasize the departurefrom Persian behaviour in his treatment of a brave enemysup3⁴ Here we are on weakerground since an incident like this could scarcely have been omitted irrespective ofthe engagement with epic But the epic abuse which comes to mind is the mistreat-ment of the body of Hector in Homer We cannot say whether this parallel wouldhave occurred to all or most or even any of Herodotusrsquo original audience But theparallel was an apt one since both died fighting bravely for a lost cause

The epic background also seems to lie behind a detail of timing (sect223) in Her-odotusrsquo battle narrative The timing of the final attack is noted by a detail whichlike the Homeric simile takes us into the normal world of peaceful activitiessup3⁵ inthe midst of bloodshed

Ξέρξης δὲ ἐπεὶ ἡλίου ἀνατείλαντος σπονδὰς ἐποιήσατο ἐπισχὼν χρόνον ἐς ἀγορῆς κου μάλισ-τα πληθώρην πρόσοδον ἐποιέετοmiddot καὶ γὰρ ἐπέσταλτο ἐξ ᾿Επιάλτεω οὕτωmiddot

Xerxes poured a libation at sunrise and after holding back for a while till the time the marketfills he made his advance This was Ephialtesrsquo instruction

ταῦτα εἴπας Ξέρξης διεξήιε διὰ τῶν νεκρῶν καὶ Λεωνίδεω ἀκηκοὼς ὅτι βασιλεύς τε ἦνκαὶ στρατηγὸς Λακεδαιμονίων ἐκέλευσε ἀποταμόντας τὴν κεφαλὴν ἀνασταυρῶσαι δῆλά μοι πολ-λοῖσι μὲν καὶ ἄλλοισι τεκμηρίοισι ἐν δὲ καὶ τῷδε οὐκ ἥκιστα γέγονε ὅτι βασιλεὺς Ξέρξης πάντων δὴμάλιστα ἀνδρῶν ἐθυμώθη ζώοντι Λεωνίδῃmiddot οὐ γὰρ ἄν κοτε ἐς τὸν νεκρὸν ταῦτα παρενόμησε ἐπεὶτιμᾶν μάλιστα νομίζουσι τῶν ἐγὼ οἶδα ἀνθρώπων Πέρσαι ἄνδρας ἀγαθοὺς τὰ πολέμια

Having spoken in this way Xerxes passed over the place where the dead lay and hearing thatLeonidas had been king and general of the Lacedaemonians he gave orders to cut off his head andimpale it It is plain to me by this piece of evidence among many others that while Leonidas livedking Xerxes was more incensed against him than against all others otherwise he would never havedealt so outrageously with his dead body for the Persians are beyond all men known in the habit ofhonoring valiant warriors Cf for instance Il ndash


Perhaps closer still than the simile is the time indicator at Il1186ndash91

ἦμος δὲ δρυτόμος περ ἀνὴρ ὁπλίσσατο δεῖπνονοὔρεος ἐν βήσσῃσιν ἐπεί τrsquo ἐκορέσσατο χεῖραςτάμνων δένδρεα μακρά ἅδος τέ μιν ἵκετο θυμόνσίτου τε γλυκεροῖο περὶ φρένας ἵμερος αἱρεῖτῆμος σφῇ ἀρετῇ Δαναοὶ ῥήξαντο φάλαγγαςκεκλόμενοι ἑτάροισι κατὰ στίχαςmiddot

But at the time a woodman prepares his mealin the glades of a mountain when he has tired his armsfelling tall trees and weariness comes upon his spiritand desire of sweet food seizes his mindat that time the Danaans by their valour broke the enemy linescalling to comrades in the ranks

The effect in the present case is to add here an element of pathos in reminding usof the continuity of normal life now about to be lost forever to the Greekfighterssup3⁶ There is a good antecedent for this in the climactic duel in Iliad 22as Hector races for his life where we are taken back to the peaceful activitiesof Troy in a world which he is about to leave

κρουνὼ δrsquo ἵκανον καλλιρρόωmiddot ἔνθα δὲ πηγαὶδοιαὶ ἀναΐσσουσι Σκαμάνδρου δινήεντοςἣ μὲν γάρ θrsquo ὕδατι λιαρῷ ῥέει ἀμφὶ δὲ καπνὸςγίγνεται ἐξ αὐτῆς ὡς εἰ πυρὸς αἰθομένοιοmiddotἣ δrsquo ἑτέρη θέρεϊ προρέει ἐϊκυῖα χαλάζῃἢ χιόνι ψυχρῇ ἢ ἐξ ὕδατος κρυστάλλῳἔνθα δrsquo ἐπrsquo αὐτάων πλυνοὶ εὐρέες ἐγγὺς ἔασικαλοὶ λαΐνεοι ὅθι εἵματα σιγαλόενταπλύνεσκον Τρώων ἄλοχοι καλαί τε θύγατρεςτὸ πρὶν ἐπrsquo εἰρήνης πρὶν ἐλθεῖν υἷας ᾿Αχαιῶντῇ ῥα παραδραμέτην φεύγων ὃ δrsquo ὄπισθε διώκωνmiddot(Il 22147ndash57)

They came to the fair-flowing springs the two sourcesof the river Scamander which bubble upOne of these flows with warm water and all about smokeRises from it as from a burning firebut the other even in summer is like hailor snow or the ice that forms on waterHere hard by the springs are the broad washing-troughsfine of stone where the wives and fair daughters of Troy

This point I owe to Simon Hornblower

86 Chris Carey

used to wash their bright clothesbefore in the time of peace before the Achaeans camePast these they sped the one in flight and the other pursuing behind

Alongside such specific and general glances toward Homer and Troy Herodotusalso draws on other epic cycles to shape his narrative Especially important is themarch of the Seven against Thebes From the Thebaid onward the campaign ofthe Seven was the archetypal ill-fated expedition It was pursued in direct oppo-sition to the will of the gods as expressed in portents

ἤτοι μὲν γὰρ ἄτερ πολέμου εἰσῆλθε Μυκήναςξεῖνος ἅμrsquo ἀντιθέῳ Πολυνείκεϊ λαὸν ἀγείρωνmiddotοἳ δὲ τότrsquo ἐστρατόωνθrsquo ἱερὰ πρὸς τείχεα Θήβηςκαί ῥα μάλα λίσσοντο δόμεν κλειτοὺς ἐπικούρουςmiddotοἳ δrsquo ἔθελον δόμεναι καὶ ἐπῄνεον ὡς ἐκέλευονmiddotἀλλὰ Ζεὺς ἔτρεψε παραίσια σήματα φαίνων(Il 4376ndash81)

He came once to Mycenae not in warbut as a guest with godlike Polynices to gather forcesfor they were going to war against the sacred walls of Thebesand prayed our people to give picked men to help themThe people were minded to let give thembut Zeus dissuaded them showing unfavourable omens

The expedition even had its own prophet Amphiaraus who read the signs andwarned the army of ruin to come In Herodotus too the march of Xerxes is rich insigns large and small indicating the hostility of the gods This creates a complexnarrative in which the recurrent drumbeats are unprecedented scale (the riversdrunk dry) and unnoticed pointers to defeat The sense of impending destructionis there from the moment Xerxes commits to the expedition Modern scholarshipfocuses not unreasonably on the lying dream which sends Xerxes to war But thetext stresses that he has an alternative There is a dream which Xerxes and hisadvisers misinterpret which points (for an audience which knows the outcome)to final defeat (719)We find it in portents on the way the cautionary tale impliedby the fate of Marsyas (7263) the stele of Croesus at the beginning of the nar-rative of the march which shows the limits of the Lydian territory long since ab-sorbed into the next empire that of the Persians (7302) the eclipse (misdated byHerodotus) which occurs as the Persians leave Sardis (7372) the disastrous ex-periences in the Troad (742ndash3) the unnatural birth and inverted animal behav-iour encountered in Asia (757) and the strangely selective diet of the Greek lionswhich devour only the creatures unknown in Greece (7125ndash6) Some of thesesigns are made explicit to Xerxes while others speak to the reader over the


head of the human participants in the action Perhaps the most interesting of thesigns is the pair which frame Xerxesrsquo visit to Troy

καὶ πρῶτα μέν οἱ ὑπὸ τῇ ῎Ιδῃ νύκτα ἀναμείναντι βρονταί τε καὶ πρηστῆρες ἐπεσπίπτουσι καίτινα αὐτοῦ ταύτῃ συχνὸν ὅμιλον διέφθειραν ᾿Απικομένου δὲ τοῦ στρατοῦ ἐπὶ ποταμὸν Σκά-μανδρον ὃς πρῶτος ποταμῶν ἐπείτε ἐκ Σαρδίων ὁρμηθέντες ἐπεχείρησαν τῇ ὁδῷ ἐπέλιπε τὸῥέεθρον οὐδrsquo ἀπέχρησε τῇ στρατιῇ τε καὶ τοῖσι κτήνεσι πινόμενος ἐπὶ τοῦτον δὴ τὸν ποταμὸνὡς ἀπίκετο Ξέρξης ἐς τὸ Πριάμου Πέργαμον ἀνέβη ἵμερον ἔχων θεήσασθαι θεησάμενος δὲκαὶ πυθόμενος ἐκείνων ἕκαστα τῇ ᾿Αθηναίῃ τῇ ᾿Ιλιάδι ἔθυσε βοῦς χιλίαςmiddot χοὰς δὲ οἱ μάγοιτοῖσι ἥρωσι ἐχέαντο ταῦτα δὲ ποιησαμένοισι νυκτὸς φόβος ἐς τὸ στρατόπεδον ἐνέπεσε

And firstly when they had halted for the night at the foot of Ida a storm of thunder and lightningfell upon them killing a great number right there When the army had come to the river Scaman-der which was the first river after the beginning of their march from Sardis that fell short and wasnot sufficient for the army and the cattle to drinkmdashwhen Xerxes arrived at this river he ascendedto the citadel of Priam having a desire to see it After he saw it and asked about everything therehe sacrificed a thousand cattle to Athena of Ilium and the Magi offered libations to the heroesAfter they did this a panic fell upon the camp in the night

As he camps near Ida thunderstorms destroy part of his army Arriving at Troy hemakes offerings to the heroes the aftermath is a panic in the army by night andthe implication of the text is that the offerings are rejected Here Herodotusdraws together the two epic traditions the ill-fated army marching to destructionagainst the will of the gods and in defiance of the signs and the Graeco-Asiatictensions of which the Trojan War was the most celebrated These signs are rein-forced for the reader by authorial prolepses such as the reference to Artayktes atthe first mention of the bridge (733) Artayktes was eventually executed by theAthenians at a spot overlooking the bridges and explicitly for his abuses in rela-tion to the cult of Protesilaus The mention of this comes just before Xerxes com-mits against the Hellespont an act which Herodotus himself condemns as lsquobar-barous and sinfulrsquo (7352) and it invites us to look toward the end even as weadmire the greatness of the Persian engineering

The final gesture toward this tradition (perhaps) comes in the death of Me-gistias who like Amphiaraus at Thebes is a prophet who fights in the knowledgethat his cause is doomed (72191 2283)sup3⁷ Here the motif (if it is present and notjust in my imagination) is transferred to the other doomed army the Spartans

τοῖσι δὲ ἐν Θερμοπύλῃσι ἐοῦσι ῾Ελλήνων πρῶτον μὲν ὁ μάντις Μεγιστίης ἐσιδὼν ἐς τὰἱρὰ ἔφρασε τὸν μέλλοντα ἔσεσθαι ἅμα ἠοῖ σφι θάνατον ἐπὶ δὲ καὶ αὐτόμολοι ἦσαν οἱ ἐξαγγείλαντεςτῶν Περσέων τὴν περίοδονmiddot

I was the seer Megistias examining the sacrifices who first told the Hellenes at Thermopylaethat death was coming to them with the dawn Then deserters came who announced the circuitmade by the Persians

88 Chris Carey

The engagement with epic in this section of the narrative has a densitymarked both by the sheer number of features and the degree of elaborationwhich each (or at least some of them) receives This reflects in part its pivotalposition The constant play with epic is not just an embellishment (though itdoes embellish) but a way of marking the escalation in the action and empha-sizing the factors which made the new theme to which he now turns unique andthe unusual scale of its demands on the narrator But the engagement is alsotriggered by the sharpness with which this book sets out some of the key themesof the war as a whole because of the non-negotiable facts of chronology The firstencounter of Greeks with barbarians in this invasion ndash at Thermopylaendash was onewhich juxtaposed seemingly unstoppable mass with individual and collectivecourage of an unusual sort Between them they set the scene for a narrativewhich gave Herodotus the opportunity more explicitly than anywhere else toevoke the status of epic in general and Homer in particular to emphasize the su-periority of his theme and to claim equivalent or greater status for his narrativeThere is throughout the book a vacillation between mirroring ideas motifs andmoments from Homer and visibly going beyond the original Though Herodotuscan be dismissive of Homer on occasion the iconic status of the Homeric epicswas an inescapable fact by the time he was writing This status is in fact of fun-damental importance for Herodotusrsquo project which is both to claim the Homericlegacy and simultaneously compete with the status of the original both in termsof genre and in terms of his own individual narrative

72283 Μνῆμα τόδε κλεινοῖο Μεγιστία ὅν ποτε ΜῆδοιΣπερχειὸν ποταμὸν κτεῖναν ἀμειψάμενοιμάντιος ὃς τότε Κῆρας ἐπερχομένας σάφα εἰδὼςοὐκ ἔτλη Σπάρτης ἡγεμόνας προλιπεῖν

This is a monument to glorious Megistias whome the Medeswho crossed the Spercheius river slewa seer who knowing well his coming doomrefused to abandon the leaders of Sparta


Part III Homeric echoes in philosophicaland rhetorical discourse

Athanasios Efstathiou

Argumenta HomericaHomerrsquos Reception by Aeschines

Following a broadly traditional scheme of reading oratorical texts as pieces ofliterature pursuing persuasion poetic quotations which are found withinspeeches and originated at the bulk of Greek poetic tradition build argumentsby themselves or most commonly support oratorrsquos argumentation through appro-priate use The purpose of this paper is to discuss the Homeric material adaptedor appropriated by Aeschines in his speeches in such a way as to support his ar-gument with the widely accepted authority of Homer Aeschinesrsquo use of Homerforms part of a mid-4th century phenomenon when poetry is mainly used espe-cially in public speeches Poetic quotations are used by Demosthenes in hisspeeches On the Crown and On the Embassy by Aeschines in his three extantspeeches (ie Against Timarchus On the Embassy Against Ctesiphon) as wellas by Lycurgus in his speech Against Leocrates Aeschines well-known as a for-mer actor of tragic plays quotes in his speeches a good deal of poetic passagesfrom Hesiod from Euripides and especially from Homer he recites by himself orasks the clerk to do so in case of long passages (coming only from the Iliad) run-ning up to eighteen linessup1

It is evident that the main way people got to know literature in the period of late5th and the first half of 4th century BC was oral performances and not written texts(on Homeric orality see also Papaioannou I Petrovic and Michelakis in this vol-ume) Moreover it seems supportive to the idea of oral learning of poetry that Soc-rates within his discussions and dialogues quotes poetry very often for exampleHomer but he is based not on his reading of certain poets but on oral recitationssup2

In the short dialogue of Plato Ion the homonymous rapsodist (Pl Ion 530andash531a) isa winner of the Homer contest in Epidaurus Ion boasts that he can recite very longHomeric passages or even that he knows everything about Homer and no otherpoet Aristotle himself while quoting a lot of seemingly Homeric excerpts in his

I am grateful to Professor Chris Carey for his valuable comments on this paper As for the Homeric quotations of the pre-Aristarchan period which are accounted to twenty-nine separate writers quoting portions they amount to about lines The most inter-esting issue is the plus-verses which are not more than nine to eleven lines For the originalinvestigation see Ludwich ff See RussoFernaacutendez-GalianoHeubeck and Steiner on Od cfPl La andashb Chrm a with Od (κακός δrsquo αἰδοῖος ἀλήτης) Hoekstra ndash esp ndash

works (eg in the Rhetoric and in the Nicomachean Ethics) recalls them from mem-ory or rather based on solid knowledge of the widespread epic tradition he re-shapes epic material in order to present it as Homericsup3

Finally Aeschines himself confirms childrenrsquos learning of poetsrsquo thoughts byheart in their early age in order to use them when they become of age (3135) Inthat case the discussion concerns Hesiod but a close reading of Aeschinesrsquo com-ments on Hesiodrsquos advice brings forth an element of casual approach from thepart of Aeschines saying that lsquoHe (scil Hesiod) says somewhere (που) sincehe attempts to instruct the masses and advise the cities that they should not tol-erate corrupt politiciansrsquo

Using Homer as a supportive material for his arguments Aeschines follows hisown batch of methodological principles which we need to single out in order tocome close to the intertextual relation developed between the two texts and to as-sort the various levels of reference to the original or primary text which is Homer

Eventually it is the primary text which is of high importance It seems to en-counter a case of lsquoliterary palimpsestrsquo when similarly in manuscript transmissionwe come across a palimpsest the interest always goes to the original text covered bya new one So one needs to look closely at the cited passage so as to decide whatkind of citation we have and then to collate the two texts the primary text and thereporting source in order to signify the differences between them It is obvious thatthe reporting source has a specific agenda according to which the intermediary au-thor makes selection of specific texts to support its content

Thus the selection of the primary text made by the intermediary author of-fers the opportunity to examine closely the purpose of the orator to use a specificpoetic example the intratextual⁴ function of the original text within the report-ing source and thus the expectation of the orator for its persuasive power Evi-dently poetry quoted in various ways is applied by Aeschines to the current sit-uation in such a way as to create a new effect supporting his political proposalsand enhancing his claims Sometimes the way of quoting a primary text (directquotation paraphrase summary of the primary text etc) the particular selec-tion of excerpts and the use of this citation within the reporting text can be char-acterized as a mere padding when the quotation does not enhance the quality ofthe secondary text adds almost nothing to the authorrsquos argument and simplycreates a cumulative effect this is the case of Aeschinesrsquo repeating the samepoints when in advance he summarizes the content of the cited text he com-

See Haslam For more on intratexuality see SharrockMorales

94 Athanasios Efstathiou

ments on this and finally he himself or the clerk reads out the quotation (eg1143 with 1144 also 1145 f)

Moreover intervention by the reporting author ranges from a selective cita-tion of the primary text to a heavy distortion of it To reconstruct the procedure ofquoting a primary text we have to start with the ascertainment that the secon-dary author makes use of what is needed for his specific argumentation strategythe selection of the cited text may lead us to understand the method and thecauses for the inclusion of these particular texts The orator Aeschines in thiscase having designed his broad argumentation strategy makes proper selec-tions from the original source and usually forms excerpts from the originaltext so as to cite what only matters for the immediate purpose⁵

Quoting from memory is often a common cause of distortion this habit reflectsconfidence or implies the popularity of a text used in education or recited orally inpublic festivals (eg Homeric poems) or even points out the lack of supportivemeans to form a citation properly (eg no access to the papyrus containing the text)

However defective memory in case of an original like Homer sometimes co-exists with heavier intervention with use of alternative formulaic phrases or eveninvented formulas transposition of verses with due syntactical modificationswhich may be found in the wide spectrum of the intertextual relation of thetwo texts In such a case it is important for the study of the primary text andits transmission to treat the excerpt in isolation from its context thus decontex-tualizing it Decontextualization is also necessary when the reporting sourcetends to make generalizations based on the primary texts A scholar workingon such texts is not facilitated to resemble the original content from which theprimary text derives Certainly in a thorough study of two texts original and con-duit together with decontextualization we may use contextualization which isimportant to trace the intermediary authorrsquos intervention upon the primarysource by taking into account the social political economic and cultural factorssurrounding the conduit text

Aeschines as a secondary source quoting Homer interferes with our perceptionof the primary text in a variety of ways It is evident that the focus of Aeschines (asin the cases of the citing authors) determines what is cited and why and this in turnshapes our perception of the cited text The selection of the particular cited text re-veals the literary preferences of the orator and his audience

See also Perlman

Argumenta Homerica Homerrsquos Reception by Aeschines 95

a The speech Against Timarchus⁶

The speech Against Timarchus is an accusation presented by Aeschines in theAthenian court against his opponent Timarchus a close political friend of De-mosthenes in 345 BC It is a case in which Timarchusrsquo credentials as a publicspeaker (rhētōr) in the Ecclesia are contested before being involved in public pol-icy in the Assembly⁷

Aeschinesrsquo prosecution of Timarchus was intended to block Demosthenesrsquoattack on Aeschines (in the case On the False Embassy) and through him his as-sociates and their overall policy

The main issue which Aeschines has to work on and form an argument is hisopponentrsquos scandalous private life that is Timarchusrsquo allegedly sexual homoeroticpreferences in connection with his habit to sell himself which was incompatibleand illegitimate for an Athenian citizen Thus the sale of sexual gratification wasby itself the issue and could bring an automatic penalty of disfranchisement incase that an individual so barred pursued to exercise citizen rights

In the refutatio part (paragraphs 117ndash76) Aeschines opts for anticipatingseveral possible arguments which his opponents may present among them wemust single out his discussion of Phēmē (lsquoreportrsquo) in paragraphs 125ndash31 andthe use of poetry and especially Homer in paragraphs 141ndash54 the latter followsthe crucial debate on noble or chaste love in Athenian culture (paragraphs 132ndash40)⁸ Aeschines in this speech as Lycurgus in the speech Against Leocrates do notconfine themselves in legal arguments but tend to use poetry as literary evi-dence supplementing their rhetorical means of persuasion⁹

The three speeches of Aeschines are abbreviated as follows Against Timarchus= On theFalse Embassy= Against Ctesiphon= when one of these speeches is discussed I do not usethe number of the speech only the number of the paragraph Democracy provided the special legal procedure of dokimasia tōn rhētorōn (lsquoscrutiny of publicspeakersrsquo) purporting to remove from influence those citizens who were proved to be unworthyOn this procedure see recently Efstathiou ndash In this speech Aeschines quotes Hesiod once while Euripides is quoted three times tragedy unknown Stheneboea (fr ndash K) Phoenix (fr K) See also Perlman


b Reference to Phēmēan invented Homeric quotation

In paragraphs 125ndash 131 Aeschines attempts to move from evidence to rumourmaking noise by using mainly the mockery of Timarchusrsquo sexual activity heneeds Phēmē to be divine and thus worthy of respect

Thus Aeschinesrsquo references to Phēmē presented as being sprung fromHomer are followed by an unidentified Euripidean verse (128) which commentson Phēmērsquo s ability to show forth the good man even if he is hidden in the in-teriors of the earth Aeschines claims that Euripides supports even further hisown view according to which Phēmē is a goddess and he does so by attributingto Euripides the view that Phēmē makes known not only the living men by re-vealing their own characters but also the dead people This statement is neitherof poetic form nor of identifiable poetic originsup1⁰ Finally this Phēmērsquos poetic an-thology culminates with Hesiodrsquos two verses coming from Op763 f (see 129)which comes to a conclusion on Phēmērsquos divinity further supported by theidea that Phēmē never dies if many men utter it

Therefore this quasi-Homeric quote on Phēmē presented by Aeschines in 128

[hellip] καὶ τὸν Ὅμηρον πολλάκις ἐν τῇ Ἰλιάδι λέγοντα πρὸ τοῦ τι τῶν μελλόντων γενέσθαιmiddotφήμη δrsquo εἰς στρατὸν ἦλθε [hellip]

You will find that Homer often says in the Iliad before some event which is about to happenlsquoReport came to the hostrsquosup1sup1

can only be compared with an Iliadic poetic two-verse passage which does notmention Phēmē but Ossa lsquorumourrsquo (Il 293ndash94) who calls the Greeks to assembly

ἰλαδὸν εἰς ἀγορήνmiddot μετὰ δέ σφισιν ὄσσα δεδήειὀτρύνουσrsquo ἰέναι Διὸς ἄγγελοςmiddot οἳ δrsquo ἀγέροντο

with them blazed Zeusrsquo messenger urging them on while they gathered togethersup1sup2

The poetic phrase which Aeschines quotes instead seems to have no real connec-tion with the context and adds almost nothing to his own argument the refer-ence to Phēmē seems superficial Moreover the phrase a semi-formula half of

See E fr inc K All cited passages from Aeschines follow the translation of Carey with adjustments All cited Iliadic passages follow the translation of Murray Wyatt with adjustments


an hexameter verse although it recalls roughly the meaning of the Iliad (293ndash94) is far from being Homeric

Trying to trace this poetic quote we soon realize that it may belong to a lostcorpus of early epic poetry and Homerrsquos name is used as populardenominationsup1sup3 Alternatively it could be an invention of Aeschines himselfwho tries to support his statements with Homerrsquos authority The passage displayshis cavalier but also the commonly encountered way of using poetsrsquo thoughts ina form of quasi-quotations or paraphrases within his speeches (cf also 3135)

Although the habit of rough quoting by recalling the original from memory re-flects confidence the issue also hints at the nature of the ancient bookwhich in theform of papyrus involves a certain amount of difficulty and imperfection for the pro-cedure of citing a text unrolling a papyrus to consult a written text was not the easi-est thing to do while a commonly encountered phenomenon of absence of pagenumbers made the job of accurate quoting particularly hardsup1⁴

Thus we could perceive this kind of quotations as sprung from an immanentknowledge created by oral recitations of Homeric or other epic songs It seems con-vincing that the poems which were later included in the Epic Cycle were formed by along-lasting interactive oral process embracing and reshaping a slew of traditionalmaterial confirmed by more or less consistent bardic performancessup1⁵

c Achilles and Patroclus lovers or friendsA distinction on chaste or unlawful sexualrelations

The most important literary material for the argumentative arsenal of all the con-testants of Timarchusrsquo trial is the relationship of Achilles and Patroclus Bothsides attempt to exploit it in their own terms and strategic demands in orderto form an argument against the opponent Aeschines first starts from the loveaffair of Harmodius and Aristogeiton the invocation of the two distinguishedheroes of democracy purports to support Aeschinesrsquo interpretation of the friend-

See also Perlman with n where among others he refers to Thucydides(ndash) in that case Thucydides quotes from the Hymn to Apollo which has been com-posed by Homer See also Carey forthcoming Tsagalis b xi ff and Burgess where it is noted that lsquo[hellip] the Cycle wouldhave been prefigured by rhapsodic performance of material from different epics (not necessarilythe ones of the Epic Cycle)rsquo


ship of Patroclus and Achilles as an erotic relationship thus Aeschines skilfullymanages to sanction the eros of Patroclus and Achilles through a widely accept-ed democratic stereotype

Aeschines reaches 133 where the main issue the relationship of Patroclusand Achilles is brought forth he argues that their friendship was caused byeros while in 135 he has to anticipate the opponentsrsquo claims on his own historyas the lover of young men which seem to become more bitter by referring to himas a poet of erotic poetry inspired by passion In the end Aeschines must play onthe same terrain and he does that at 136 by acknowledging the notion of honour-able-chaste love admitting his love affairs of the past while he acknowledgessome of the erotic poems as his but not the rest which may be fabricated bythe opponents for obvious reasons Finally he comes to a definition of chastelove and love sold for money making a clear distinction between them (137)

In 141 the passage runs as follows

᾿Επειδὴ δὲ ᾿Αχιλλέως καὶ Πατρόκλου μέμνησθε καὶ ῾Ομήρου καὶ ἑτέρων ποιητῶν ὡς τῶν μὲνδικαστῶν ἀνηκόων παιδείας ὄντων ὑμεῖς δὲ εὐσχήμονές τινες προσποιεῖσθε εἶναι καὶ ὑπερ-φρονοῦντες ἱστορίᾳ τὸν δῆμον ἵνrsquo εἰδῆτε ὅτι καὶ ἡμεῖς τι ἤδη ἠκούσαμεν καὶ ἐμάθομεν λέξο-μέν τι καὶ ἡμεῖς περὶ τούτων ᾿Επειδὴ γὰρ ἐπιχειροῦσι φιλοσόφων ἀνδρῶν μεμνῆσθαι καὶ κατα-φεύγειν ἐπὶ τοὺς εἰρημένους ἐν τῷ μέτρῳ λόγους θεωρήσατε ἀποβλέψαντες ὦ ᾿Αθηναῖοι εἰςτοὺς ὁμολογουμένως ἀγαθοὺς καὶ χρηστοὺς ποιητάς ὅσον κεχωρίσθαι ἐνόμισαν τοὺς σώφρο-νας καὶ τῶν ὁμοίων ἐρῶντας καὶ τοὺς ἀκρατεῖς ὧν οὐ χρὴ καὶ τοὺς ὑβριστάς

But since you have come to mention of Achilles and Patroclus and of Homer and other poetsas though the jury were men without education while you represent yourselves as men of su-perior rank whose erudition allows you look down on the people to show you that we toohave already acquired a little knowledge and learning we too shall say a word on this subjectFor since they undertake to cite wise men and take refuge in tales expressed in verse lookmen of Athens at those who are acknowledged to be good and edifying and see how farapart they considered chaste men lovers of their equals and those whose love is illicitmen who recognize no limits

Teaching the mass by quoting poets becomes a risky matter since the orator maybe offensive when putting on a show and enlivening his speech the speaker pre-senting himself as over clever as a man of distinctive erudition above the aver-age Athenian therefore above the jurors can cause harm to himself Noteworthyhere in 141 there is the term ἱστορία used by Aeschines which may be equivalentto paideia lsquoeducationrsquo or even lsquogeneral or encyclopaedic knowledgersquosup1⁶ The termis possibly used with the latter of the proposed meanings highlighting the arro-

On ἱστορία see also the discussion in Fowler and n


gant posture of his opponents justified by their pretension of comprehensive-en-cyclopaedic knowledge

A delicate balance is demanded from rhētores using poetry in their speechesthe Athenians expected from them a highly qualified speaking and thinkingtheir sincere advice while they felt particularly cautious towards expertise pro-fessionalism and preparation all of them pointing to a kind of deceptivecommunicationsup1⁷ Sophistry and its notable product deception usually connect-ed with various forms of trickery and delusion of the audience fabricated bymagic arts and alien methods became a topos in the context of public oratoryThe description of the opponent as γόης (lsquowizardrsquo) and βάσκανος (lsquosorcererrsquolsquoslandererrsquo) points to a deceptive speaking with dangerous results for thedēmos Demosthenes as Aeschines argues represents the prototype of sophisticspeaker who controls his speech in an absolute way his sophistry allows him tospeak only according to his targets and purposes speaking the truth only whenhe intends to create a favourable result That is a depiction of a professional so-phist performing an art with deceptive potential and no moral or other con-straints in order to achieve his end to persuade people Thus distinguishedknowledge of poetry in a sophistic way of speaking might hide deception andeven more may be associated with un-Athenian identity and behaviour since ev-erything originating in sophists could be exotic and of foreign origin thus alienand incompatible to the Athenian identitysup1⁸

All in all Aeschines taking the necessary precautions against the risk to looklike a highly educated public speaker using tricks and poetry in his speech a realwiseacre tries to do his best by adopting the first person plural in order to presenthimself as one of audience and jurors in detail he accepts the value of Homericpoetry which is going to be used by his opponents although he declares that hehas taken aback to hear that his opponents have managed to rally even Homerrsquosspirit as the verb μέμνησθε may meansup1⁹ even more by associating himself withthe audience he hits upon the opponents with a charge for arrogant and slightingbehaviour towards the jurorssup2⁰ In 142 Aeschines refers to Homer making an attempt

Ober Strauss ndash esp ndash For the concept of deception in Athenian public speaking see Hesk ndash and Hesk ff Burkert ndash esp Bowie ndash The verb here may mean lsquoyou after all now have discovered or rather you have now broughtAchilles Patroclus the poets and especially Homer into playrsquo thus pointing again to sophisticmanipulation See also Ober ndash for Demosthenesrsquo attempt to denote that his knowledge of po-etry is not superior to that of his audience see and


to begin his argumentative procedure from the widely accepted acknowledgement ofhis value as a poet which is an easy point to make

The text precisely states

λέξω δὲ πρῶτον μὲν περὶ Ὁμήρου ὃν ἐν τοῖς πρεσβυτάτοις καὶ σοφωτάτοις τῶν ποιητῶν εἶναιτάττομεν ἐκεῖνος γὰρ πολλαχοῦ μεμνημένος περὶ Πατρόκλου καὶ Aχιλλέως τὸν μὲν ἔρωτα καὶτὴν ἐπωνυμίαν αὐτῶν τῆς φιλίας ἀποκρύπτεται ἡγούμενος τὰς τῆς εὐνοίας ὑπερβολὰς κατα-φανεῖς εἶναι τοῖς πεπαιδευμένοις τῶν ἀκροατῶν

I shall start with Homer whom we rank among the oldest and wisest of the poets Although heoften speaks of Patroclus and Achilles he keeps love and the name of their friendship con-cealed since he thinks that the exceeding strength of their affection is manifest to the culti-vated among his hearers

Thus Aeschines enumerates Homerrsquos real and indisputable qualities by sayingthat he is classified among the senior and wisest poets Homer as an intellectualauthority could perfectly confirm the relationship between Patroclus andAchilles although as Aeschines notes Homer avoids identifying their friendshipas love According to Aeschines Homer does not mention the name of love dueto lsquocultivated sensitivityrsquosup2sup1 since it was manifested that such an affection be-tween them could be easily understood as love by the well-educated hearersnamely the most of the jurors as he has already pointed out in 141

The long-standing discussion on the nature of the relationship betweenAchilles and Patroclus as accounted in the Iliad starts from the interpretationof Homerrsquos text and followed by consecutive attempts of later authors to reworkthe Iliadic text a lasting process which pervades antiquity Certainly Homerdoes not depict Patroclus and Achilles as lovers at least in an explicit mannerAeschines argues that even Homer although he believes that their relationshipwas an erotic one for his own reasons ndash he does not specify whichmdash he avoidsnaming it as such Homerrsquos silence on homoerotic relationship followed by Hes-iod and Archilochus makes us believe that in the Archaic period homosexualbehaviour was not institutionalized and was not acceptable in Greek societiesHowever the ravishing of Ganymede lsquothe most beautiful of the mortalsrsquo to beZeusrsquo cupbearer may point to Zeusrsquo homosexual desire (see Ibycus fr 289) ifit is combined with Dawnrsquos rape of Tithonos as well as Aphroditersquos affair withAnchises they are all brought forth in the same context of erotic passion

In the Classical period Aeschylusrsquo trilogy Myrmidones Nereides and Phry-gians was made a subject for discussion in Platorsquos Symposium 180a wherePhaedrus appears to say that

The expression comes from Dover


ὅθεν δὴ καὶ ὑπεραγασθέντες οἱ θεοὶ διαφερόντως αὐτὸν ἐτίμησαν ὅτι τὸν ἐραστὴν οὕτω περὶπολλοῦ ἐποιεῖτο Αἰσχύλος δὲ φλυαρεῖ φάσκων ᾿Αχιλλέα Πατρόκλου ἐρᾶν ὃς ἦν καλλίων οὐμόνον Πατρόκλου ἀλλrsquo ἅμα καὶ τῶν ἡρώων ἁπάντων καὶ ἔτι ἀγένειος ἔπειτα νεώτεροςπολύ ὥς φησιν ῞Ομηρος

Therefore the gods admired him (scil Achilles) so much that they gave him distinguished honoursince he took so much care of his lover Aeschylus talks nonsense in saying that Achilles was inlove with Patroclus Achilles was more beautiful not only than Patroclus alone but than all theheroes being still beardless and moreover much the younger as Homer says

Obviously Phaedrus based on Homer (Il 11786) rightly claims that Achilles wasyounger than Patroclus while he argues that the relationship was one of love be-tween Achilles as erōmenos and Patroclus as erastēs devotion highlights passionsince Achilles was ready to die in avenging Patroclusrsquo deathsup2sup2 Coming back to Ae-schylusrsquo fragments (frr 135 136 Radtsup2sup3) we realize that the language used when re-ferring to the two companions is explicit enough for their homoerotic relationship

ltrsquoΑΧΙΛΛgt σέβας δὲ μηρῶν ἁγνὸν οὐκ ἐπῃδέσωὦ δυσχάριστε τῶν πυκνῶν φιλημάτων

(Myrmidones fr 135 Radt)

And you felt no compunction for (sc my) pure reverence of (sc your) thighsmdashO what an ill return you have made for so many kissesμηρῶν τε τῶν σῶν εὐσεβὴς ὁμιλία(Myrmidones fr 136 Radt)god-fearing converse with your thighssup2⁴

On the other hand Xenophonrsquos Socrates in Smp 831 opts for a real friendshipdeveloped between the two mensup2⁵

Eventually apart from the issue concerning the kind of relationship which wasdeveloped between Achilles and Patroclus Aeschinesrsquo view of both the nature ofthis relationship and of Homerrsquos real opinion may represent the dominant attitudeof the Athenian society of the period Aeschinesrsquo representation of Homeric valuesand ideas tends to restore the Athenian society of his period making conclusions on

It has been stated by Weil ( xii) that the discussion of the relationship between Achillesand Patroclus in Platorsquos Protagoras shows us that Aeschines knew the text of Plato as Fisher( ) rightly comments this topic may be discussed widely in oral debates in which Ae-schines must have participated Radt Both fragments as translated by Dover for fr see also LobelRobertsWege-ner See also Dover ndash and Clarke ndash Poole ndashOgden


the education he had received but also the education of the audience the culturalatmosphere in Athens towards the last decades of the fourth century in generalterms it is a matter of Homeric reception within antiquity which allows us tofind connections between Homeric material and creativity the orator by usingHomer in his speeches appears as an intelligent reader whose views correspondwith those of the ordinary person he undertakes the duty to interpret and finallyappropriate the poetic material in order to offer it to the publicsup2⁶

Moreover conventions of speaking and reticence of language may be anissue when the orator has to give an account of such a thorny matter whichwas the homoerotic relationship of the most important hero of Greek historyAchilles The hero comes out of the idealizing framework of Homeric epicsbut for Aeschinesrsquo own rhetorical needs it must function as a prototype of homo-erotic relationship applied to the case of Timarchus Even though Aeschinesneeds to present the relationship in this particular way he skips the Aeschyleanversion which would have been particularly supportive of his own thesis optingfor a specific reading of Homer which focuses on the emotional aspect of desirerather than the physical dimension he also has to be careful in interpreting atext presented before an educated audience and not breaking with traditionsof restraint in public speaking as well as maintaining decorum of language Ex-plicit words excessive obscenity reference to distasteful matters may offend theaudience Aeschines has at least to pretend that he respects the audience byusing the right language being a man of ethical valuessup2⁷

In 143 the Athenian orator moves to another point he tries to corroborate hisclaim that the relationship between the two men was clearly a passionate lovesince Achilles accepted the duty to take care of Patroclus

The text runs as follows

λέγει γάρ που Aχιλλεὺς ὀδυρόμενος τὸν τοῦ Πατρόκλου θάνατον ὡς ἕν τι τοῦτο τῶν λυπη-ροτάτων ἀναμιμνῃσκόμενος ὅτι τὴν ὑπόσχεσιν τὴν πρὸς τὸν πατέρα τὸν Πατρόκλου Μενοί-τιον ἄκων ἐψεύσατοmiddot ἐπαγγείλασθαι γὰρ εἰς Ὀποῦντα σῶν ἀπάξειν εἰ συμπέμψειεν αὐτὸν εἰςτὴν Τροίαν καὶ παρακαταθεῖτο αὑτῷ ᾧ καταφανής ἐστιν ὡς διrsquo ἔρωτα τὴν ἐπιμέλειαν αὐτοῦπαρέλαβεν

HardwickStray See Alex De Figuris Walz παρέχει δὲ καὶ ἔμφασιν ἤθoυς χρηστoῦ Theon (Prog Walz) commenting on the same technique he says that the dignity of the speech is gained whenthe speaker does not express shameful things in a straightforward way but by using allusionsTheon names this technique of Aeschines ἀρρητoπoιία (lsquospeaking of unspeakable thingsrsquo) Her-mogenes (Id Rabe) expresses his doubt about this technique and thinks that lsquoif you givean advance indication of what you are doing [hellip] you will not be as persuasive and you will ap-pear to be someone who enjoys slanderrsquo (trans by Wooten )


Homer says somewhere that Achilles in the course of his lament for Patroclusrsquo death mentions asone of his greatest painful memories that he has unwillingly betrayed his promise given to Patro-clusrsquo father Menoetius he had declared he would bring the son safe back to Opus if the fatherwould send him along with him to Troy and entrust him to his care And this makes it quite evi-dent that it was because of love that he had taken responsibility for his care

Aeschines in this paragraph tries to give a prose account a paraphrase of theforthcoming quotation of Il 18324ndash29 which follows in 144 this paraphrase an-ticipating the direct quotation of the Iliadic passage purports to predispose theaudience in such a way as to focus on the points which Aeschines singlesoutsup2⁸ Worthy of note is the way of introducing the Homeric text using the adverbof place with indefinite meaning που (lsquosomewherersquo) this mode of rough quotingbrings into discussion the issue of citations from memory common even for well-known authors like Aristotle

Achillesrsquo unspeakable sorrow due to Patroclusrsquo death caused him doubleharm firstly because he lost his love companion and secondly because he un-willingly had broken his promise to Menoetius father of Patroclus that hewould bring his son back safe to Opus if he entrusted him to Achilles Ae-schinesrsquo personal view of the subject is expressed in the phrase ᾧ καταφανήςἐστιν ὡς διrsquo ἔρωτα τὴν ἐπιμέλειαν αὐτοῦ παρέλαβεν ie that the duty of Achillesto take care of Patroclus makes evident the erotic nature of their affectionthough the syllogism is based on a logical fallacy

In 144 Aeschines continues his argument by referring directly to Il 18324ndash29 it is the same point which comes back the betrayal of Achillesrsquo promise tobring Patroclus back to Opus safely

ὦ πόποι ἦ ῥrsquo ἅλιον ἔπος ἔκβαλον ἤματι κείνωιθαρσύνων ἥρωα Μενοίτιον ἐν μεγάροισινφῆν δέ οἱ εἰς ᾿Οπόεντα περικλυτὸν υἱὸν ἀπάξειν῎Ιλιον ἐκπέρσαντα λαχόντά τε ληΐδος αἶσανἀλλrsquo οὐ Ζεὺς ἄνδρεσσι νοήματα πάντα τελευτᾶιἄμφω γὰρ πέπρωται ὁμοίην γαῖαν ἐρεύθειν

Alas vain words I uttered that daywhen I assured the hero Menoetius in his hallsI told I would surely bring his glorious son back to Opus againas sacker of Troy having taken the due share of spoilBut Zeus does not fulfil to men all intentsfor it is fated that both (scil Achilles and Patroclus) of us make red one spot of earth

See also ndash where Aeschines in a similar way anticipates the testimony of Amyntorthe sole witness called upon in the case On the False Embassy


Nowhere in the Iliadic text is there any hint to the relationship between the twomen certainly as Homer avoids naming their relationship as love somethingwhich Aeschines himself has noticed (142) it would not be expected to goeven further by saying that Achillesrsquo acceptance of the duty to take care of Patro-clus points to a homoerotic love relationship

The text of the Iliad which is quoted by Aeschines in 144 is almost identicalwith the text transmitted by the mss the only difference is that Aeschines givesthe verb ἐρεύθειν while mss (especially Bibl Brit Add ms 17210 6th c AD PBibl Brit inv 107 1stndash2nd c AD testimonia cetera and mss Z and Ω)sup2⁹ opt forἐρεῦσαι the exact reference to the fate of Achilles and Patroclus is better servedby an aorist infinitive and also the syntax with πέπρωται needs a future expres-sion as predicate the infinitive of present tense found in Aeschinesrsquo text may beinfluenced by τελευτᾶι of verse 328 however from 328 to 329 there is a shift fromgeneral to specificsup3⁰

Coming to 145 we encounter Aeschinesrsquo summary of an extensive section ofbook 18 of the Iliad the dialogue of Achilles and Thetis which starts from v 65 ffThe main parts of this section from the Iliad are the arrival and departurespeeches of Thetis (73ndash77 and 128ndash37) the two speeches of Achilles (79ndash93and 98ndash 126) and certainly the crucial announcement of Achillesrsquo fate by Thetis(95ndash96) Achillesrsquo decision to avenge Patroclusrsquo death brings Thetis to tears andleaves no room for optimism (90ndash93) Thetis declares that Achillesrsquo fate wouldbe speedy and his death prompt following Hectorrsquos death (95ndash96)

Aeschines on the other hand focuses on Achillesrsquo grief his solid faith withthe dead friend which forced him to avenge his death and to prefer death in-stead of survival Thetisrsquo appeal to Achilles to abandon his plan is left unfulfil-led His noble strength of purpose was such that he hastened to punish hisfriendrsquos killer and though everyone urged him to bathe and take food heswore that he would do none of them until he brings Hectorrsquos head to Patroclusrsquotomb However detailed description and elements of brutality concerning Hec-torrsquos death are omitted from Aeschinesrsquo idealizingsup3sup1 account (cf Il 1891ndash93)

In 146 Aeschines presents a short prose version of Il 2365 ff the appearanceof Patroclusrsquo ghost to Achilles (65ndash68) preceding Patroclusrsquo speech (69ndash92) Ae-schinesrsquo account in 146 ends up with a summary of scattered Homeric versesὥσπερ καὶ ἐτράφησαν καὶ ἐβίωσαν ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ οὕτω καὶ τελευτησάντων αὐτῶν

Reference to the sigla of MWestrsquos edition of the Iliad (ndash) this edition is followedthroughout For the use of πέπρωται with the infinitive of aorist see also E Alc [A] PV DC The term is used by Fisher


τὰ ὀστᾶ ἐν τῇ αὐτῇ σορῷ κείσεται (lsquoin just the same way that they had grown upand lived together in death too their bones should lie in the same cofferrsquo) hissummary comes from 2377ndash91 especially v 84 ἀλλrsquo ὁμοῦ ὡς τράφομέν περἐν ὑμετέροισι δόμοισιν and 91 ὣς δὲ καὶ ὀστέα νῶϊν ὁμὴ σορὸς ἀμφικαλύπτοιclosely echoing the wording of the Homeric verses Again Aeschinesrsquo main pur-pose is to underline the strong bond of the two men in life and death hinting at apassionate love Two techniques are used by Aeschines here repetition and an-ticipation The above stated idea expressed by these verses identical or in an ad-justed form permeates almost all Homer-based arguments of Aeschines aimingat a cumulative effect Moreover it is Aeschinesrsquo usual technique of anticipationby which he comments in his own way on a forthcoming quotation of Homerictext (in this case in 149) attempting to predispose the audience (see below 147)

In paragraph 147 Aeschines moves from summarizing the Homeric scenesand ideas sprung from Iliad book 18 to a prose paraphrase of an allegedly Ho-meric passage the introductory lines of Patroclusrsquo ghost speech when Achilleswas sleeping by the funeral pyre Patroclus is referred to be saying in directspeech the following

οὐκέτι περὶ τῶν μεγίστων ὥσπερ τὸ πρότερον καθεζόμενοι μετrsquo ἀλλήλων μόνοι ἄπωθεν τῶνἄλλων φίλων βουλευσόμεθα

We are not going to sit together alone anymore as in the old days apart from our friends anddeliberate on the most serious matters

Aeschines enriches this paraphrasis of the Homeric text with his comment on thecore meaning of the passage which in his opinion is the loss of loyalty and af-fection the most characteristic virtues of the relationship between the two men(τὴν πίστιν οἶμαι καὶ τὴν εὔνοιαν ποθεινοτάτην ἡγούμενος εἶναι)sup3sup2 He probablyaims at a lsquoromanticrsquo presentation of affection loyalty and mutual exclusivenessfeaturing the relationship of the two men This seemingly Homeric quotationgiven in an anticipatory way purports to predispose the audience and recognizethroughout the forthcoming direct quotation of 18333ndash35 (in 148) the pointswhich Aeschines singles outsup3sup3

Indeed in 148 the Athenian orator calls upon the clerk to read the actual Ho-meric verses concerning the vengeance of Hector (Il18333ndash35) This quotationbelongs to Achillesrsquo lament in which he promises Patroclus to honour his burialwith the armour and head of his killer Hector together with the sacrifice oftwelve Trojans and the long-lasting lamentation of captive women

I believe that he (Patroclus) considers that the loss most keenly felt is loyalty and affection See also n above


λέγε πρῶτον τὰ περὶ τῆς Ἕκτορος τιμωρίαςἀλλrsquo ἐπεὶ οὖν φίλrsquo ἑταῖρε σεῦ ὕστερος εἶμrsquo ὑπὸ γαῖανοὔ σε πρὶν κτεριῶ πρίν γrsquo Ἕκτορος ἐνθάδrsquo ἐνεῖκαιτεύχεα καὶ κεφαλήν μεγαθύμου σεῖο φονῆος

Read the verses first about the vengeance on Hectorsup3⁴But since dear comrade I shall go beneath the earth after youI will not bury you until I bring herethe armour and head of Hector the killer of you the great-hearted

The Homeric text runs as follows

νῦν δrsquo ἐπεὶ οὖν Πάτροκλε σέrsquo ὕστερος εἶμrsquo ὑπὸ γαῖανοὔ σε πρὶν κτεριῶ πρὶν Ἕκτορος ἐνθάδrsquo ἐνεῖκαιτεύχεα καὶ κεφαλὴν μεγαθύμου σεῖο φονῆοςmiddot(Il 18333ndash35)

But now Patroclus since I shall go beneath the earth after youI will not bury you until I bring here the armour and head of Hectorthe killer of you the great-hearted

Divergences from Homerrsquos text are the following (i) major alteration change of awhole phrase in v 333 the vocative Πάτροκλε has been replaced by the addressφίλrsquo ἑταῖρε Obviously it is a deliberate alteration emphasizing the erotic rela-tionship between the two mensup3⁵ The suggestion which has been promptedthat may have been caused by slip of memory falls down since the phrase isunique in surviving epic poetrysup3⁶ (ii) Minor alterations concerning grammaticalor metrical alternatives in v 334 the use of the Ionic or Attic contracted futureκτεριῶ instead of the ancient form κτερίωsup3⁷ and the particle γrsquo

The important conclusion again is that Aeschines for his argumentativeneeds reforms his Homeric quotation with slight alterations so as to make itmean something quite different from what Homer implies in the Iliad

Paragraph 149 is devoted to the direct quotation of Il 2377ndash91 This time it isnot Aeschines himself who reads the poetic quotation but the clerk of the courtwho is called by the orator to read out what Patroclus says

ἀναγίγνωσκε δὴ τὰ περὶ τοῦ ὁμοτάφους αὐτοὺς γενέσθαι καὶ περὶ τῶν διατριβῶν ἃς συν-διέτριβον ἀλλήλοις

Il ndash Van der Valk ndash II ndash Edwards ndash Chantraine I


77 οὐ γὰρ ἔτι ζωοί γε φίλων ἀπάνευθεν ἑταίρωνβουλὰς ἑζόμενοι βουλεύσομενmiddot ἀλλrsquo ἐμὲ μὲν κὴρἀμφέχανε στυγερή ἥπερ λάχε γεινόμενόν περmiddotκαὶ δὲ σοὶ αὐτῷ μοῖρα θεοῖς ἐπιείκελrsquo Aχιλλεῦ

81 τείχει ὕπο Τρώων εὐηγενέων ἀπολέσθαι81a μαρνάμενον δηίοις ῾Ελένηςsup3⁸ ἕνεκrsquo ἠυκόμοιο81b ἄλλο δέ τοι ἐρέω σὺ δrsquo ἐνὶ φρεσὶ βάλλεο σῇσινmiddot

μὴ ἐμὰ σῶν ἀπάνευθε τιθήμεναι ὀστέrsquo Aχιλλεῦ83a ἀλλrsquo ἵνα περ σε καὶ αὐτὸν ὁμοίη γαῖα κεκεύθῃ83b χρυσέῳ ἐν ἀμφιφορεῖ τόν τοι πόρε πότνια μήτηρ84 ὡς ὁμοῦ ἐτράφεμέν περ ἐν ὑμετέροισι δόμοισιν

εὖτέ με τυτθὸν ἐόντα Μενοίτιος ἐξ Ὀπόεντοςἤγαγεν ὑμέτερόνδrsquo ἀνδροκτασίης ὕπο λυγρῆςἤματι τῷ ὅτε παῖδα κατέκτανον Aμφιδάμαντοςνήπιος οὐκ ἐθέλων ἀμφrsquo ἀστραγάλοισι χολωθείςmiddotἔνθα με δεξάμενος ἐν δώμασιν ἱππότα Πηλεὺςἔτρεφέ τrsquo ἐνδυκέως καὶ σὸν θεράποντrsquo ὀνόμηνενmiddot

91 ὣς δὲ καὶ ὀστέα νῶιν ὁμὴ σορὸς ἀμφικαλύπτοι

In modern editions of the Iliad (see West ad loc) v 83b is edited as v 92

92 χρυσέος ἀμφιφορεύς τόν τοι πόρε πότνια μήτηρNow read out what Patroclus says in the dream about their burial together and the pursuitsthey once had in life with one anotherNever more in life shall we sit apart from our dear comradesand take counsel together No the hated fatehas gapped around me the fate which was appointed me at my birthAnd for you yourself too godlike Achilles it is fatedto die beneath the walls of the noble Trojansfighting with the enemy for fair-haired Helenrsquos sakeMore shall I tell you and fix it in your heartLet not my bones be laid apart from your own Achillesbut that you and I may lie in common earthin the golden casket your queenly mother gave youjust as we were reared together in your chambershomewhen as a small child still Menoetius from Opusbrought me to your house because of sad man-slayingon that day when I slew Amphidamasrsquo sonin childish wrath all unwitting angered over diceThere in his halls Peleus the knight welcomed mekindly reared me and called me your companionSo to let the same vessel cover our bones

The type ῾Ελήνης in Diltsrsquo text must be an orthographic error


The above lengthy direct quotation from Homer (2377ndash91) seems to stand quiteapart from the Homeric text as it is transmitted by the mss we encounter signif-icant variations such as (i) major additions a) of the verse 81a (μαρνάμενον δηί-οις ῾Ελένης ἕνεκrsquo ἠϋκόμοιο) made by two Homeric formulaic parts found else-where (μάρνασθαι δηίοις in Il 9317 11190 205 17148hellip and ῾Ελένης ἕνεκrsquoἠϋκόμοιο in Il 9339) b) of the verse 83a ἀλλrsquo ἵνα περ σε καὶ αὐτὸν ὁμοίη γαῖακεκεύθῃ which retains a somehow formulaic character resembling Il 18329ἄμφω γὰρ πέπρωται ὁμοίην γαῖαν ἐρεῦσαι (ii) a transposition of verse since Ae-schinesrsquo quotation stops at v 91 the transposition of v 83b in effect correspondsto v 92 of Homerrsquos text with some due amendments χρυσέῳ ἐν ἀμφιφορεῖ τόντοι πόρε πότνια μήτηρ (iii) major alterations the latter part of v 82 σὺ δrsquo ἐνὶφρεσὶ βάλλεο σῇσιν replaces the Homeric formula καὶ ἐφήσομαι αἴ κε πίθηαιαἴ κε πίθηαι is found in Il1207 21293 and Od1279 (iv) minor alterations in v77 Aeschines (lsquoand some of the city- textsrsquo DidA)sup3⁹ prefers the wording οὐγὰρ ἔτι ζωοί γε while the mss read oὐ μὲν γὰρ ζωοί γε

In 150 Aeschines opts for quoting five other Iliadic verses coming from1895ndash99 Again he asks the clerk to read the verses marked in the lsquoAeschinianrsquoversion of the text

ὡς τοίνυν ἐξῆν αὐτῷ σωθῆναι μὴ τιμωρησαμένῳτὸν τοῦ Πατρόκλου θάνατον ἀνάγνωθι ἃ λέγει ἡ Θέτις

95 ὠκύμορος δή μοι τέκος ἔσσεαι οἷrsquo ἀγορεύειςmiddotαὐτίκα γάρ τοι ἔπειτα μεθrsquo Ἕκτορα πότμος ἑτοῖμοςΤὴν δrsquo αὖτε προσέειπε ποδάρκης δῖος Aχιλλεύςmiddotαὐτίκα τεθναίην ἐπεὶ οὐκ ἄρrsquo ἔμελλον ἑταίρῳ

99 κτεινομένῳ ἐπαμῦναι ὅ μοι πολὺ φίλτατος ἔσκενNow to show that he could have been saved if he had not avengedPatroclusrsquo death read out what Thetis sayslsquoSwift will fall your fate my child from what you sayFor immediately after Hector your doom is waitingrsquoTo her in turn made answer swift-footed divine AchilleslsquoLet me die straight-away since it seems I was not to rescuemy friend from death he who was far dearest to mersquoIl 1895ndash 100

95 ldquoὠκύμορος δή μοι τέκος ἔσσεαι οἷrsquo ἀγορεύειςmiddotαὐτίκα γάρ τοι ἔπειτα μεθrsquo Ἕκτορα πότμος ἑτοῖμοςrdquoτὴν δὲ μέγrsquo ὀχθήσας προσέφη πόδας ὠκὺς Aχιλλεύςmiddotldquoαὐτίκα τεθναίην ἐπεὶ οὐκ ἄρrsquo ἔμελλον ἑταίρῳκτεινομένωι ἐπαμῦναιmiddot ὃ μὲν μάλα τηλόθι πάτρης

100 ἔφθιτrsquo ἐμέο δrsquo ἐδέησεν ἀρῆς ἀλκτῆρα γενέσθαι

Richardson referring to Did= Didymus and A= Marc gr (olim ) saec x


Comparing Aeschinesrsquo text to Il 1895ndash99 we can specify the following varia-tions (i) selective quotation Aeschines quotes the first two lines (95ndash96) fromthe dialogue of Thetis and Achilles and then chooses only vv 98ndash99 fromAchillesrsquo extensive answer (in Il 1898ndash 126) (ii) major alterations a) the latterpart of v 99 ὅ μοι πολὺ φίλτατος ἔσκεν is Aeschinesrsquo invention b) in v 97 amajor change has been made by Aeschines introducing the phrase αὖτε προ-σέειπε ποδάρκης δῖος instead of μέγrsquo ὀχθήσας προσέφη πόδας ὠκύς

Homerrsquos Iliad 1895ndash99 provides a very useful material for Aeschines to com-pose an argument in poetic form this time which corroborates his thesis It is theresult of an apt reworking of the Homeric text with slight changes in wording anduse of two variant phrases a) ὅ μοι πολὺ φίλτατος ἔσκεν and b) αὖτε προσέειπεποδάρκης δῖος The first phrase emphasizes the close relationship betweenAchilles and Patroclus alluding to a homoerotic bond while the second one isused to fit the current situation and context the original phrase μέγrsquo ὀχθήσαςmight have caused a misunderstanding since it could have taken to point tothe anger of Achilles towards Thetis which is really not the case Leavingaside vv 100 f from the Iliad and making these alterations Aeschines turns hisquotation neatly and gives an impression of completeness

Socrates in Platorsquos Apology 28cndashd supporting the decision to abandon hisway of life uses the same episode from the Iliad as an exemplum for heroic think-ing and behaviour However this does not prove in any sense that Aeschinesknew and used Platorsquos text Homer would have been well known to the Atheni-ans of the fourth century through numerous oral recitations

This conspectus of the readings of both texts (original and conduit) may leadus to several conclusions focusing on the changes which Aeschines has made

Aeschinesrsquo quotations diverge quite significantly from the text transmittedby the Homeric mss he adds alters and transposes verses However especiallyin 149 which gives scope for further investigation it is most unfortunate that thisspecific manuscript (papyrus fragments noted as P12 in Westrsquos edition) does notcontain vv 2ndash84 to give us a safe idea how Aeschinesrsquo quotations (and especial-ly the plus-verses 81a 83a and 83b)⁴⁰ can be connected with the pre-Aristarchantradition of the text⁴sup1 The long-standing scholarly discussion on the value of

As for the plus-verse a again the old papyrus P (=P Grenf P Hib P Heidndash)does not help this plus-verse does not exist in later papyri (as P and Ωms) either but thisis out of the question in the pre-Aristarchan tradition on P see also West ndash As we were fortunate enough to check [Plu] Consol ad Apoll c where Il ndashb(with two plus-verses) is quoted in that case we were helped by the papyrus edited by Grenfelland Hunt ( ) which came into light to verify Plutarchrsquos quotation for more detail Allen ndash esp


plus-verses and minus-verses found in quotations of ancient authors seems to beinconclusive

Dueacute after a thorough analysis of Aeschinesrsquo variants and based also on Aldodi Luzio⁴sup2 supports the inclusion of these verses in the text arguing that we canlsquofind ways of including them in a multi-text that embraces the fluidity of the tex-tual traditions of the Iliad and Odysseyrsquo⁴sup3 which certainly helps us by creating afull picture of the variants but still does not separate out the different traditionspointing to the pre-Aristarchan tradition

However a critical approach of the Homeric excerpts cited by Aeschinesforces us to make a decision on these readings through rhetorical judgementmainly due to the lack of other evidence from the pre-Aristarchan period suchas papyrus fragments Lapse of Aeschinesrsquo memory as a cause to all these varia-tions must be excluded and on this point I agree with Dueacute⁴⁴ By examining thecited texts in comparison to the original text the way in which they rhetoricallyfunction within the overall corpus of the reporting text how they fit to variousarguments marshalled by Aeschines we may conclude that the changes mightmore safely represent his personal version of the text rather than a distinct tra-dition of the Homeric text most of the departures from the Homeric text (see ed-ition by West) may have been made to form or better to create a text that bestsupports Aeschinesrsquo argument in which the relationship of Patroclus andAchilles was one of chaste homoerotic love Aeschinesrsquo job was quite difficultsince Homerrsquos presentation of the relationship at issue was quite differentand this was well understood by the Athenian society of the fourth centuryBC The twofold target to use Homer but also to adapt his ideas in such away as to serve his rhetorical purpose was for Aeschines a challenging job givinghim the opportunity to function like an experienced reader who has to play witha text its wording its phrasing its poetic formulaic identity and structure with afinal target to produce his own version in a convenient form All his changes hadto abide by the ideas of fourth-century society on homoerotic relations Ae-schines provided the clerk of the court with this lsquointerpolatedrsquo version of thetext after having marked it with the relevant passages It is a text for officialuse in the court but not lsquoofficialrsquo by itself Poetry used in court may be regardedrhetorically and procedurally as a kind of witness (see Arist Rh 1375b28 ff) ob-taining a really authoritative character teaching poetry and teaching law from

Di Luzio ndash Dueacute ndash quotation from Dueacute


the rostrum were two parallel and equally important procedures in the Atheniancourt Ford has proved⁴⁵

Moreover the Homeric text cited by Aeschines in the speech Against Ti-marchus seems to be the text delivered during the hearing of the case it is prob-ably not a product of later revision simply because it is organically connectedwith the arguments of the orator⁴⁶ the way the speech is structured in 141ndash54is Aeschinesrsquo way it is really the way in which Aeschines also predisposes theaudience with comments before the clerk reads out a testimony or a document(eg in the speech On the False Embassy the testimony of Amyntor follows a pro-leiptic exposition given by Aeschines in six paragraphs [63ndash68] or in the samespeech paragraph 60 where Aeschines presents a partial possibly modifiedquotation of the Alliesrsquo dogma given in an anticipatory way in order to corrob-orate his own arguments)

In all these cases Aeschines reworks a text of Homer and makes slight modi-fications trying to support his case At the same time he avoids significant devia-tions

d The Speech Against Ctesiphon

In this political trial presented before the law court in 330 the accused Ctesi-phon who was a political friend of Demosthenes had to defend himself Hewas also helped by Demosthenes who acted as his synēgoros the reason forthe prosecution of Aeschines against Ctesiphon was the latterrsquos proposal mdashille-gal according to Aeschinesmdash suggesting that the city should offer a crown to De-mosthenes as a reward for his lifetime service and efforts offered to the city

However the real target of Aeschinesrsquo accusation was political since he hadto dispute over Ctesiphonrsquos justification of the award which was based on a longargumentation that Demosthenes has showed concern for and loyalty to the cityall his life Thus Aeschines moves to a real evaluation of Demosthenesrsquo politicalcareer attempting to impose his unfavourable view for Demosthenesrsquo political re-cord The prosecution was not successful for the part of Aeschines who failed toget the one-fifth of the votes He was then fined and he left Athens

We encounter in this speech of Aeschines an indirect quotation or allusion tothe Homeric text through the epigram of the Stoa of Hermai in paragraph 185⁴⁷

Ford ndash Van der Valk II Dueacute and n It is also Hesiod (Op ndash) that is quoted in


In 190 an epigram in honour of the democrats from Phyle is also quoted Thepurpose of setting up these three stēlai was to honour Cimonrsquos victory at Eionin 476 (Hdt 7107 Th 1981) Aeschines by quoting these inscriptions demandsto support his case that Demosthenesrsquo asking to be crowned by the dēmosdoes not comply with the glorious Athenian past Athens promotes collectiveand not personal deeds

ἐπὶ δὲ τῷ τρίτῳ ἐπιγέγραπται Ἑρμῇmiddotἔκ ποτε τῆσδε πόληος ἅμrsquo Aτρείδῃσι Μενεσθεὺςἡγεῖτο ζάθεον Τρωικὸν ἂμ πεδίονὅν ποθrsquo Ὅμηρος ἔφη Δαναῶν πύκα χαλκοχιτώνωνκοσμητῆρα μάχης ἔξοχον ἄνδρα μολεῖνοὕτως οὐδὲν ἀεικὲς Aθηναίοισι καλεῖσθαικοσμητὰς πολέμου τrsquo ἀμφὶ καὶ ἠνορέηςἔστι που τὸ τῶν στρατηγῶν ὄνομα οὐδαμοῦ ἀλλὰ τὸ τοῦ δήμου(Aeschin 3185)

And on the third of Hermai is inscribed

When Menestheus from this city led his men on the holy plain of Troy to join Atreusrsquo sonsHomer once said of the linen clad Danaanshe was supreme in ordering the battleFittingly then shall the Athenians be allhonoured and calledmarshals and leaders of war heroes in combat of armsrdquoIs the name of the generals anywhere Nowhere just the name of the people

The inscription recalls a passage from Il 2552ndash54

τῶν αὖθrsquo ἡγεμόνευrsquo υἱὸς Πετεῶιο Μενεσθεύςτῶι δrsquo οὔ πώ τις ὁμοῖος ἐπιχθόνιος γένετrsquo ἀνήρκοσμῆσαι ἵππους τε καὶ ἀνέρας ἀσπιδιώταςmiddot

The leader of those (scil the Athenians) was Menestheus son of PeteosLike him was no other man upon the earth forthe marshalling of chariots and of warriors that bear the shield

In fact we have a case of a two-stage reception of Homer first the reception ofthe Iliad by the Athenians in the 470s producing this epigram and second thereception of the epigram and indirectly of the Iliad by Aeschines in his speech

The third inscription mentioned here by Aeschines makes reference to theAthenian contingent for the Trojan War Menestheus appearing as son of Peteosin this text was the Athenian army leader his role in the Trojan War was prob-


ably minor⁴⁸ Theseus is totally absent from the Homeric passage although thereference to Athens only and not to Marathon Aphidna Eleusis Thoricos maymean that this concerns an age after the synoecism attributed to Theseus

The content of both texts (Il 2552ndash54 and Against Ctesiphon 185) presents aclose similarity the wording resembles in a way the Homeric original (egκοσμῆσαι in Homer κοσμητῆρα and κοσμητάς in the inscription cited by Ae-schines) Nevertheless the addition of the two verses οὕτως οὐδὲν ἀεικὲς [hellip]καὶ ἠνορέης which overstates Athenian virtues may be a slight distortion ofthe Iliadic text

This inscription is in effect an attempt of a retrospective reworking of Hom-errsquos verses concerning Athensrsquo engagement with the Trojan War It is simply theassociation technique employed in this lsquoStoa of the Hermairsquo in such a way as toplace the recent prominent victory against Persia within a broader historical con-text including the War against Troy

Eventually concerning the question of the edition of the Homeric text in the ageof Peisistratus the issue of Athensrsquo role in the Trojan War may help draw conclu-sions on the overall interpolations by the Athenians Moreover as a corpus thethree inscriptions of the lsquoStoa of Hermairsquo of the early Classical age point to a dynam-ic or creative reception of Homer by the Athenians once they quote their engage-mentmdash though not eminentmdashin the Trojan War backing their deeds of the recentpast What really interests the city in the 470s is a sole reference to their presencein Troy enriched by the authority of Homer overlooking the minor character ofthis participation This may be the reason why they do not distort the source somuch since it is again a matter of rhetorical use

Important to this discussion on the inscription of the lsquoStoa of Hermairsquo is that thetext quoted by Aeschines in 3185 is also used with the same order and almost thesame wording by Plutarch (Cimon 7) followed by Plutarchrsquos phrasing immediatelyafterwards (Cimon 8)⁴⁹ Although Wade-Gery supports the idea of a multiple sourcefor Plutarchrsquos text (including Hypereides and Demothenes Against Leptines 112) Plu-tarchrsquos conclusion that ταῦτα καίπερ οὐδαμοῦ τὸ Κίμωνος ὄνομα δηλοῦντα τιμῆςὑπερβολὴν ἔχειν ἐδόκει τοῖς τότrsquo ἀνθρώποις (lsquoalthough these inscriptions nowherementioned the name of Cimon his contemporaries regarded them to be an honourof distinction for himrsquo) connects the two texts Aeschinesrsquo and Plutarchrsquos veryclosely⁵⁰ However it is beyond the scope of our discussion to go to a more detailed

For more detail see Kirk ndash ndash For the divergences of Plutarchrsquos text from Aeschines see Wade-Gery See Wade-Gery ndash esp ndash see also Jacoby ndash where it isnoted that Aeschines copied them from D (Against Leptines) recently Robertson ndash Petrovic ndash


analysis of these epigrams making comments on the lsquoStoa of Hermairsquo and the bulkof inscriptions that may have been kept there

Nevertheless I feel quite confident that Aeschines presenting these threeepigrams within his text had made a selection among more than three epigramsreversing the order and making the epigram from Eion first and the Menestheusepigram third The typical motif of lsquoour ancestors our fathers ourselvesrsquo usedalso in funeral orations is probably reversed here (see Th 2361ndash4)⁵sup1

e Thersites the symbolic language of rhetoric

Θερσίτης δrsquo ἔτι μοῦνος ἀμετροεπὴς ἐκολώιαὃς ἔπεα φρεσὶν ἧισιν ἄκοσμά τε πολλά τε εἴδημάψ ἀτὰρ οὐ κατὰ κόσμον ἐριζέμεναι βασιλεῦσινἀλλrsquo ὅ τί οἱ εἴσαιτο γελοίιον Aργείοισινἔμμεναιmiddot αἴσχιστος δὲ ἀνὴρ ὑπὸ Ἴλιον ἦλθεmiddotφολκὸς ἔην χωλὸς δrsquo ἕτερον πόδα τὼ δέ οἱ ὤμωκυρτώ ἐπὶ στῆθος συνοκωχότεmiddot αὐτὰρ ὕπερθενφοξὸς ἔην κεφαλήν ψεδνὴ δrsquo ἐπενήνοθε λάχνηἔχθιστος δrsquo Aχιλῆϊ μάλιστrsquo ἦν ἠδrsquo Ὀδυσῆϊmiddotτὼ γὰρ νεικείεσκεmiddot τότrsquo αὖτrsquo Aγαμέμνονι δίωιὀξέα κεκληγὼς λέγrsquo ὀνείδεαmiddot τῶι δrsquo ἄρrsquo Aχαιοὶἐκπάγλως κοτέοντο νεμέσσηθέν τrsquo ἐνὶ θυμῶιαὐτὰρ ὃ μακρὰ βοῶν Aγαμέμνονα νείκεε μύθωιmiddot(Il 2212ndash24)

Only Thersites still kept chattering unmeasured in speechbeing adept at disorderly wordswith which to revile the kings recklessly in no due orderwhatever he thought would raise a laugh among the Argivesthe ugliest of men who came to IlionHe was bandy-legged dragging the foot with two rounded shouldershunching together over his chest and above themhis head was pointed and a sparse stubble flowered on itHateful was he to Achilles above all and to Odysseusfor both of them he was in the habit of reviling but nowwith shrill cries he uttered abuse against noble Agamemnon With him were the Achaeansexceedingly angry and indignant in their heartsThus shouting loudly he reviled Agamemnon

καὶ εἰ μέν τις τῶν τραγικῶν ποιητῶν τῶν μετὰ ταῦτα ἐπεισαγόντων ποιήσειεν ἐν τραγῳδίᾳτὸν Θερσίτην ὑπὸ τῶν Ἑλλήνων στεφανούμενον οὐδεὶς ἂν ὑμῶν ὑπομείνειεν ὅτι φησὶνὍμη-ρος ἄνανδρον αὐτὸν εἶναι καὶ συκοφάντηνmiddot αὐτοὶ δrsquo ὅταν τὸν τοιοῦτον ἄνθρωπον στεφανῶτε

Cf Loraux ndash


οὐκ ltἂνgt οἴεσθε ἐν ταῖς τῶν Ἑλλήνων δόξαις συρίττεσθαι οἱ μὲν γὰρ πατέρες ὑμῶν τὰ μὲνἔνδοξα καὶ λαμπρὰ τῶν πραγμάτων ἀνετίθεσαν τῷ δήμῳ τὰ δὲ ταπεινὰ καὶ καταδεέστεραεἰς τοὺς ῥήτορας τοὺς φαύλους ἔτρεπονmiddot Κτησιφῶν δrsquo ὑμᾶς οἴεται δεῖν ἀφελόντας τὴν ἀδο-ξίαν ἀπὸ Δημοσθένους περιθεῖναι τῷ δήμῳ(Aeschin 3231)

And if any of the tragic poets who are to bring on their plays afterwards in a tragedywere to represent Thersites as crowned by the Greeks no one of you would tolerate it becauseHomer says he was a coward and a slanderer (sykophantēs) but when you yourselves crownsuch a man as this donrsquot you think you are being hissed in the minds of the Greeks Your fa-thers gave a tribute for the glorious and brilliant achievements to the people but mean andunworthy acts threw upon the incompetent politicians however Ctesiphon thinks you shouldremove the stigma from Demosthenes and place it on the people

Aeschines in his attempt to evaluate not only Demosthenesrsquo political career butalso his overall personality takes refuge to Homer this time in an alternativeway he attacks Demosthenesrsquo character trying to convince the jurors that sucha personality is not worthy of being crowned to support this claim and to addmore strength and credit to this he makes a direct comparison between Demos-thenes and Thersites the infamous man mentioned by Homer in Il 2221⁵sup2 tocriticize Agamemnon being punished by Odysseus afterwards Thersitesrsquo nameis obviously a lsquospeakingrsquo name (originating in θέρσος the Aeolic form of Ionicθάρσος)⁵sup3 since it carries an apparent meaning of over-boldness recklessnessrashness Thus the comparison attempted by Aeschines purports to assimilatethe present to the past and transfer the features of unmanliness (see ἄνανδρον⁵⁴)and sycophancy (συκοφάντην⁵⁵) and even other characteristics (being nastily

Cf Aeschin where an implicit comparison between Demosthenes and Ajax is at-tempted this echoes the epic cycle in a way (cf Proclusrsquo summary of the Little Iliad) In

the tone is ironic (Demosthenes is characterized as μεγαλόψυχος καὶ τὰ πολεμικὰ διαφέρων)but the reference to the intentional wounding by Demosthenes to himself (see the case AgainstMeidias) and the overall content of the passage are leading to a conclusion that Demosthenesuses even his body (his head in this passage his mouth in the speech On the False Embassy and ) for gaining profit Kirk For the feature of unmanliness (ἄνανδρος ἀνανδρία) given to Demosthenes by Aeschines invarious occasions see also the whole context in this passage refers to an association ofpassive homosexuality and womanly clothing The term συκοφάντης hints at the social and civic sphere it may mean the person whobrings an unjust prosecution one not based on solid ground (cf also D) Despite the fre-quent references of litigants to their opponents as sycophants the meaning and etymology ofthe word remain obscure see Harvey ndash for various meanings of the word and nu-merous references In some cases it means a professional informer (Ar Ach ) in


abusive disgusting repulsive and distinguished for impropriety) from Thersitesto Demosthenes but not only these Aeschines intends to ascribe to Demos-thenes all these features coming directly from Thersites and moreover to promptan identification of both men in terms of character and posture since visible per-sonality and character must be consistent⁵⁶

However Thersitesrsquo courage is never really discussed in Homer or other epicAeschines does discuss Demosthenesrsquo courage or lack of it rewriting Thersites inthe image of Demosthenes as he himself presents him In that sense Aeschinesreworks Thersites in terms of fifth and fourth-century language and concepts

Similarly the initial statement of the paragraph lsquoif any of the tragic poets [hellip]a slanderer (sykophantēs)rsquo seems important Indeed this clearly brings forth thecultural atmosphere of the period in which proclamation of honours upon citi-zens or non-citizens for distinctive service to Athens was organized during tragicfestivals and especially City Dionysia⁵⁷ more than this within this cultural at-mosphere it is Homer who is recognized as one of the favourite authors re-worked by the tragic poets of the time through the myths and ideas which he of-fers however Homer has already established his ideas and even his characterswith a certain profile in the Athenian audience adaptation of Homeric materialwas a usual phenomenon and sometimes a routine process for classical litera-ture in the fourth century Thersitesrsquo character was reworked by Chaeremon ina tragedy entitled Achilles Thersitoktonos (lsquoSlayer of Thersitesrsquo) It seems asthough that such an unpopular character like Thersites is a risky venture if atragic poet or even an orator attempts a representation of him⁵⁸ It is also the fa-mous case of Phrynichusrsquo Capture of Miletos (see Hdt 6212) along with variousother anecdotes and vivid accounts presenting cases of conflicts between tragicperformances and Atheniansrsquo moral and political sentiments in tandem with theaudiencersquos frightened reaction⁵⁹

others a prosecutor who seeks financial reward from public action or by blackmailing his op-ponent it can also mean generally a citizen who uses his legal expertise to escape conviction See Russell Pickard-Cambridge

See also Lowry cf the vase-painting related to the Achilles Thersitoktonos (Boston Mu-seum of Fine Arts ) See further Pickard-Cambridge

ndash


f Reference to Margites

In 3160 Demosthenes is presented by Aeschines to give to Alexander the nick-name lsquoMargitesrsquo

Ἐπειδὴ δrsquo ἐτελεύτησε μὲν Φίλιππος Aλέξανδρος δrsquo εἰς τὴν ἀρχὴν κατέστη πάλιν αὖ τερα-τευόμενος ἱερὰ μὲν ἱδρύσατο Παυσανίου εἰς αἰτίαν δὲ εὐαγγελίων θυσίας τὴν βουλὴνκατέστησεν ἐπωνυμίαν δrsquo Aλεξάνδρῳ Μαργίτην ἐτίθετο ἀπετόλμα δὲ λέγειν ὡς οὐ κινηθήσε-ται ἐκ Μακεδονίας ἀγαπᾶν γὰρ αὐτὸν ἔφη ἐν Πέλλῃ περιπατοῦντα καὶ τὰ σπλάγχνα φυλάτ-τοντα Καὶ ταυτὶ λέγειν ἔφη οὐκ εἰκάζωνἀλλrsquo ἀκριβῶς εἰδὼς ὅτι αἵματός ἐστιν ἡ ἀρετὴ ὠνία αὐτὸς οὐκ ἔχων αἷμα καὶ θεωρῶν τὸνAλέξανδρον οὐκ ἐκ τῆς Aλεξάνδρου φύσεως ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τῆς ἑαυτοῦ ἀνανδρίας

But when Philip died and Alexander had come to rule Demosthenes still ldquopresenting himselfwith an imposing air he caused a shrine to be dedicated to Pausanias and involved with theCouncil in the charge of making sacrifice for good news he gave Alexander the nicknamelsquoMargitesrsquo and had the effrontery to maintain that he would not stir from Macedonia becausehe was content he said to stroll around ⁶⁰ in Pella observing the omens⁶sup1 He said this wasnot based on conjecture but on accurate knowledge that the price of valour is blood thoughhe himself having no blood in him and formed his judgement of Alexander not by Alexanderrsquosnature but by his own cowardice

This reference to Margites is clearly from a mock-epic named after the epony-mous character Margites is featured by proverbial stupidity madness andlust lack of experience immaturity indecision the name Margites is a lsquospeak-ingrsquo name coming from μάργος (see also LSJ9 sv Μαργίτης)

Demosthenesrsquo reference to Margites cannot be found anywhere in his pub-lished speeches and may have been obelized after revision However Plutarch(Dem 232) repeats the statement as follows καὶ τὸ βῆμα κατεῖχε Δημοσθένηςκαὶ πρὸς τοὺς [hellip] παῖδα καὶΜαργίτην ἀποκαλῶν αὐτὸν (lsquoDemosthenes reigned su-preme in the Assembly and wrote to the generals of the King who were in Asiaattempting to stir them up to start a war against Alexander from there while hecalled Alexander a boy and a Margitesrsquo) In addition Philotas the son of Parme-nio called contemptuously Alexander a stripling (μειράκιον) who enjoyed thetitle of king through Philotasrsquo and Parmeniorsquos efforts (see Plu Alex 485)

The word περιπατοῦντα has been regarded (see Carey n ) as sneering atAlexanderrsquos training in the school of Aristotle which was called Peripatos Tὰ σπλάγχνα φυλάττοντα is likelier to mean lsquoguarding the sacrificial entrailsrsquo hinting at hisindecision like Margites to proceed to further action although he had made all the necessarypreparations (see also above οὐ κινηθήσεται ἐκ Μακεδονίας)


It seems quite possible to have a genuine reference here and a truthful alle-gation from the part of Aeschines for the attribution of the nickname to Alexand-er by Demosthenes (cf Plu Alex 113) which is in tune with Demosthenesrsquo policyagainst Alexander especially in the first years of Alexanderrsquos reign Demos-thenes tried to form a stubborn opposition against him he firmly supportedThebes in their attempt to resist the Macedonians and made ironic and disdain-ful comments on Alexanderrsquos personality (see also Marsyas of Pella FGrH 135F3) It may be the case that Demosthenes trying to make a clear distinction be-tween Alexander and Achilles who is the prototype of heroic character and amodel that Alexander wished to imitate identifies Alexander to Margites whowas the very opposite model⁶sup2

A single reference to a comic hero like Margites without any other commentsimply means that the person referred to and more importantly the parodic epicpoem were really well-known to the Athenian audience of the mid fourth centu-ry Indeed the poem is discussed in Poetics 1448b where Aristotle argues that itmust be credited to Homer who was the first poet delineating the forms of com-edy by composing the Margites According to Aristotle Homer in the case of theMargites dramatized the laughable avoiding invective and the Margites becamea predecessor of comedy as the Iliad and the Odyssey of tragedy (1448b35ndash40)⁶sup3Moreover the pseudo-Platonic dialogue Alcibiades II (147B) makes reference tothe Margites as Homeric⁶⁴

Once again fourth-century political oratory uses epic themes and symbolswith or without reference to Homer and transfers them as rhetorica exempla⁶⁵into political discussion Moreover in the third century BC the popularity ofthe mock-epic poemMargites continues to be high since it enjoys the admirationof Callimachus (see fr 397 Pf)

See Plu Per where Alexander is presented as playing kithara a hint at his attempt toimitate Achilles For modern scholarly views on the authorship of theMargites see Jacob ndash Rot-stein esp ndash Bossi According to Eustratius on Arist EN (Comm in Arist Gr xx p Heylbut) the at-tribution of the name Margites to a poem of Homer is accepted also by Archilochus (fr B)and Cratinus (fr K-A) see Pfeiffer see also Hyp Lyc presenting Margitesas ἀβελτερώτατος for more ancient references to the Margites see West IEG

ndash IIndash See Quint Inst lsquoest in exemplus allegoria si non praedicta ratione ponanturrsquo withLausberg sect


g Reference to the Sirens

Another point in anticipation is Aeschinesrsquo reference to the Sirens though thispoint is not included in the speech On the Crown omitted possibly after revisionalthough it is equally possible that this reference could be an invention by Ae-schines to introduce his attack on Demosthenes It is an allusion to the Odyssey

Καὶ νὴ τοὺς θεοὺς τοὺς Ὀλυμπίους ὧν ἐγὼ πυνθάνομαι Δημοσθένην λέξειν ἐφrsquo ᾧ νυνὶ μέλλωλέγειν ἀγανακτῶ μάλιστα Aφομοιοῖ γάρ μου τὴν φύσιν ταῖς Σειρῆσιν ὡς ἔοικε Καὶ γὰρ ὑπrsquoἐκείνων οὐ κηλεῖσθαί φησι τοὺς ἀκροωμένους ἀλλrsquo ἀπόλλυσθαι διόπερ οὐδrsquo εὐδοκιμεῖν τὴντῶν Σειρήνων μουσικήνmiddot καὶ δὴ καὶ τὴν τῶν ἐμῶν εὐπορίαν λόγων καὶ τὴν φύσιν μου γεγενῆ-σθαι ἐπὶ βλάβῃ τῶν ἀκουόντων Καίτοι τὸν λόγον τοῦτον ὅλως μὲν ἔγωγε οὐδενὶ πρέπεινἡγοῦμαι περὶ ἐμοῦ λέγεινmiddotτῆς γὰρ αἰτίας αἰσχρὸν τὸν αἰτιώμενόν ἐστι τὸ ἔργον μὴ ἔχεινἐπιδεῖξαιmiddot(Aeschin 3228)

And by the Olympian gods of all the things which I hear Demosthenes will say the one I amabout to tell you makes me most indignant the most For he likens my natural gifts to the Si-rens He says that their hearers were not enchanted but destroyed by them and that thereforethe Siren-song has no good repute and that in like manner the smooth flow of my way ofspeaking and my natural talent have proved disastrous for those who listened to me

And yet I think this claim is one that nobody under any circumstances can properly makeagainst me it is a shame when someone makes an accusation and is not able to show theground for the accusation

Though the Sirens must have occurred in a lot of poetry in the interim the refer-ence may point to Homer without mention of Homer or can be regarded as a spe-cific detail which would point to Homerrsquos Odyssey 1239ndash54 (Circersquos foretellingaccount on the Sirens) and 158ndash200 (the episode with the Sirens) wherethese supernatural female sea-creatures (soul-birds or otherworld enchantress-es) singing with the sweetest voice lure sailors to their doom⁶⁶

Demosthenes ndashthrough Aeschinesmdash compared the sweet but destructive sound-ing of the Sirens to Aeschinesrsquo skilful and allegedly destructive speaking Thus Ae-schinesrsquo voice is at issue here a theme which could also be encountered in variousother passages in Demosthenesrsquo speeches contra Aeschines (see for example18259 308 19337 cf Demochares FGrH 75 F6c with [Plu] Mor 840e) But in19216ndash17 Demosthenes attempts to reverse the situation arguing that the jurorsrsquojob must not be dependent on the speakersrsquo talent and the quality of speechesThis idea can be found in 18287 where Demosthenes argues that he was chosen

For an account of the Sirensrsquo scene in the Odyssey and this literary motif see HeubeckHoek-stra ff


ndashand not Aeschinesmdashas a speaker for the funeral speech over the war dead afterChaeronea since the Athenians looked for a speaker to express the mourning ofhis soul and not to lament their fate with the pretended voice of an actor seealso 18291 where Aeschines is presented as λαρυγγίζων ie roaring⁶⁷

The charge in its generic form is not uncommon in rhetorical exchanges theorator is suspect of rhetorical skill and manipulation trying to captivate the ju-rors and audience with pleasurable speaking⁶⁸ Even more an actor-orator likeAeschines is able to transfer his acting experience skilful delivery gesturesand fine voice from acting stages to political stages becoming πάνδεινος (lsquodread-fulrsquo) γόης (lsquowizardrsquo) σοφιστής (lsquosophistēsrsquo) φέναξ (lsquoroguersquo)⁶⁹ this hints at theidea of deception a rhetorical motif used elsewhere in oratory with the termsψυχαγωγέω and ψυχαγωγία⁷⁰ This is also what Philocleon at AristophanesrsquoWasps (see esp 566 f) presents as entertainment and pleasures enjoyed by ajuror Philocleon among other things makes reference to Aesoprsquos funny talesand other jokes which make jurors laugh and lay aside their wrath The lastpoint on jokes is made also by Demosthenes (23206) who claims that the jurorsacquit criminals who have proved guilty if they make witty remarks in court

Eventually the motif of the Odyssean Sirens moves the discussion from law-court to theatre from argument to performance from logic to seductive meansAeschinesrsquo fine voice represents the histrionic power which enables the orator toseize the audience and leads the jurors to accept the thesis of the speaker whichis manipulated through illusion and deception But not only this the discussionon Aeschinesrsquo voice is levelled as an important argument since as Easterlinghas observed⁷sup1 it is placed at a climactic point with the perorations in bothspeeches On the Embassy and On the Crown

See Harpocration sv λαρυγγίζων meaning lsquofull throatened with mouth wide openrsquo For references to good speakers see Aeschin (a description of Leodamas the Achar-nian) and D a description of Kallistratos of Aphidna who enjoyed widespread fame asan orator see Plu Dem ff with [Plu] Mor b it was Kallistratos who inspired Dem (seePlu loccit) See Lada-Richards ndash See also Lex Vind (Nauck) sv ψυχαγωγός DH Dem For the relation between law-courts and theatre see Hall ndash OberStrauss Easterling Lada-Richards


Conclusions

In the period of 345ndash330 when the opposition between Athens and Macedonreached a high point we find three men of great significance Demosthenes Ae-schines and Lycurguswho enrich their argumentative weapons with poetryWiththe authority of Homer (together with Euripides and Hesiod) Aeschines antici-pates the main arguments of his opponent Demosthenes in the case Against Ti-marchus while Homer provides him with material to deconstruct Demosthenesrsquoimage in the case Against Ctesiphon It is worthy of note that Homer is used main-ly in these two speeches this raises issues on personal and political behaviourwhere personal life and public sphere are seen as two sides of the same coin⁷sup2

The interesting outcome is that all the poetic quotations paraphrases andsummaries are found in speeches (of the three orators mentioned) delivered ina short period of 15 years from 345 to 330⁷sup3 This is an issue (educational polit-ical or otherwise) that needs further investigation since we have a bulk ofspeeches political or not of the late fifth and the first half of the fourth centurywhich would have included poetic texts in their corpus

Consequently one may ask what forces Demosthenes Aeschines and Lycur-gus to use poetry And also was that a rhetorical variation or a new culturalphenomenon traced in this specific period To answer these questions wehave to point to the cultural features and the overall political trend of the periodespecially the third quarter of the fourth century BC including the lsquoLycurgan Erarsquo(338ndash322 BC) in this period political initiatives and significant cultural meas-ures offered Athens the opportunity to reaffirm its dominant cultural role inthe Greek world It seems that this cultural policy (Kulturpolitik) functions asan alternative to the political and military policy now in decline⁷⁴ I held thatthe encounter of poetry in oratory of this period may lead us to believe that itwas not only the revival of tragedy and the three tragedians (Aeschylus Sopho-cles and Euripides) and their plays which came to be presented again in theAthenian theatre More than this it was a revival in arts literature and generallyin culture which was spread around using theatre industry as a starting pointand influenced all kind of poetry and Homer among them This procedureseems to have already started from the period of Eubulusrsquo administration after

However poetry in general can be found in more public speeches of the same period asDemosthenesrsquo On the Crown and On the Embassy and Lycurgusrsquo Against Leocrates

See Petrovic ndash for an analogous note on the use of epigrams within oratorywhich is placed in See Hintzen-Bohlen


the Social War (355 BC) It is not accidental that both Eubulus and Lycurgus be-came heads of the cityrsquos Theoric fund

In a period of crisis as the Lycurgan era when Athens faces the question ofits independence in the future a re-evaluation of institutions traditions culturaland historical heritage is needed The Athenians seek to assure the past in orderto form a reworked identity with future perspective The term lsquointentional historyrsquoused by Gehrke and interpreted as lsquoprojection in time of the elements of subjec-tive self-conscious self-categorization which construct the identity of a group asa grouprsquo is telling of the policy adopted by Lycurgus in this period⁷⁵ Homer Hes-iod and the tragedians were surely in the agenda of the old idealized heritageworthy of modern adaptation

In his two speeches (Against Timarchus and Against Ctesiphon) Aeschinesopts for a creative reception of Homer appropriating the poetrsquos ideas and valuesthrough his modernized perspective but also tentatively with due respect to asanctioned text In the speech Against Timarchus he feels certain that he isadapting the issue of the relationship of Achilles and Patroclus to his argumen-tative needs namely speaking of chaste love as distinctively different from thesale of sexual gratification allegedly characterizing Timarchus

In the speech Against Ctesiphon again Aeschines has to play with the ideaof a glorious past with such values and principles that check the present situa-tion of the allegedly unlawful crowning of his opponent Demosthenes Homerconveys all the necessary literary material to support Aeschines ie a referenceto the Athenian contingent to the Trojan War embedded in an inscription of the470s and figures of symbolic power like Thersites the Sirens and Margites

However while the rhetorical scope was served well the citations of the Ho-meric text which are used should not be regarded as a safe indicator for thetransmission of this text Divergences from what was regarded as Homeric textin the fourth century BC were made to form freestanding excerpts and thishas been made on purpose and not to represent a distinct part of the transmis-sion of the text

All in all in the third quarter of the fourth century BC Homer (for culturalrevival) is not a text for public recitations or for educational use only it is trans-formed into a powerful rhetorical tool with influence on the dēmos

For lsquointentional historyrsquo and its interpretation see Hanink and n quoting Lura-ghiFoxhall ndash However to the above interpretation I feel that a creative process ismissing as an aspect of lsquointentional historyrsquo


Eleni Volonaki

Homeric Values in the Epitaphios Logos

a Moral values in the Homeric poems

The specific character of Homeric values has been the subject of considerable de-bate during the last half-century and more Two are the most influential approachesthat have been introduced to describe the sense of morality in the Homeric poemsfirstly Dodds made the distinction between lsquoshame culturersquo and lsquoguilt culturersquosup1 andlater Adkins advocated the lsquocompetitiversquo and the lsquocooperativersquo valuessup2 In particularAdkins argued that the Greeks from Homer onwards consistently attributed supremevalue to those virtues of which success rather than intention is the criterion and onthis view competition would count far more than co-operationsup3

Adkinsrsquo views have generally been adopted in scholarly literature⁴ althoughthey have encountered some acute criticism As Lloyd-Jones (1987 308) notedAdkins approached Greek religion from a distance in the manner of an anthro-pologist his own ethical standpoint being that lsquoduty and responsibility are thecentral concepts of ethicsrsquo⁵

Adkins favours the study of values of societies as wholes and has also equatedthe system of values as a whole with the morality of the society⁶ Long has objectedto the interpretation of many Homeric contexts as if they reflected the values of anautonomous existent society outside the poems and argues that any inferencesdrawn purely from Homer about ethical language cannot be assumed as lsquohistoricalaxiomsrsquo⁷ Hence heroic aretē as depicted in the Homeric poems should not betaken to represent accurately the life and values of any actual society Objectionsto Adkinsrsquo approach have mainly concentrated on his denial of lsquoco-operative valuesrsquoand the centrality of his thesis to Homerrsquos ethics of the so-called lsquocompetitive

Dodds ndash Adkins ndash Adkins He also maintained that the most powerful terms of value continuedin the fifth century to be what they had been in Homeric times aretē agathos and kakos used ofmen and aischron used of actions that diminished aretē As well as in general philosophical discussions of Greek ethics cf Finkelber n Adkins Adkins Long

valuesrsquo⁸ His treatment assumes a rigidity of structure in the behaviour of certainGreek moral terms for example he seems to exaggerate the extent to which agathosapplies to qualities of courage and capacity⁹

Gagarin uses the term morality to designate a sense of consideration for oth-ers not closely related to rational self-interest but not either the status of puremorality based on this approach he distinguishes three categories of rulesthe legal rules between two or more full members of a community the religiousrules which influence the behaviour of a mortal toward a god and the moralrules which influence the behaviour toward another person who isunprotectedsup1⁰ In reply Adkins disputes the distinction of these three types ofrules on the grounds that the same vocabulary of evaluation (eg aretē timēhybris etc) is used for all kinds of relationshipssup1sup1

The purpose of this paper is not to examine all the issues that have beenraised but to focus on the significance of the Homeric values of aretē (bravery)and timē (honour) as central to the representation of the herowarrior Based onthe assumption that there is a continuity in the application of heroic aretē as afundamental value of success attached to the agathos from Homer until the fifthcenturysup1sup2 we shall explore the context in which aretē and the associated Greekvalues are employed in the funeral orations of late 5th and 4th centuries BC andthe extent to which these have functioned as an inspiration for the praise of thedead As will be shown there is a shift in the emphasis placed upon the warriorrsquosheroic aretē in the funeral orations of the democratic polis when addressing thewhole of the Athenian dēmos in contrast to the aristocratic connotations reflect-ed in the Homeric poems

Aretē as a Homeric value is closely related to the warriorrsquos greatness in bat-tle It is a power necessary to and valued by the society Aretē is far more impor-

Long ( ndash) explores the link between timē which is a competitive standard andthe unfavourable evaluation of certain kinds of aggressive or unco-operative behaviour as forthe use of the adjective agathos in Homer to make the most powerful commendation as Adkinsrightly argued Long notes that only the context will decide whether in the use of agathos is theevaluative or rather the descriptive aspect which prevails For other arguments from objection toAdkinsrsquo approach cf also Lloyd-Jones ndash Schofield ndash Williams ndash ndash Cairns ndash Zanker ndash Creed ( ndash) argued that there is a tendency to use the word in relation to thesequalities in certain contexts and questions whether in these cases agathos retains the automati-cally overriding force with which Adkins invests it Gagarin ndash Adkins ndash Lloyd-Jones ( ndash) criticizes Gagarinrsquos attempt to establisha via media between Adkins and himself as not successful Generally on the continuity and persistence of Greek values cf Walcot

126 Eleni Volonaki

tant than any other social value and is firmly attached to the individual agathosdenoting the significance of his achievements in war The adjective agathoswhich corresponds to the noun aretē indicates the basic qualification requiredin order that one may be recognized as a possessor of this value which is notjust success but the very fact of participating in the competitionsup1sup3

The agathos man has been traditionally characterized as the one who canmore effectively secure the stability safety and welfare of the social groupboth in war and in peace The Homeric warrior is driven to action by a needfor social validation The noble men are honoured by their people becausethey achieve fame ndash kleos The warriorrsquos greatness in battle ensures his contin-ued prestige during his life so that his identity persists among future genera-tions by the tale of his deeds In the Iliad the heroic excellence is prominentbut it is also explored in terms of its underlying bitterness In the Odyssey thepoet moves beyond the glamour of heroism to a standard level of human condi-tion where the hero succeeds only by accepting his own weaknesssup1⁴ Thus theheroism in the two epics is based upon the success and personal achievementwithin competition

Honour is generally assumed to be a competitive value However as Frin-kelber (1998 16) points out the only Homeric formula in which the word timēoccurs is ἔμμορε τιμῆς the use of this formula and its modifications in the Ho-meric corpus show that lsquothe idea of allotment of timē rather than gaining it in faircompetition was deeply rooted in the epic traditionrsquosup1⁵ In this view timē (honour)should be regarded as a distributive rather than a competitive value moreoverthe distribution of timē (honour) in Homer appears to follow a personrsquos socialstatus which is determined by the superiority in birth and wealth On theother hand the function of agathos and aretē in Homer to commend achieve-ment and status is consistent with a standard of appropriateness which con-demns excess and deficiencysup1⁶

On balance the limits between what scholars define as lsquocompetitiversquo lsquodis-tributiversquo and lsquoco-operativersquo values are not clear-cut Most scholars howeveragree that the herorsquos aretē and timē (honour) involve prowess in war statusbirth and observation of social conventions Achievement on the battlefielddoes play a fundamental role to those who possess aretē and timē even thoughit may not necessarily constitute qualification for possessing these values In ef-fect the values of aretē and timē in the Homeric poems are closely related to the

Finkelberg On the heroism as displayed and used in the two epics cf Clarke ndash Ibid n Long

Homeric Values in the Epitaphios Logos 127

aristocratic background of the Homeric hero and the society to which he be-longed In this context kleos (glory) andreia (bravery) auto-thusia (self-sacri-fice) and hysterophēmia (posthumous fame) are essential and natural qualitiesof the agathos hero and warrior who is being allotted prizes (timē) for his excel-lence and expertise

b The praise of the dead (egkōmion)in the funeral oration

In Homeric epic the thrēnos (lament) is sung by the bard over the herorsquos bodycreating a sort of contrasted mourning between the members of the familyand the crowdsup1⁷ The heroes of epic appear to play the primary role to the familymourning since they did not regard tears as incompatible to their virility as war-riors Appeals for pity were frequent in the aristocratic epitaphs celebrating awarrior A typical example of epic lamentation comes from Iliad 23 whereAchilles is mourning in tears over the dead body of his friend Patroclus The glo-rious complement to the herorsquos lamentation is the organization of the funeralgames in respect for the dead friend In honour of Patroclus Achilles institutesthe following games the chariot-race the fight of the crestus the wrestling thefootrace the single combat the discus the shooting with arrows and darting thejavelin The funeral games essentially function as a sort of diversion from griefcelebrating Patroclusrsquo life Furthermore the funeral games of Patroclus representone of the most significant values of Greek aristocratic life individual honour

The original place of the funeral oration should be assigned between the twopoles of the lament and the eulogy which in aristocratic society expressed the rela-tionship between the living and the dead The classical city abandoned the concep-tion of mourning and the funeral oration excludes the lamentation (thrēnos) of epicand lyric poetry since it involves the relationship between a community ndashthe dem-ocratic polisndash and its dead and through these dead its connection with its presentand its pastsup1⁸ The funeral oration constitutes a eulogy containing the elements ofpraise (egkōmion) exhortation (parainesis) and consolation (paramythia) The pref-erence of praise over lamentation is stated in Platorsquos Menexenus 248c

Loraux Ibid ndash in the classical period thrēnos is regarded as simply a synonym of gōos thegeneral term for any kind of lamentation

128 Eleni Volonaki

τὰ μὲν γὰρ ἡμέτερα τελευτὴν ἤδη ἕξει ἥπερ καλλίστη γίγνεται ἀνθρώποις ὥστε πρέπει αὐτὰμᾶλλον κοσμεῖν ἢ θρηνεῖν

The end of our lives will be very noble for mankind and praise will be more appropriate thanlamentationsup1⁹

In the classical period the Athenian city left room for womenrsquos lamentationsince weeping was womenrsquos lot at the time while it chose a man to deliverthe praise of the men that it was buryingsup2⁰ As a purely military and politicalspeech the funeral oration reflected only male values and therefore rejectedthe thrēnos and any appeals for pity The democratic city was identified withits army and was able to accept the death of its men with greater peacefulnessHowever the official orator was inspired by the epic tradition so that he was me-diating in the communityrsquos relationship with its deadsup2sup1

All funeral orations reflect a democratic reading of Athenian history inHomerrsquos world funeral ceremonies were restricted to the individual aristocratbut in democratic Athens they were anonymous and collective since they repre-sented ordinary Athenian soldiers (particularly hoplites) and not their leadersThe notion of the lsquoposthumous glory and memory of the namersquo of the dead isthe most substantial in the funeral oration dominated by the rule of anonymityIn the epitaphioi the citizens are given no other name than that of Athenians anda collective glory A gap can be noticed between the catalogue of the dead andthe funeral oration between the hymn and the eulogy the funeral or heroic la-ment two dimensions coexist in the national funeral oration and should beviewed as such the religious and the political contextsup2sup2

Funeral speeches reviewed the achievements of the mythical and historicalpast of the city of Athens setting thus an example of virtue in political life Aspeaker on a burial ceremony is encouraged to say something significant and

The translation of all cited passages is based on Herrman with minor adjustments The funeral orations (epitaphioi) were delivered as part of a state burial ceremony Thucy-dides in his introduction to Periclesrsquo funeral oration () informs us of this traditional cus-tom which was presumably celebrated annually whenever there were Athenian war-dead tobury According to Thucydides and the ceremony was dated in the winter atime most appropriate for the Athenians to gather and bury their dead after the battle opera-tions had ended and the dead bodies had been brought to Athens The ceremony consisted offour stages the prothesis where the remains of the dead bodies were brought in the coffinsone for each of the ten Athenian tribes the ekphora a formal procession to the public cemeterynamed Kerameikos the burial at the demosion sēma and finally the funeral oration delivered bya chosen distinguished orator Loraux Hardwick ndash Loraux


original On the other hand he needs to satisfy audience expectations which in-volve the traditional cultural ideals such as patriotism freedom under the lawself-confidence and public democratic debatesup2sup3 All surviving speeches display acommon structure and later rhetoricians refer to these same typical elements forfuneral orations In the proem the speaker explains that his words are inade-quate to the occasion The epainos or ldquopraiserdquo section follows which includedstandard mythological and historical exploits one of which was the praise ofthe ancestors and their accomplishments In the final section the speakershould give some consolation to the relatives of the dead

The orations did not aim to inform but to apply common ideals values andattitudes of the citizens To that end they sought to resolve the conflict between acultural ideal of Panhellenic altruism and the Athenian superiority at any cost(philonikia) or desire for honour (philotimia)sup2⁴ The claims to Athenian primacyand uniqueness are frequent in the funeral orations with a hyperbolic andself-praise rhetorical emphasis transforming Athenian aggression into nobleself-sacrifice In this context the orators praise aretē and prowess of the deadAthenian soldiers in such a way that the purely historical events may be distort-ed or deliberately misinterpretedsup2⁵

c Moral values in the epitaphioi

Among the surviving epitaphioi each one is distinctive despite all the traditionalelements of structure each one serves its own goal addressing a differentaudiencesup2⁶ Moreover the epitaphioi cannot be included in one and the samegroup since they were not all delivered at a public burial nor are they alldated to the same period The central themes of all speeches are lsquonoble deathrsquoand the lsquofreedomrsquo of Greece due to the achievements of the ancestors and thedead in specific battles The achievements derived from aretē and all relevantqualities of the Athenian warriors as well as of their ancestors Our emphasiswill be placed upon these qualities and the distinctive skills that contributedto their own private but also to the common freedom and welfare (eudaimonia)

Cf Kennedy ndash Walters Ibid ndash The tone of funeral orations is both educative and deliberative (symbouleutic) since the or-ators attempt to influence public opinion for resistance and continuation of the war

130 Eleni Volonaki

d Thucydides Periclesrsquo Epitaphios 234ndash46

Thucydidesrsquo epitaphios was a reworking of the funeral oration delivered by Peri-cles at the end of the first year of the Peloponnesian war in 431sup2⁷ It had a specificpolitical goal to glorify the Athenian democracy in the time of Pericles The epai-nos begins with praise of the progonoi (ancestors) by asserting

ἄρξομαι δὲ ἀπὸ τῶν προγόνων πρῶτον δίκαιον γὰρ αὐτοῖς καὶ πρέπον δὲ ἅμα ἐν τῷ τοιῷδετὴν τιμὴν ταύτην τῆς μνήμης δίδοσθαι τὴν γὰρ χώραν οἱ αὐτοὶ αἰεὶ οἰκοῦντες διαδοχῇ τῶνἐπιγιγνομένων μέχρι τοῦδε ἐλευθέραν δι᾽ ἀρετὴν παρέδοσαν (2361)

I shall begin with our ancestors it is both just and appropriate that they should have the hon-our of the first reference on an occasion like the present They dwelt in the country withoutbreak in the succession from generation to generation and it is because of their excellencethat the state we have inherited is free

The ancestors deserve to be honoured through the funeral oration Their virtue asexcellence has guaranteed freedom for later generations Here the term aretēdoes not explicitly denote the military excellence and bravery of the ancestorsbut it does imply that their efforts on the battlefield established freedom forthat time and the future The notion of freedom in Thucydides is closely relatedto happiness and valour (2434)sup2⁸

The real subject of the praise in Periclesrsquo epitaphios is the Athenian way oflife without offering any specific examplessup2⁹ However Thucydides later exem-plifies their audacity performance of duty and feeling of shame at the momentof fighting as virtues of all Athenian warriors (2431) Aretē is also designated asthe criterion of electing public officials in particular their good deeds (2371ἔχων γέ τι ἀγαθὸν δρᾶσαι τὴν πόλιν) It becomes obvious that aretē in Thucydidesis assigned with menrsquos achievements and needs to be proved in practice either inwar or in peace

Thucydides () explains in the introduction to his history that the speeches are recon-structed on the basis of probability with an attempt to hold as closely as possible to what wasactually said He also describes how difficult it was for him to remember exactly what was saidand therefore needed to talk to witnesses about the speeches Further on the idea of freedom and its use in Thucydides cf Hornblower Pericles avoids referring to the achievements of the ancestors since BC had been a year ofinvasion and destruction the first year of the war was marked by lack of military and political suc-cess Therefore any comparison between the past and the present would open negative reactionsand criticism The remarkable rhetorical technique of Pericles lies in the way he blends the pastand the present in a lsquotimeless encomium of the cityrsquo the city of Athens is praised as a city worthdying for On the historical context of Thucydidesrsquo funeral oration see Bosworth


Orators tend to suggest that their praise is distinct in particular from that ofthe poets Thucydides rejects the need for a poetic eulogy of Athens on thegrounds that poets exaggerate and distort the truth

καὶ οὐδὲν προσδεόμενοι οὔτε Ὁμήρου ἐπαινέτου οὔτε ὅστις ἔπεσι μὲν τὸ αὐτίκα τέρψει τῶνδ᾽ ἔργων τὴν ὑπόνοιαν ἡ ἀλήθεια βλάψει ἀλλὰ πᾶσαν μὲν θάλασσαν καὶ γῆν ἐσβατὸν τῇ ἡμ-ετέρᾳ τόλμῃ καταναγκάσαντες γενέσθαι πανταχοῦ δὲ μνημεῖα κακῶν τε κἀγαθῶν ἀίδιαξυγκατοικίσαντες (2414)

We shall not need the praises of Homer or of any other rhapsodist whose poetry may pleasefor the moment but the truth of action will work against his intention We have made all of thesea and the earth accessible for our daring and we have established jointly everlasting memo-rials to our harmful and good deeds

The dead do not need the Homeric praise but their own fights have left eternalmemorials to their deedssup3⁰ The contrast here indicates that prizes for poeticcompetitions were designed for the immediate moment whereas Thucydidesrsquowork is permanent but superficially unpleasingsup3sup1 Elsewhere Thucydides alsomakes a distinction between literary genres implying for example that he is nei-ther a poet nor a logographer (1212) or that his work is not to be recited becausesuch a recitation might have been a joyless occasion (1224)sup3sup2 In this contextThucydides may not wish to devalue the Homeric praise but drawing on its re-ception as was commonly and widely accepted he rather uses it to describehis own work Thus his own praise is solely based upon historical deeds andachievements either bad or good which reveal the truth By the mid-fifth centuryHomeric eulogy has been connected with a joyful recitation giving only pleas-ure There is a shift in the emphasis of the praise by Thucydides which doesnot exaggerate for the readersrsquo pleasure but employs proofs for its credibility

καὶ τὴν εὐλογίαν ἅμα ἐφ᾽ οἷς νῦν λέγω φανερὰν σημείοις καθιστάς (2421)

The funeral for the men over whom I am now speaking should be by proofs manifestly estab-lished

On the issue whether this downgrading of Homer should be attributed to Pericles or to Thu-cydides cf Loraux Hornblower In Thucydides says that his aim is purely intellectual and that he does not intend toimprove his readers by making them morally better people like doctors who wish to make lsquotheirpatients betterrsquo Here the distinction does not involve literary genres but rather scientific ap-proaches to people

132 Eleni Volonaki

Noble death rather than a disgraceful life is a Homeric ideal reflected in thepraise of Thucydidesrsquo funeral oration Their death is presented to have occurredat a moment of glory and not fear

καὶ ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ ἀμύνεσθαι καὶ παθεῖν μᾶλλον ἡγησάμενοι ἢ [τὸ] ἐνδόντες σῴζεσθαι τὸ μὲναἰσχρὸν τοῦ λόγου ἔφυγον τὸ δ᾽ ἔργον τῷ σώματι ὑπέμειναν καὶ δι᾽ ἐλαχίστου καιροῦτύχης ἅμα ἀκμῇ τῆς δόξης μᾶλλον ἢ τοῦ δέους ἀπηλλάγησαν (2424)

Since they thought that fighting and suffering were more appropriate than yielding and sur-viving they avoided any shameful talk with their act of physical resistance and in an instanceat the height of their fortune they passed away from the scene not of their fear but of theirglory

Thucydides also argues that death occurring at a moment of patriotism andstrength is to be preferred than humiliation which follows cowardice

ἀλγεινοτέρα γὰρ ἀνδρί γε φρόνημα ἔχοντι ἡ μετὰ τοῦ [ἐν τῷ] μαλακισθῆναι κάκωσις ἢ ὁ μετὰῥώμης καὶ κοινῆς ἐλπίδος ἅμα γιγνόμενος ἀναίσθητος θάνατος (2436)

And surely to a man of spirit the degradation of cowardice must be considerably more pain-ful than the unfelt death striking him in the midst of his strength and patriotismsup3sup3

Immortal glory for the dead is a Homeric idea (hysterophēmia) which is emphati-cally used in the funeral oration It is striking that Thucydides refers to the com-mon glory which will be eternally remembered upon every occasion (2432) Be-cause they gave their lives for the common good they received ageless praiseindividually and a tomb most distinctive They donrsquot rest there instead theirglory eternally awaits any occasion for speech or action that may arise Moreoverthe glory of the dead constitutes a relief for the living (2444)

Periclesrsquo funeral oration closes with the identification of aretē as the braveryshown by excellent men and honoured by prizes ἆθλα γὰρ οἷς κεῖται ἀρετῆς μέ-γιστα τοῖς δὲ καὶ ἄνδρες ἄριστοι πολιτεύουσιν (2461) The conception of couragein the Periclean funeral oration is closely tied to Athenian democratic ideologyThucydides emphasizes that lsquoAthenian courage was grounded in rational delib-erationrsquo (2403)sup3⁴ As has been shown virtue has been presented by Thucydidesmainly as a lsquocompetitiversquo value according to Adkinsrsquo terminology though it in-volves the achievements of the whole group of warriors rather than of eachhero individually

For a discussion on the young age of the dead cf Hornblower ndash For the as-sociation of a noble and good death with happiness (eudaimonia) in life see Th Herrman


e Gorgiasrsquo Epitaphios

During the Peloponnesian War another funeral oration was composed by Gor-gias the famous sophist from Leontini (480ndash380 BC) which survives only infragments In the best preserved fragment of the funeral oration Gorgias de-scribes aretē as divine whereas the mortality of the dead as human

οὗτοι γὰρ ἐκέκτηντο ἔνθεον μὲν τὴν ἀρετήν ἀνθρώπινον δὲ τὸ θνητόν πολλὰ μὲν δὴ τὸ πρᾶονἐπιεικὲς τοῦ αὐθάδους δικαίου προκρίνοντεςhellip (DK86 B6)

In this funeral oration which was most probably written as a kind of demonstra-tion speech for students of rhetoricsup3⁵ the praise of the dead is exaggerated tosuch an extent that they are even deified Moreover the deification of theiraretē implies an excellence of achievements

Further below in the same fragment the epainos of the dead refers to theirnoble death and the sacrifice of their lives in order to benefit their country proofof their courage is that they fought against greater numbers of the enemy andendured The honourable behaviour of the dead is specified as respect towardsthe gods care for their parents and justice towards their fellow citizens Such aconduct resulted into their immortality τοιγαροῦν αὐτῶν ἀποθανόντων ὁ πόθοςοὐ συναπέθανεν ἀλλrsquo ἀθάνατος οὐκ ἐν ἀθανάτοις σώμασι ᾖ οὐ ζώντων

The emphasis placed upon their excellent behaviour both in private andpublic life is intended to offer an exemplary way of political life Thus thedead deserve the honour and praise of all the living in effect the citizens areencouraged to imitate their choice and virtue As can be seen moral and civicvalues are here interrelated for the educational purposes of a reading audience

f Lysias 2 Epitaphios for those who diedassisting the Corinthians

The epitaphios attributed to Lysias was composed during the Corinthian war of 395ndash387 for those who died lsquoassisting the Corinthiansrsquo Lysiasrsquo epitaphios presents a cleardivergence from the rest of the corpus and therefore its authorship has been con-siderably doubtedsup3⁶ Lysias however would most likely be the one to have such

It is unlikely that Gorgias actually delivered this funeral oration since he was not an Athe-nian citizen UsherNajock ndash

134 Eleni Volonaki

good reasons for lsquohighlighting the contribution played by xenoi (foreigners) in thedemocratic counter-revolution of 4032 (Lys 266)rsquosup3⁷ Moreover the funeral orationmay seem the sort of patriotic speech Lysias would be expected to writesup3⁸ Lysiashimself could not have delivered the speech since he was not an Athenian citizenand therefore this specific funeral oration must have been designed as a modelto be used for rhetorical training addressing in any case a reading audiencesup3⁹

Lysiasrsquo epainos is taken almost completely from the genos and extends oversixty sections Such a lengthy mythical-historical narrative is often considered tobe the most typical and important part of classical funeral orations⁴⁰ Lysias devel-ops the epainos chronologically according to three broad divisions the ancestors(sectsect 3ndash19) their descendants (sectsect 20ndash66) and those now being buried (sectsect 67ndash70)

In the opening of the speech Lysias states that the virtues as denoting theachievements of the dead are celebrated by the living who are mourning fortheir sufferings (22 πανταχῇ δὲ καὶ παρὰ πᾶσιν ἀνθρώποις οἱ τὰ αὑτῶνπενθοῦντες κακὰ τὰς τούτων ἀρετὰς ὑμνοῦσι) The verb hymnein (celebrate) at-tributes a heroic tone since it implies a connection with hero-cult⁴sup1 The heroicelement of the praise is complemented with the didactic purpose of the funeraloration the funeral practice consists of lsquothe celebration of the dead in songsmaking speeches at memorials for the brave men honouring the dead atthese sorts of occasions and teaching the living the deeds of the deadrsquo (23)⁴sup2In this educational context virtue is also associated with sōphrosynē (discretion)and opportunity to exercise good judgement while extending a great deal of self-control and respect to all people (257) The aretē of the dead is also connectedwith the idea of competitiveness which here serves to emphasize the limitation

Todd ndash Cf Kahn Modern scholars view Lysiasrsquo epitaphios as a typical funeral oration of the period cf Ziol-kowski ndash Herrman ndash Todd ndash Loraux ndash Cf Ziolkowski ndash Todd ( ) refers to the stereotype connected with hero-cult ὑμνοῦνται δὲ ὡςἀθάνατοι διὰ τὴν ἀρετήν (lsquothey are praised like immortals on account of their braveryrsquo) On paideusis playing an important role in epitaphioi and predicated not just of those beingburied but also of their ancestors cf ibid For the educative role of the epitaphioi cf also ἄνδρες δὲ γενόμενοι τήν τε ἐκείνων δόξαν διασώσαντες καὶ τὴν αὑτῶν ἀρετὴν ἐπιδείξαντες(lsquothese men are to be envied both in their life and in death because they were schooled in thegood qualities of their ancestors and as adults they preserved the glory of those generations anddisplayed their own virtuersquo)


of Athenian military action⁴sup3 In effect aretē has been introduced as a heroiccompetitive value rhetorically employed for educative purposes

Aretē explicitly denotes the bravery shown on the battlefield within a patrioticcontext ἄνδρες δ᾽ ἀγαθοὶ γενόμενοι καὶ τῶν μὲν σωμάτων ἀφειδήσαντες ὑπὲρ δὲ τῆςἀρετῆς οὐ φιλοψυχήσαντες (225 lsquothey proved to be brave without sparing their livesand they did not choose life over virtuersquo)⁴⁴ Aretē is also associated with freedomand as such is preferable to enslavement accompanied by reproach and wealth(233) The exaggeration that the dead exceeded their contemporaries or eventheir ancestors in virtue is consistent with the heroic representation of the warriorsand their glorious self-sacrifice (240) It is striking that virtue as bravery is identifiedwith fatherland itself for which the warriors fought and died (266) from such a dis-play of virtue the living can benefit and enjoy their life (274)

The choice of a glorious and immortal death is a common theme in funeralorations and is also used by Lysias to portray the bravery and virtue of the dead(223) As Loraux (1986 98ndash 118) argued it is characteristic of funeral speeches topraise not the lives of the citizens but their choice of death The concept of thelsquobeautiful deathrsquo of the heroic warrior is a Homeric ideal for example in Iliad 22the Greeks admire the physical beauty of the dead Hector even as they take turnsto disfigure it Moreover the Homeric hero chooses to die in honour of his home-land and comrades rather than live in shame⁴⁵ An extension of this concept isthe choice of freedom as consequent to the choice of death as Lysias states theancestral virtue was proved by the choice of a death with freedom rather than alife with slavery (262) On this view the funeral oration distances from the Ho-meric ideal of a beautiful death to emphasize the freedom of the community acity-state and the whole of Greece

g Platorsquos Menexenus 234andash249d

Socrates presents another funeral oration by Aspasia the well-known mistress ofPericles which has been incorporated in Platorsquos dialogue Menexenus the historicaldetail in the speech indicates that it was written after the Corinthian war and Lysiasrsquo

Ibid cf Lys ἀλλ᾽ ἐκείνοις μὲν ἀντὶ τῆς ἀσεβείας τὴν ἑαυτῶν ἀρετὴν ἐπεδείξαντοαὐτοὶ δὲ λαβόντες τὰ ἆθλα ὧνπερ ἕνεκα ἀφίκοντο (lsquoThey demonstrated to them their own virtuein place of impiety They themselves took the prizes for which they had comersquo) For showing bravery on the battlefield cf also on the importance of aretē for makingthe memory immortal cf for the rhetoric on aretē as a whole cf For Hectorrsquos views on the performance of duty even if this implies self-sacrifice cfIl ndash

136 Eleni Volonaki

funeral oration in 386 BC The ascription to Aspasia establishes a connection be-tween Platorsquos Menexenus and the famous Periclean funeral oration by Thucydides

Scholars differ in their interpretation of the dialogue⁴⁶ Many parallels canbe observed between Platorsquos and Thucydidesrsquo orations such as the antithesisof word and deed (logos and ergon) the tradition of the funeral oration andthe emphasis placed upon the paideia and politeia⁴⁷ There are however differ-ences between the two orations concerning the individual and collective ideal ofvirtue the vocabulary the tone and the approach of the audience⁴⁸ Despite thepolemic relationship between the two orations the Menexenus can be seen as analternative and an answer to the Periclean oration in two aspects the rhetoricand the politics It offers an analysis of the faults of rhetoric by recognizingthe falsehood of the idealized portrayal of Athens which in effect becomes ob-ject of parody in Socratesrsquo funeral oration⁴⁹ Thus Plato takes the opportunity todemonstrate how a funeral oration should be written⁵⁰ In terms of politics thecontrast between the two figures Pericles and Socrates is obvious the formerrepresents the prestige of the Athenian empire and naval power whereas the lat-ter reflects the ideals of virtue (Socratic aretē) and justice Platorsquos target is theconstruction of Pericles as a symbol and he criticizes Thucydidesrsquo portrayaland the Athenian practice particularly in the funeral oration to exemplify Peri-cles his leadership and his policy⁵sup1 Thus the appeals to the traditions of Athe-nian history are presented to offer a judgement against Periclesrsquo imperial policy

Platorsquos epainos (239a6ndash246b2) is treated in a long section that included the sto-ries of the mythical background and a survey of Athenian history from the Persianwars down to the Peace of Antalcidas in 387 BC Plato makes no distinction betweenthe deeds of the present dead and the deeds of their ancestors He praises the deadfor their virtue as they set an example to imitate in the later battles (240d) whichreflects the didactic purpose of the funeral oration They are more specifically prais-

Some view the speech as an antagonistic response to Thucydidesrsquo idealized view of Atheniandemocracy under Pericleswhereas others see it as a sort of parody that adopts an ironic tone onLysiasrsquo epitaphios For a detailed discussion of scholarly views cf Herrman ndash For an analysis of these parallels cf Kahn ndash Monoson ndash Cf Salkever ndash Cf Coventry ndash Plato praises the city of Athens as it should be praised but departures from historical accu-racy can be observed A funeral oration is certainly not a work of historical research and there-fore the historical distortions especially in details such as the role of Sparta to the Persian Warsand the supposed alliance between Athens and Sparta against Persia in the Corinthian Warshould not be looked for further analysis and explanation cf Kahn Salkever ndash Cf Monoson ndash


ed for their nobility of birth upbringing and education and their deeds (237a)Virtueis here associated with education noble nature and freedom (239andashb) as well assōphrosynē (243a lsquomoderationrsquo) Plato identifies military with civic aretē by praisingthe virtue of the warriors as causing not only the victory but also the glory and goodreputation of the city (243cndashd) The concept of justice co-existing with virtue isstressed by Plato and is consistent with his philosophical approach of aretē as a sys-tem of values that sets limitations for the common good (247a)

The choice of a glorious death rather than a shameful life is also stressed inPlatorsquos Menexenus but focuses upon the consequences for the relatives friendsand citizens (246d)⁵sup2 it is striking however that the dead are described as braveand glorious but not immortal (247d)⁵sup3

Plato refers to funeral games as a part of the funeral together with the per-formance of the oration recalling the Homeric funeral games in honour of Patro-clus (Iliad 23) and enhancing the competitive nature of moral values praised forthe dead πρὸς δὲ τούτοις ἀγῶνας γυμνικοὺς καὶ ἱππικοὺς τιθεῖσα καὶ μουσικῆςπάσης καὶ ἀτεχνῶς τῶν μὲν τελευτησάντων ἐν κληρονόμου καὶ ὑέος (249b lsquoIn ad-dition the city enacts competitions in gymnastics horses and all sorts ofmusicrsquo)⁵⁴

h Demosthenes 60 Epitaphios

In 338 Demosthenes was chosen by the Athenians to deliver the funeral orationover those Athenians who had died fighting Philip II at the Battle at Chaeronea⁵⁵Despite the dispute about the authenticity of the funeral speech it cannot be dis-carded as a non-genuine work of Demosthenes on grounds of style andstructure⁵⁶ The epitaphios had to deal with a terrible defeat which involvedan enemy who was not Greek and signalled the beginning of the end for the in-dependent Greek city-states of the classical periods In this context the epainosof the dead is not limited to their achievements on the battlefield but expands totheir virtue in life Thus aretē is presented both as a co-operative value attachedto birth education way of life and justice (603) and as a competitive value tiedto manhood bravery self-sacrifice courage and success (6017ndash 18) The co-exis-

On the theme of a lsquoglorious deathrsquo cf above the discussion on the epitaphios attributed to Ly-sias For the immortality of the dead that compasses the living parents cf Lys Cf Th D Plu Dem For a detailed analysis of the authenticity of Demosthenes cf Worthington ndash

138 Eleni Volonaki

tence of excellence and justice is reflected in the praise of the ancestors as καλοῖςκἀγαθοῖς καὶ δικαιοτάτοις εἶναι (607)

Demosthenes departs from the tradition outlined in the previously describedspeeches by praising the men as children and adults before their service as sol-diers (6015ndash24) we can thus deduct the topoi paideia and epitedeusis Sōphro-synē (moderation) was the primary focus in the education of young Athenians⁵⁷and within this context Demosthenesrsquo definition of complete virtue is placedconsisting first of learning and then of bravery (6017) In order to preventfrom any bad feelings Demosthenes states that all those who die in battlehave no share in defeat but should all equally share in victory (6019) and accus-es the Theban commanders for their performance in the battle-field (6018 22)The epainos may be directed upon the present rather than the historical pastof the Athenians but Demosthenes connects the eulogy for both the ancestorsand the dead by depicting the latter related to their ancestors by birth (6012)Demosthenesrsquo epitaphios contains the sad immediacy of the recent defeat anda gap opens between the legendary past and the present⁵⁸

It is striking that Demosthenes states in the beginning of his funeral speechthat he will avoid using the myth or heroic element in his praise of the achieve-ments of the dead (609)

ἃ δὲ τῇ μὲν ἀξίᾳ τῶν ἔργων οὐδέν ἐστι τούτων ἐλάττω τῷ δ᾽ ὑπογυώτερ᾽ εἶναι τοῖς χρόνοιςοὔπω μεμυθολόγηται οὐδ᾽ εἰς τὴν ἡρωϊκὴν ἐπανῆκται τάξιν ταῦτ᾽ ἤδη λέξω

Now I shall speak of other achievements in no way inferior to those earlier deeds in worththough they have not yet been shaped into myth or elevated to the heroic rank as they aremore recent

However at a later point of his speech Demosthenes exemplifies the qualities ofcourage and self-sacrifice through mythical paradigms in particular he men-tions Acamas who had sailed for Troy for the sake of his mother Aethra(6029) Aethra is mentioned in Il 3144 but the rest of the story is not Homeric⁵⁹The distance from the Homeric tradition may reflect Demostenesrsquo own differen-tiation from earlier versions of the myth though his use of courage and self-sac-rifice for the depiction of the dead obviously derives from the heroic code

Aeschin ndash cf Herrman Loraux This Acamas is unknown to Homer though he mentions two other individuals of the samename It was later myths that told of the rescue of Aethra after the fall of Troy by her two grand-sons not sons Acamas and Demophon


A common place in the funeral oration is the freedom of the whole of Greeceas an achievement of the virtue of the dead⁶⁰ Demosthenes also stresses thistheme by identifying the virtue of the dead with the very life of Greece (6023)The reference to individual and common achievements is enhanced by the rhet-oric of common freedom as a kind of motivation for the choice of death (6028)

δεινὸν οὖν ἡγοῦντο τὴν ἐκείνου προδοῦναι προαίρεσιν καὶ τεθνάναι μᾶλλον ᾑροῦνθ᾽ ἢ κατα-λυομένης ταύτης παρὰ τοῖς Ἕλλησιν ζῆν φιλοψυχήσαντες

They regarded it therefore as a dreadful thing to betray the principles of that ancestor andpreferred to be dead rather than through love of life to survive among the Greeks with thisequality lost

Another common rhetorical theme in funeral orations is the choice of death aglorious good noble or just death⁶sup1 Demosthenes in particular praises nobledeath over disgraceful life (6026 καὶ θάνατον καλὸν εἵλοντο μᾶλλον ἢ βίοναἰσχρόν) Shame is an important quality closely tied with life as opposed to no-bility and death⁶sup2 Demosthenes underlines the factors that have contributed tothe choice of a noble death birth education habituation to high standards ofconduct and the underlying principles of the Athenian form of government(6027 ἃ μὲν οὖν κοινῇ πᾶσιν ὑπῆρχεν τοῖσδε τοῖς ἀνδράσιν εἰς τὸ καλῶς ἐθέλεινἀποθνῄσκειν εἴρηται γένος παιδεία χρηστῶν ἐπιτηδευμάτων συνήθεια τῆςὅλης πολιτείας ὑπόθεσις) Aristocratic background has thus been merged withthe civic values of Athenian democratic ideology to praise death

Two common themes closely associated with the good death in Homeric po-etry and funeral orations are the superiority of immortal glory over physicaldeath (6027) and the hysterophēmia brought upon the families of the dead to-gether with relief and happiness (6035ndash36)

In conclusion Demosthenes applies certain ideas and terminology for aretē no-bility shame immortality and glory from an aristocratic point of view he alsopraises the civic values of Athenian democratic ideology such as freedom and com-mon good moderation with education as a prerequisite to the actual display of brav-ery

cf D Lys Hyp cf Th Lys Pl Mxd This view is further reflected in the speakerrsquos statement that the dead considered either a lifeworthy of their heritage or a noble death ()

140 Eleni Volonaki

i Hypereides 6 Epitaphios fr 1b 1ndash43

Hypereidesrsquo epitaphios in the form in which it has been transmitted to us⁶sup3 wasdelivered at a burial ceremony in 322 BC at the end of the first season of the so-called Lamian war This war was largely successful for the Greeks though thegeneral Leosthenes a friend of Hypereides was killed The speech was presentedafter the initial victory in Boeotia the siege at Lamia and the defeat of Leonnatus(612ndash 14) Later that year the Athenian fleet suffered two major losses and thearmy was defeated soon afterwards The battle was a complete failure for theGreeks More than one thousand Athenians died and two thousand were takenhostage the rest of the Greeks also suffered losses As a result the Athenianshad to submit to Macedonian terms whereas Hypereides and Demosthenesthe leading opponents of Macedonian involvement in Greek affairs were con-demned to death by the Athenian dēmos⁶⁴ Hypereidesrsquo funeral oration high-lights the Athenian policy of resistance to Macedon⁶⁵

Hypereides gives more details about the occasion of death than the earlierspeakers He underlines that Leosthenes deserves more praise than his predeces-sors whereas earlier epitaphioi praise the deeds of the dead as equivalent tothose of their ancestors⁶⁶ Hypereides brings an innovation to the traditionalthemes and structure of the epitaphioi logoi by inserting a picture of thepresent⁶⁷ He emphasizes the virtues of the Athenians of the present wishingprobably to encourage and mobilize them to fight though the war was at theend unsuccessful

Despite the innovation in content and structure of his funeral oration Hy-pereides is employing aristocratic terms to describe the deeds of the fallen sol-diers such as megaloprepeia (1 οὔτε ἄνδρας ἀμείνους τῶν τετελευτηκότωνοὔτε πράξεις μεγαλοπρεπεστέρας) ndash a virtue that motivated Athenian aristocratsto participate in liturgies⁶⁸ Aretē is generally applied in the speech to describe

Hypereidesrsquo delivery of the funeral oration is attested by Diodorus of Sicily () PsPlu-tarch (Decem Oratorum Vitae f) and PsLonginus (De Subl) cf Herrman For details about the arrest and death of Demosthenes and Hypereides cf Plu Phoc Plu Dem ndash Herrman A description of the war in which the men commemorated in the epitaphios died is uncom-mon in funeral speeches let alone the focus so exclusively on one person For the unusual el-ement of narrative cf Ziolkowski Herrman Loraux Herrman


purely military excellence and is used in the plural to denote specific virtuousaccomplishments on the battlefield (3)

ἄξιον δέ ἐστιν ἐπαινεῖν τὴν μὲν πόλιν ἡμῶν τῆς προαιρέσεως ἕνεκεν τὸ προελέσθαι ὅμοια καὶἔτι σεμνότερα καὶ καλλίω τῶν πρότερον αὐτῇ πεπραγμένων τοὺς δὲ τετελευτηκότας τῆς ἀν-δρείας τῆς ἐν τῷ πολέμῳ τὸ μὴ καταισχῦναι τὰς τῶν προγόνων ἀρετάς

Our city is worthy of praise for the choice it made a policy that suited and even surpassed theproud and noble deeds it accomplished in the past the dead men deserve praise for theircourage in battle courage that did not disgrace the valour of their ancestors

Similarly to the other funeral orations⁶⁹ Hypereides pairs intellectual ability andmartial courage As Loraux (1986 109ndash 10) has argued Hypereides here followsa time-honoured definition of aretē and this kind of narrow conception may be areaction against current trends in civic funeral orations in which aretē is equa-ted with other qualities more importantly sōphrosynē (lsquomoderationrsquo) Hyper-eides however later states that the soldiers as children have learned qualitiessuch as sōphrosynē and dikaiosynē (lsquojusticersquo) and when they went to war theydemonstrated their military skill (28 τότε μὲν γὰρ παῖδες ὄντες ἄφρονες ἦσαννῦν δ᾽ ἄνδρες ἀγαθοὶ γεγόνασιν)⁷⁰ Education (paideia) was essential to the up-bringing of the soldiers in order to demonstrate their military excellence andbravery in war⁷sup1 A common honourific phrase describing soldiersrsquo death in fu-neral orations and other patriotic literature is employed here (28) as well as insect8 (ἵνα ἄνδρες ἀγαθοὶ γένωνται) Hypereides contrasts the heroic death of the sol-diers with their childhood and presents their death on the battlefield as the de-cisive moment of their adulthood⁷sup2

For the praise of victory Hypereides uses the verb epainein whereas for thepraise of the virtue of Leosthenes and his soldiers he uses the verb egkōmiazeinThe repeated usage of egkōmion in Hypereidesrsquo funeral oration may reflect thedevelopment of the prose genre of egkōmia praising contemporary individualsand in this case Leosthenes⁷sup3

The slogan lsquofreedom for the Greeksrsquo ndasha commonplace in the funeral orationmdashdepicts the Greek alliance as a kind of reincarnation of the Greek unification

Th D For the use of aretē to denote military excellence and echo the description of the Marathonbattle cf Hyp For the interest in the education of the soldiers as reflecting contemporary institutional re-forms in mid-fourth century Athens such as the ephēbeia cf Herrman Ibid According to Arist Rh bndash the distinction between the two terms corresponds to thecontrast between virtue (epainos) and accomplishment (egkōmion) cf Herrman ndash

142 Eleni Volonaki

against the Persians in 480479 BC (16 οἳ τὰς ἑαυτῶν ψυχὰς ἔδωκαν ὑπὲρ τῆς τῶνἙλλήνων ἐλευθερίας) The choice of death is presented as associated with theconcept of freedom (24 οἵτινες θνητοῦ σώματος ἀθάνατον δόξαν ἐκτήσαντο καὶδιὰ τὴν ἰδίαν ἀρετὴν τὴν κοινὴν ἐλευθερίαν τοῖς Ἕλλησιν ἐβεβαίωσαν)This pas-sage distinguishes the soldiers from the Athenian citizens whereas in sect5 (τοῖςδὲ ἰδίοις κινδύνοις καὶ δαπάναις κοινὴν ἄδειαν τοῖς Ἕλλησιν παρασκευάζουσα)and in sect19 (καὶ τὴν μὲν ἐλευθερίαν εἰς τὸ κοινὸν πᾶσιν κατέθεσαν) a distinctionis made between Athens as a collective whole and the rest of Greece Immortality(27) and glory (42) are themes closely tied with the choice of death

A new element in Hypereidesrsquo approach of aretē is the andragathia (29 μνημο-νευτοὺς διὰ ἀνδραγαθίαν γεγονέναι 40 ὑπερβαλλούσης δὲ ἀρετῆς καὶ ἀνδραγαθίαςτῆς ἐν τοῖς κινδύνοις) In his discussion of the development of the concept of andra-gathia in the late fifth centuryWhitehead (1993 57ndash62) concludes that andragathiapraised men for lsquowhat they had done rather than who they werersquo and was oftenused to describe military valour or more specifically death on the battlefield⁷⁴ Hy-pereides links the two terms aretē and andragathia to denote both the qualities ac-quired through education as well as the deeds or the moment of death The combi-nation of the two concepts may reflect Hypereidesrsquo use of traditional and innovativeelements in his funeral as well as the development of the Athenian democratic andcivic ideology in the fourth century

Conclusion

Funeral orations display commonplaces in the praise of the dead refiguring theHomeric heroic code either in the use of terminology or in content Homeric aretēas a competitive value denoting success on the battlefield and purely military ex-cellence is prominent in the praise of funeral orations In this context the choiceof a noble glorious and immortal death of the hero is widely employed in funer-al oration to depict the bravery and glory of the Athenian warriors and citizens⁷⁵in effect heroic fame and immortality are frequently used for the praise of thedead both ancestors and current soldiers⁷⁶

Orators may use mythical paradigms in their epainos of the dead but theyappear to draw a line in rejecting the poetic epainos they focus on the history

For the use of andragathia in decrees awarding Athenian citizenship to foreigners cf Kap-paris ndash Th Lys Pl Mx d Hyp Th Lys Pl Mx c d d D


of Athens and their commendation is based upon the Athenian and civic iden-tity of the dead For Pericles as well as the other orators Athens was a model ofpolitical and military aretē Even when the funeral speech serves a Panhellenicpropaganda this is apparently linked with Athenian nationalism (eg Lys 247)the epitaphioi lay claim on the honour of the warriors for the salvation and free-dom of Greece⁷⁷

New civic and political qualities develop in the praise of funeral orationthroughout the fifth and fourth centuries in relation with the changes of theAthenian constitution Sōphrosynē and education are central to the acquisitionof virtue as well as the subsequent display of bravery and courage in life andwar in adulthood Dikaiosynē is also fundamental to the description of aretēand freedom of the city and the whole of Greece The pair of individual and com-mon achievements is stressed in funeral orations to show the superiority of thecity of Athens but also its contribution to the common good of the rest of Greece

Our close examination of the surviving funeral orations dating from the sec-ond half of the fifth century until the end of the fourth century reflects on theone hand a common praise of both moral and civic values and on the otherhand a development in structure and content of the rhetoric of praise influenc-ing respectively the didactic purpose of the funeral oration Thucydidesrsquo funeraloration focuses on the competitive civic aretē that brings success and superiorityas indicative of the Athenian democratic ideology Gorgias identifies moral andcivic values in the context of excellence in all kinds of achievements Lysias com-bines the heroic and patriotic element in the praise of citizens both in war andlife he also stresses the importance of the ancestorsrsquo virtue for justice and de-mocracy Platorsquos funeral oration emphasizes the significance of dikaiosynē (lsquojus-ticersquo) and sōphrosynē (lsquomoderationrsquo) in the education of the Athenian citizensThe role of education to the acquisition of aretē is further explored and devel-oped in the last two funeral orations which were the only two speeches actuallydelivered in the last half of the fourth century BC It is to be noted that both ora-tions by Demosthenes and Hypereides were performed on occasions of Atheniandefeat Hence one can notice a shift in the emphasis from the praise of the pastto the praise of the present Demosthenesrsquo praise focuses on the virtues in pres-ent life referring back to the childhood of the Athenian citizens Hypereidesplayed a significant role to the change of epainos of the virtues of the wholebody of the soldiers to an egkōmion of an individual Although he draws on ar-istocratic terminology and views he gives more details on the moment of death

Ibid

144 Eleni Volonaki

creating thus a picture of the present Aretē is complemented and closely tiedwith andragathia

On balance civic aretē is mainly honoured in public commemoration in fifthand fourth-century funeral orations which assumed their educative function bylinking the present of Athens to its past and future The Homeric hero is agathosbut the dead praised in the funeral oration is described as agathos gignesthaiThe term agathos gignesthai implies that the citizenrsquos aretē is not an immanentquality in a city a man must become anēr agathos he is not agathos by essenceIn contrast to the epic praise of individuality the funeral oration celebrates theanonymous group No one receives the honour of a special mention with the ex-ception of the general Leosthenes praised by Hypereides who is neverthelesstaken to represent the whole group


Ioannis Perysinakis

The Ancient Quarrel between Philosophyand Poetry Platorsquos Hippias Minor

a The Dialogue

In the Hippias Minor Hippias has just delivered a public lecture on Homer (epideix-is) and Socrates is invited by Eudicus to comment on it Hippiasrsquo position is thatAchilles is ἀληθής τε καὶ ἁπλοῦς (lsquotrue and simplersquo) while Odysseus is πολύτροπόςτε καὶ ψευδὴς (lsquoresourceful and falsersquo) The discussion originates in Iliad 9308ndash13where Achilles addresses Odysseus after the latterrsquos speech in the Embassy lsquoWith-out consideration for you I must make my answer [hellip] For as I detest the gates ofHades I detest that man who hides one thing in his mind and says anotherrsquosup1The conclusion in the first section (363a1ndash369b7) is that the true man and thefalse man are the same and therefore Achilles and Odysseus are the same Beforethat it had been accepted that lsquothe false man is the man with the power ability andthe wisdom to be false in the matters in which he is falsersquo (lsquothe false is he who hasthe wisdom and the power to speak falselyrsquo) lsquothe true man is the man with thepower ability and wisdom to speak truthfullyrsquo and lsquothe expert is ἄριστος in the mat-ters he is most capable and wisest of menrsquo

In the second section (up to 373c) Hippias denies the conclusion they havereached and Socrates quotes several Homeric passages Iliad 9312ndash13 9357ndash63Achillesrsquo first answer to Odysseus (lsquotomorrow you will see early in the morningmy ships sailing over the fishy Hellespont and on the third day I shall reach fertilePhthiarsquo) and 1169ndash71 (lsquoNow I am returning to Phthiarsquo) as well as 9650ndash55Achillesrsquo third answer to Ajax (lsquoI shall not think again of the bloody fighting untilsuch time as the son of wise Priamhellip comeshellip to the ships of the Myrmidons andtheir sheltersrsquo) All these passages he claims support the conclusion they cameto and show that Achilles is resourceful and false Hippias argues that Achillesacts involuntarily induced by the kindness of his heart (371e5ff) but this seemsto lead to the conclusion that those who voluntarily deceive (371e7ndash8) are betterthan those who do so involuntarily Hippias denies this since he finds it incredibleto think that people voluntarily doing wrong (371e7ndash8) could be better than thoseinvoluntarily doing so

The translation of the Iliadic passages is based on Lattimore with adjustments

In the third section (up to the end) Socrates and Hippias consider whether peo-ple voluntarily or involuntarily doing wrong or failing (ἁμαρτάνειν) are better in eachin a long series of human activities and finally in the area of justicemdashjustice beingboth power and science and therefore the soul which has the greater power is alsothe more just and the wiser soul will be the juster soul (375d7ff) Their conclusionalways seems to be that the one voluntarily lsquodoing badrsquo in an area is better and infact that the person who voluntarily fails and voluntarily does shameful and unjustthings would have to be the good person if such a good person even exists(376b5ndash6) Both Socrates and Hippias deny the conclusion but neither is able toexplain how they have gone wrong and so the dialogue ends without their beingable to come to a satisfactory conclusion

b Homer Iliad 9

According to Socrates Achilles lsquodares to contradict himself in front of Odysseuswho does not notice it he does not appear to have said anything to him whichwould indicate that he noticed his falsehoodrsquo (371a trans Jowett 19534 with ad-justments) It has been said that we are never closer to Plato as a writer thanwhen we are reading Plato readingsup2

Analyzing Achillesrsquo evolution as a hero in the ninth book of the Iliad CHWhitmansup3 finds that the embassy does not fail entirely to move Achilles andthat his rejection of Agamemnonrsquos offer is not based upon mere sulky passionbut upon the half-realized inward conception of honourWhen Odysseus has fin-ished his speech Achilles in his final words to him announces that lsquotomorrow[hellip] you will see if you wish and if it concerns you my ships at early dawn sailingover Hellespont [hellip] on the third day thereafter we might reach generous Phthiarsquo(357ndash63) After the long emotional speech of Phoenix Achilles is less sure and inhis final words to Phoenix he says lsquowe shall decide tomorrow as dawn showswhether to go back home again or stay herersquo (618ndash 19) Finally after the shortand straight targeted speech of Ajax Achilles says nothing about going homebut he announces that lsquoI shall not think again of bloody war until such timeas [hellip] Hector comes to the ships of the Myrmidons [hellip] But around my own shel-ter I think and beside my black ship Hector will be held though being eager forbattlersquo (650ndash55) Achillesrsquo reply to fight only when the fire reached his own shipsconstitutes the active terms in which he has framed the absolute for himself This

OrsquoConnor Whitman ndash Perysinakis

148 Ioannis Perysinakis

is the heroic paradigm which he embraced from the story of Meleager Thesethree points in Achillesrsquo replies to the envoys and to Phoenix have alreadysince antiquity been recognized as three stages of Achillesrsquo decision makingBut scholars have failed to see a gradual withdrawal in Achillesrsquo refusal to par-ticipate in the war and its function

When the envoys go back at the end of the ninth book Odysseus reportsonly Achillesrsquo reply to him and that he threatened to go home and hence thewhole venture seems to have failed Odysseus the great diplomat reportsAchillesrsquo position quite erroneously for dramatic reasons and for the sake ofthe plot This inconsistency has been observed as early as the scholia The strat-egy of the Embassy is consumed the Achaeans are found in a worse positionthan before and Achilles is going to meet his fate

c Hippias Minor

(i) Literature on the Hippias Minor

Many scholars have written papers on the Hippias Minor (Weiss 1981 Mulhern1968 Hoerber 1962 Phillips 1987 Zembaty 1989 Leacutevystone 2005 Balaban2011 Lampert 2002 Blundell 1992 Rudolph 2010) and others have occasionallyreferred to the dialogue (Taylor 1926 Guthrie 1962ndash 1981 IV 191ndash99Vlastos 1991Friedlaumlnder 1964 Blondell 2002 Hobbs 2000 Cormack 2006 see recently Des-treacutee Herrmann (eds) 2011 and on Platorsquos response to poetry from the viewpointof classical reception theory see Emlyn-Jones 2008)

In more specific terms Vlastos believes that Plato presents in the HippiasMinor the historical Socrates in an authentic situation of confession of uncertain-ty and vacillation unparalleled in the elenctic dialogues accepting in this wayindirectly the view alluded to in the second part of his additional note lsquoThe Hip-pias Minor-Sophistry or Perplexityrsquo⁴

Behind the sudden uncertainty of Socrates lsquoif there be such a manrsquo (376b)and his refusal to be reconciled with the necessary conclusion what followsfrom our argument and the final aporia of the dialogue stands the entire solu-tion the idea of good in which the whole Platonic belief in the necessity of theknowledge of bad and good has been invested⁵

Vlastos ndash esp ndash Skouteropoulos

The Ancient Quarrel between Philosophy and Poetry Platorsquos Hippias Minor 149

In Mulhernrsquos terms the argument fails because of a confusion of dynamis-terms ie terms which denote ability and tropos-terms ie terms which denotetypical behaviour Thus the statement that lsquothose who do wrong voluntarily arebetterrsquo may mean either of two things those who have it in their power to dowrong are better or those who normally wish or desire to do wrong are betterOf course in the first case lsquobetterrsquo means lsquogood at somethingrsquo while in the sec-ond lsquobetterrsquo means lsquomorally goodrsquo⁶ Mulhernrsquos starting point was Spraguersquosmonograph⁷ which drew attention to the fact that large parts of the argumentof Platorsquos Hippias Minor turn on the equivocal use of lsquowilinessrsquo (for both lsquoshifti-nessrsquo and lsquointellectual abilityrsquo) lsquopowerrsquo (for both lsquopower for goodrsquo and lsquopower forevilrsquo) lsquogoodrsquo (for both lsquogood at somethingrsquo and lsquomorally goodrsquo) and lsquovoluntaryrsquo(for both lsquowhat is in our powerrsquo and lsquowhat we normally wish or desirersquo)

Roslyn Weissrsquos interpretation⁸ constitutes an attempt to maintain the integ-rity of the dialogue by viewing all its parts as related to a single topic who is thetruly superior man She concludes that the ἀγαθός of the Hippias Minor is thusnot the standard ἀγαθός who is judged on the basis of his actions Since theagent in this dialogue is judged solely on the basis of his skill things may besaid with impunity about this man that could not be said so freely about the or-dinary ἀγαθόςThe arguments of both stage I and III of the dialogue go no furtherthan to assert that the better man in all τέχναι and ἐπιστῆμαι is the one who isδυνατός and σοφόςWe need only bear in mind that the ἀγαθός here is the manskilled at justicemdashnot lsquothe just manrsquo

Hoerber argues that it is clear from several aspects that Plato is challenginghis readers to work out a solution to the perplexing propositions of the HippiasMinor especially since Socrates himself admits perplexity both in the course ofthe discussion and at the conclusion of the dialogue (372dndashe 376bndashc) Anotherwarning Plato presents to the reader concerning the argumentation which is notto be taken as final is the statement of Socrates on the concluding page εἴπερ τίςἐστιν οὗτος (376b) for Plato employs such a phrase in other dialogues (cf Euthy-phro 8e Gorgias 480e) to show his personal disagreement The doublets and pro-fessed confusion within the dialogue seem to be dramatic clues pointing thereader to two famous propositions of Socrates that virtue is knowledge andthat no one does wrong voluntarily The dramatic technique of the dialogue fi-nally is manifest from the play on the word πολύτροπος The term first becomesprominent in the discussion of the Homeric characters Odysseus and Achilles

Mulhern Sprague ndashndash Weiss


then in the sense of clever or skillful the adjective becomes the chief character-istic of the polymath Hippias and at the conclusion of the dialogue it is Socrateswho is πολύτροπος⁹

Similarly Cormack suggests that instead of interpreting the Hippias Minor asPlatorsquos criticism of the craft analogy and the earlier Socratic method of doingphilosophy one should treat the ending of the dialogue as a puzzle that Platohas left to be worked out by the readersup1⁰

The word polytropia is ambiguous according to Antisthenes it means either lsquodi-versity of styles and discoursesrsquo or lsquodiversity of dispositions characters or soulsrsquo(fr 51 Caizzi) Leacutevystone argued that the same distinction is implicitly at work in Pla-torsquos Hippias Minor where Socrates defends Odysseusrsquo polytropia against the pseudo-lsquosimplicityrsquo of Hippiasrsquo favourite hero Achilles However whereas Antisthenes triesto clarify these different meanings Platorsquos Socrates exploits the ambiguity to con-fuse his interlocutor Such a distinction sheds a new light on the Hippias MinorOdysseus is polytropos in the first positive sense while the simplicity of Achillesshould be understood as a bad kind of polytropia It provides an explanation forthe first paradoxical thesis of the dialogue that he who voluntary deceives is betterthan he who errs for falsehood is in one case only in wordswhile in the other it isfalsehood in the soul itself It is thus proposed that Odysseusrsquo skill in adapting hislogos to his hearers was probably a model for Socrates himself The analogy betweenthe hero and Socrates is especially clear in Platorsquos dialogues which show the phi-losopher in an Odyssey for knowledgesup1sup1

Blondell uses the Hippias Minor to show how Plato puts characterization towork in various ways She chose as she says this dialogue as exemplary notonly because of its elenctic character and its vividly characterized participantsbut also because of its concern on the discursive level with the educational valueof traditional literary figuressup1sup2

Hobbs argues that the Apology Hippias Major and Hippias Minor show un-equivocally that the old Homeric heroes like Achilles and Odysseus are still pow-erful influences in classical Athens and that they also show that reflection onthe heroes and their code of conduct raises ethical and psychological issues ofthe greatest importancesup1sup3

Hoerber ndash passim Cormack Leacutevystone Blondell ndash especially the sections lsquoHippias and Homerrsquo (ndash) and lsquoRewrit-ing Homerrsquo (ndash) Hobbs


After reviewing Weissrsquos position Jane Zembatty argues that Socratesrsquo perplexityin the dialogue should not be seen merely as an ironic ploy Rather it should beseen as reflecting Platorsquos awareness of the problems endemic to the Socratic attemptto define virtue simply in terms of some characteristic of the agent psychēsup1⁴

Arguing that liars are better than the unenlightened Socrates concludes thatthere are no liars Instead there are only those who know and those who do notThe unenlightened cannot lie and alien volitions desires or emotions are un-likely to mislead and deceive those who know ie the wisesup1⁵

Why does Socrates argue for the superiority of Odysseus Why does he insist ona repellant conclusion And why does he say he vacillates The answer to thesequestions points to an essential element of Socratesrsquo political philosophysup1⁶

Blundellrsquos reading of the Hippias Minor argues first that Socratic argument isintrinsically ad hominem rather than a preliminary sketch for a universal moraltheory second that the dialogues must be situated in their local context (in thiscase the Hippias Minor needs to be seen as Platorsquos response to the educationalprogrammes of Homerists and Sophists) and third that it is necessary both toconsider the possibility that weak Socratic argument is an intrinsic part of thedesign of the dialogue rather than Platorsquos oversight and to recognize that this un-avoidable question can never be resolved with absolute certaintysup1⁷

For Rudolph finding Hippias incompetent as a Homeric interpreter Socratestakes up the task of interpreting the poetic basis for Hippiasrsquo moral position Byso doing he makes a larger point that the liar and the truth-teller are the sameman or that unintentional wrongdoers are worse than deliberate wrongdoers Byre-appropriating the language of rhapsody Socrates subverts the Homeric contentin a way that it is reminiscent of Platorsquos Ion She concludes that by mastering therhapsodic skill Plato shows that the supposedly authoritative interpretations ofHomer lead to moral dilemmas from which even Socratic dialectic cannot free ussup1⁸

(ii) My suggestion

According to Aristotlersquos Metaphysics (995a7ndash8) there are people who will takeseriously the arguments of a speaker (including those of a philosopher) only ifa poet can be cited as a witness in support of them Hippias uses Homer to sup-

Zembatty Balaban Lampert Blundell Rudolph


port his arguments Socrates does the same for his purposes The Hippias Minoris concerned on the discursive level with the educational value of traditional lit-erary figures Plato has to contend not only against the mythos of poetry but alsoagainst the power of rhetoric

The following interpretation constitutes an attempt to discover unnoticedthreads of thought in the Hippias Minor especially the transformation of Homer-ic moral values and political behaviour that Plato is making in his dialogues theformation of some of Socratesrsquo (or Platorsquos) main principles and propositions andthe relationship of thought with other dialogues

In composing the Hippias Minor Platorsquos aim seems to be twofold first to deter-mine what is agathos and the meaning of aretē and second to blame poetry forusing plots and mimēsis by means of which it cannot educate the children onaretē Plato aimed at subjecting mythos to logos That the conclusion lsquomust followfrom our argumentrsquo (ek tou logou) is part of the same strategy lsquoreason proves or per-suadesrsquo (logos airei) is a standard expression in Plato (R 604c 607b Lg 663d)Achilles lsquothe best of the Achaeansrsquo cannot behave in the way he does in theIliad as it is described apart from the Hippias Minor in the Republic (336e 390e391c 386c 388a 516d but cf Apol 28c) and other dialogues (Lg 628cd 728a) Jus-tice is the final point in the Hippias Minor and constitutes the main subject of theRepublic the main themes of the dialogue are also addressed in the Apology Prota-goras Menon and the first book of the Republic Hippias is treated (and mistreated)in a dramatic way (as often with other Platonic dialogues) he is one of the lsquodramatispersonaersquo Socratesrsquo intrusion into the sophistsrsquo arena could be described as a cri-tique of the Athenian performance culture and was itself a drama in which Socra-tesrsquo lsquoperformance philosophyrsquo gave conviction to Platorsquos critique of the institutions ofhis polis and force to his lsquoalternative dramatic stagersquo The Platonic dialogues consti-tute lsquometatheatrical prose dramasrsquoWhat we hear are philosophical voices in actiona poetic and philosophic call to the philosophic life In Socratesrsquo interlocutions withthe sophists Plato is dramatizing the reception and the contest of cultural values asa physical realitysup1⁹ The absence of Plato himself either as author or as character inhis dialogues strengthens more than anything else the generic link between the dia-logues and Athenian dramamdashand validates ironically Socratesrsquo complaints (or Pla-torsquos himself) about the poets Finally in the Hippias Minor we have a chapter in the

Emlyn-Jones Cf also Goldhillvon Reden Ferrari The term lsquometatheatrical prose dramasrsquo is adopted by Charalabopoulos esp ndashFor other explanations why Plato wrote dialogues cf Griswold Kahn and ch


history of the ancient quarrel between philosophy and poetry (on which I am cur-rently working)mdashwithout offering a definition of the quarrel or further chapterssup2⁰

d Republic mythos (lsquoplotrsquo) and mimēsisThe verb used for Homer in the Hippias Minor and the Republic is poiei pepoiēkenaipepoiēken pepoiētai and it is the verb which denotes poetry from the fifth centuryBC onwards The poetrsquos own voice can be heard in and through all the elements ofhis poem it is no more than a technical distinction whether we take him to be lsquomak-ingrsquo his characters actspeak in certain ways or lsquospeakingrsquo himselfsup2sup1 But the verbpoiein serves to convey implicit responsibility in such passages as the followingfrom the Republic and the Hippias Minor and this is what Plato criticizes

Homer and the poets are banished from the city both on the basis of theirmythos (plots and myths) and the mimēsis which they employ Plato believedthat one becomes the kind of person one is portraying and this led to the con-clusion that drama has a bad moral and psychological effect on performers whoin their turn pass the influence on to their audience (cf Ion 535d) The poet andlater the recipient assimilates himself to the figures of poetry The battle of thegods that Homer made (pepoiēken) must not be admitted into the city lsquoA childcannot distinguish what is and what is not allegory and the ideas he takes inat that age are likely to become indelibly fixed for this reason it is very impor-tant to see that the first stories he hears should be composed to produce the bestpossible effect on his character (ὅτι κάλλιστα μεμυθολογημένα πρὸς ἀρετήν)rsquo (R378dndashe trans Cornford 1941 with adjustments) Socrates and Adeimantus willnot let the guardians believe that Achilles who was the son of a goddess andof the wise Peleus and the pupil of the sage Chiron was so disordered thathis heart was a prey to two contrary maladies mean covetousness and arrogantcontempt of gods and men (R 391c cf also R 388a 516d Hippias Minor 371d)Needless to say that there is neither covetousness nor arrogant contempt on thepart of Achilles it is a matter of honour and the plot of the Iliad which Platocriticizes The truth-content of myths and stories must be judged principally interms of their implicit logos Achillesrsquo character is also rejected because it is as-

Cf Most ndash This is a wide theme and I am mentioning only the monographsunder the same or similar title Barfield Edmundson Gould Kannicht Levin Rosen Naddaff Ramphos To these I must add the seminalstudy by Nightingale which reassesses Platorsquos quarrel with poetry and rhetoric as well asthe debt he owes to these lsquounphilosophicalrsquo adversaries Cf Halliwell


sociated with grief and lamentation both in his first appearance in book two(383b) and in the final book of the Republic (605dndashe) His lamentation posesa great threat to the well-being of the citizens of Platorsquos ideal state Homer trag-edy lamentation and lsquowomanishrsquo behaviour are all to be eliminated from thelives of the guardians as from the city as a whole Some themes of Platorsquos cri-tique of poetry are already prefigured in the first and second book of the Repub-lic as the first definition of justice by Simonides (331dndashe) and Cephalusrsquo wordsabout old age and the Underworld which are echoed in the view that the godscan be propitiated (364cndashd 365e)sup2sup2

Besides falsehood and deceptiveness are two main points of the HippiasMinor they must be connected to Platorsquos arguments on Greek poetry in the Re-public lsquoTo be deceived about the truth of things and so to be blindly ignorantand harbour untruth in the soul is what all men would least of all accept False-hood in that case is abhorred above everythingrsquo Therefore lsquothis ignorance in thesoul of the man deceived is what really deserves to be called the true falsehoodrsquo(382b trans Cornford 1941 with adjustments) But since we do not know thetruth about events in the past by making something as close as possible tothe truth we make it useful (382d) Deceptiveness of poetry is the subject ofthe tenth book of the Republicsup2sup3

Where Homer is delivering a speech in character he tries to make his mannerresemble that of the person he has introduced as speaker In the Embassy sceneHomer speaks in the character of the participating persons and tries to make usfeel that the words come not from him but from the speakers Homer does notspeak in his own person but he makes Odysseus Phoenix Ajax and Achillesspeak each in his own character (R 393) Plato is blaming Homer for the verypoint for which Aristotle praises him (Poet 1460a5ndash11) after a short proem he rep-resents his characters as speaking and acting Homer is praised because his poemshave so little narrative and so much speech or because only in the proems he speaksin his own voicesup2⁴ Plato criticizes Homer for speaking in the character of Chryses andtries to make us feel that the words come not from Homer but from an aged priest

Perysinakis ndash Michelakis n and n Murray ndash Hobbs ndash Janaway ndash and ndash Halliwell ndash Cf Gill and Belfiore Halliwell ndash Belfiore first suggested that in Rd Plato echoes Hes Th and Od Plato concludes that the poet creates onlylsquolies unlike the truthrsquo not lsquolies like the truthrsquo Partee ndash On this point cf the discussion in De Jong ndash For poetic imitation in R cfDyson


The metaphysical argument of the tenth book on poetry and mimēsis (in par-ticular 598dndash599e) is an expansion of the point adumbrated in the third (393a)The tragic poets and their master Homer we are told understand not only alltechnical matters but also all about goodness and badness and about thegods lsquofor a good poet must understand the issues he writes about if his writingis to be successful otherwise he could not write about themrsquo (598e) The tragicpoet as well as the other poets since he is a representer comes third fromthe king and the truth (597e) Aretē retains much of its Homeric sense butwith a Platonic twist Homer sings the claims of the agathos lsquoto be the bravestrsquoand lsquothe lays of menrsquo Plato accepts the traditional view that tragic poetry is con-cerned with aretē in the sense of the important and memorable actions recordedby the singers of the glorious deeds of men However he insists that becausearetē depends on use true aretē requires craft knowledge of what is useful(601d)sup2⁵ The poet or the singer has no knowledge of a craft he is possessedby divine portion (luck) and power (Ion 534c) Aretē in Plato refers to theorder in the soul in which each of the parts of the soul does its own job as aruler or subject (443b 444dndashe) agathos politēs is one who knows both howto govern and to be governed in accordance with dikē (Lg 643e)

The moral point is clear if the chief purpose of representation is to create animpression then the representer does not have to know about the moral value ofhis work (R 599d) He lacks knowledge and knowledge is always in some senseknowledge of goodness lsquoImitative poetry copies appearances of human affairsand of human excellence in particular But these appearances differ drasticallyfrom reality being varied and contradictory instead of stable and uniform the ap-parently excellent character is in fact a model of vicersquosup2⁶ Poetry corrupts because it isa form of imitation copying appearances instead of reality The poet imitates eidolaof excellence instead of genuine excellence this is to say that the poet imitates ap-parently excellent characters and actions that is whichever characters and actionsappear excellent to the ignorant many The poet creates the illusion of forms basedon the deceptions of the material world and the flattery of the lower part of the soulThus mimetic art encourages the soul to rest content with the shadow world of thebecoming Platorsquos argument against poetry involves firstly the opposition of reasonto the irrational parts of the soul secondly it involves the opposition between twoaspects of reasoningwhich is involved in explaining why one can be tempted to act

Cf Belfiore ndash Woodruff ndash Janaway ndash Moss and passim Cf Urmson Janaway ndash esp ndash Marusic esp ndash


even on what one knows not to be correct Besides Platorsquos repudiation of the tragicis a vital dimension of his own philosophysup2⁷

Therefore Plato banishes Achilles and Homer because in his characterAchilles appears to lie Homer makes his characters speak in accordance withthe plot and for the dramatic purposes of the IliadWe must keep in mind thataccording to Aristotle the poet must be a maker of plots (Poet 1451b28ndash9 cfPl Phd 61b where mythos has a different meaning) Achilles lsquowho was theson of a goddess and of the wise Peleus and the pupil of the sage Chironrsquoand in the main lsquothe best (ἄριστος) of the Achaeansrsquo cannot behave in thisway and Homer must not make him false The acceptable poet is described aslsquothe unmixed imitator of the good manrsquo and as lsquoone who will imitate for usthe speech of the good manrsquo (397d 398b) Achilles does not meet the presuppo-sitions Plot mimēsis virtue (aretē) and agathos falsehood and deceptivenessall of them are questioned in the Republic and Platorsquos other dialogues and allof them are found in the Hippias Minor Of course Achillesrsquo replies serve theplot of the epic Homer makes Achilles speak in his own dramatic characterbut Plato criticizes this And since he is aristos it is time (Plato seems to say)to find out what aristos means and to transform the traditional aretē in termsof morals As Diotima says in the Symposium lsquoif someone got to see the beautifulitself only then will it become possible for him to give birth not to images of vir-tue but to true virtuersquo (211endash 12a) lsquoIf we recall that in the Republic Plato appliesthe phrase ldquoimages of virtuerdquo to poets a particular contrast suggests itselfWhilethe poet makes only images and understands only images the philosopher whostrives for and encounters the eternal unchanging beauty can bring genuinegoods into the world because he understands what virtue isrsquosup2⁸

e Agathos-aretēThroughout the dialogue Achilles is called ἀμείνων or ἄριστος at the beginningof their conversation Socrates asks Hippias lsquoin what particularrsquo he thinks Achillesis ἀμείνων (364d) The first thing to be noticed therefore is that Plato continuesthe particularization of aretē begun already in Homer with expressions such aslsquogood in battle-cryrsquo the standard meaning of aretē is excellence of every kind Asecond observation is the agreement between Socrates and Hippias the wisest

Nehamas cf Murdoch ndash Halliwell Lear Annas ( ndash ndash and Annas ) criticizes Plato for his account of poetry and argues for the dif-ferences between the third and the tenth book of the Republic Janaway Janaway ndash


and the ablest of men is also the best (ἄριστος) in these matters (366d) whichmeans that wisdom science is identified with aretē ie aretē is particularizedin wisdom and dynamis (lsquoabilityrsquo) is also identified with aretē Dynamis gener-ally speaking is the presupposition of excellencearetē In the Republic Platospeaks of the power and capacity of the crafts or of the limbs of the body iethe specific virtue (oikeia aretē) (346a 353bndashc 433d)

In the first part of the dialogue it has been accepted that lsquothe false are theywho have the wisdom and the power to speak falselyrsquo (366b) in the secondpart that lsquothe voluntary liars are better than the involuntaryrsquo (371e) in the thirdpart lsquobetter are those who err voluntarilyrsquo (373c) and the conclusion is that theone voluntarily lsquodoing badrsquo in an area is better and in fact that the person whovoluntarily fails and voluntarily does shameful and unjust things would have tobe the good person if such a good person even exists (376b5ndash6) In fact whatis under discussion in these judgments is the old Socratic dictum lsquono one doeswrong voluntarilyrsquo (or lsquono one wishes evilrsquo) and lsquovirtue is knowledgersquo the manwho errs involuntarily lacks knowledge and is at a disadvantage The agathos isthe man who errs voluntarily while the kakos errs involuntarily and does wrongagainst his own will the kakoswho errs involuntarily has no knowledge and there-fore he is not kakos voluntarily It is a typical feature of the traditional agathos todo wrong voluntarily and of the traditional kakos to do wrong involuntarily Thisstatement mirrors the historical situation for the traditional agathos who is in aposition to do wrong against the kakos and to fall into hybris This is lsquothe mightis rightrsquo principle of the agathos The runner who runs slowly voluntarily is better(373d) because he has both the ability and the knowledge to run quickly if he de-cides to do so The agathos has the ability to do wrong because he has the dyna-mis ability which is an element of aretē It has been shown that lsquothe soul whichhas the greater power (dynamis) and wisdom (sophia) is betterrsquo (375e) because theformer is the presupposition of aretē and the latter is (part of the) aretē itselfsup2⁹ Athird doctrine lsquoI neither know nor think that I knowrsquo (Ap 21d 29andashb cfHpMa 298c) related to Socratesrsquo ignorance and method may be found in the dia-logue he who knows the truth can deceive better than he who does not and hewho deceives voluntarily (as Socrates does) is better than he who does so involun-tarily In the Hippias Minor as in other Platonic dialogues we have to know every

Aristotle criticizes Socratesrsquo doctrine that virtue is knowledge in the seventh book of the EN(b ndashb) At the end of the sixth he says epigrammatically lsquoSocrates then thoughtthat the virtues are instances of reason because he thought that they are all instances of knowl-edgeWe on the other hand think that they involve reasonrsquo (bndash trans Irwin

with adjustments) Cf Guthrie ndash III ndash


time whether Plato uses agathos in the traditional political and social meaning orin the moral meaning he wants to attach to the word

f Hippias Minor Protagoras andother Platonic Dialogues

The Socratic principle lsquono one does wrong voluntarilyrsquo is also found in the Pro-tagoras (345dndashe) and as it is well known in other Platonic dialoguessup3⁰ Thereare also a number of minor topics which may be found in the Hippias Minorand in other dialogues of Plato In the Protagoras Socrates argues that lsquoSimo-nides was not so uneducated as to say that he praised a person who willinglydid no evil as if there were some people who did evil willinglyrsquo and that lsquonowise man believes that anyone does wrong willingly or acts shamefully andbadly of his own free willrsquo (345dndashe trans Taylor 1926 with adjustments) Thisis what Socrates is talking about in the Hippias Minor and this is what is includ-ed in the conditional statement of the final conclusion lsquoif there be such a manrsquo

When in the first section of the Hippias Minor the interlocutors agree thatlsquothe false is he who has the wisdom and the power to speak falselyrsquo (366b)and that lsquoevery man has power who does that which he wishes at the timewhen he wishesrsquo Socrates feels the need to add lsquoI am not speaking of any specialcase in which he is prevented by disease or something of that sortrsquo (366c) Sim-ilarly in the Protagoras Socrates argues that an agathos (lsquogood manrsquo) couldsometimes become kakos (lsquobadrsquo) lsquothrough the effect of either age or toil or dis-ease or some other misfortunemdashfor doing badly is nothing other than being de-prived of knowledgersquo (345b trans Taylor 1926 with adjustments)

In the Protagoras since a most important part of a manrsquos education is beingknowledgeable about poetry the title-character and Socrates decide to analyze Si-monidesrsquo poem to Scopas concerning the very thing that they are discussing name-ly excellencewith the only difference that it is transferred to the sphere of poetry Atthe end of the discussion the analysis fails and they leave aside the discussion oflyric and other kinds of poetry they do not need poets because lsquoone cannot ques-tion them on the sense of what they say but in most of the cases when people quotethem one says the poet means one thing and one anotherrsquo (347e trans Taylor 1926with adjustments) At the end of the dialogue Protagoras and Socrates exchangetheir views on the teachability of virtue In the Hippias Minor the title-character

Cr a Ap dndasha a Μeno bndashb Prt dndashe cndashd R c Lg cb d Ti d For the recurrent theme οὐδεὶς ἑκὼν ἁμαρτάνει see Mackenzy ch


has given a lecture on Homer and uses certain Homeric passages to support hisviews In the middle of the dialogue they decide to leave aside Homer lsquoas thereis no possibility of asking Homer what he meant in these verses of hisrsquo (365d)and at the end they result in a paradox The paradox lsquoif there be such a manrsquo iswhat follows from the argument in accordance with the logos (376e)sup3sup1

Finally as in the Protagoras Menon and the Republic Socrates starts the con-versation in the Hippias Minor inductively from various arts and professions fromthe limbs of the body and the soulrsquos capacity to result in general conclusions

g Hippias Minor Aristotlersquos andXenophonrsquos works

There are a number of topics which may be found in the Hippias Minor and in theworks of Aristotle and Xenophon Without the explicit testimony of Aristotleprobably few critics would consider the Hippias Minor a genuine Platonicworksup3sup2 Aristotle says lsquoHence the argument in the Hippias that the same manis false and true is misleading for it takes him to be false who is able to deceivethough he is discerning and intelligent and takes him to be better who is will-ingly badrsquo (Metaph1025a6ndash9 trans Hope 1960 with adjustments)

The distinction between ethics and other areas of human epistēmē and dy-namis seems to be clear from Aristotlersquos reception of the Hippias Minorsup3sup3 Twopassages from the Nicomachean Ethics are extremely pertinent In the first pas-sage justice is prescribed as a state of character (hexis) and since justice is astate its relation to just actions is different from the relation of a capacity toits character lsquoWe see that the state (hexis) everyone means in speaking of justiceis the state that makes us doers of just actions that makes us do justice and wishwhat is just In the same way they mean by injustice the state that makes us doinjustice and wish what is unjust [hellip] For what is of sciences (epistēmē) and ca-pacities (dynamis) is not true of states For while one and the same capacity orscience seems to have contrary activities a state that is a contrary has no con-trary activitiesrsquo (1129a6ndash 17 trans Irwin 19992)

In the second passage in defining intelligence Aristotle recognizes the connec-tion between temperance and intelligence that intelligence cannot be misused and

On the interlocutors not having the possibility of asking the poet and in general on the dif-ference between oral and written discourse cf Ap b Phdr dndashe Ep VII a c Friedlaumlnder Hoerber ndash


cannot be forgotten lsquoHence intelligence must be a state grasping the truth involv-ing reason and concerned with action about human goods Moreover there is thevirtue of craft but not of intelligence Furthermore in a craft someone who errswillingly is more choiceworthy but with intelligence as with virtue the reverse istrue Clearly then intelligence is a virtue not craft-knowledge There are twoparts of the soul that have reason Intelligence is a virtue of one of them of thepart that has belief for belief is concerned as intelligence is with what admits ofbeing otherwise Moreover it is not only a state involving reason A proof of thisis the fact that such a state can be forgotten but intelligence cannotrsquo (1140a20ndash30 trans Irwin 19992 with minor adjustments)

Aristotlersquos reception of the Hippias Minor emerges from each of these passag-es From the first citation it seems that the prior portion of the Hippias Minor ledAristotle to the definition between hexis versus dynamis and epistēmē thus solv-ing the riddle of the first perplexing proposition In the second citation Aristotleappears to have the latter portion of the Hippias Minor in mind in distinguishingbetween voluntary error in ethics as contrasted with error in the crafts

Finally there is a long passage in XenophonrsquosMemorabilia (421ndash40) which inview of its similarity to Platorsquos Hippias Minor has been discussed in connection withthat dialogue Various claims have been made about the relationship of the twoworks including that Plato copied Xenophonsup3⁴ Though there are clearly some sim-ilarities between this section of the Memorabilia and the Hippias Minor the differ-ences are more striking and more important In Hippiasrsquo position the arrogant pro-fessional teacher who charges others for teaching them what he knows isEuthydemus who is not only not teaching others but has not even reached full ma-turity Since the Platonic material is entirely dramatic with no external lsquoexplana-tionsrsquo by a narrator and so no explicit statement of purpose the interpretation isleft to the reader In the Memorabilia (4219ff) Xenophon allows the discussionto end with Socrates apparently agreeing that justice is exactly like the other craftsand that the knowing wrongdoer is better In the dialogue not only Hippias directlydenies this conclusion but Socrates himself expresses his grave doubts It is theidentification of craft and justicemdashbeing explicit in theMemorabilia but problematicin the Hippias Minormdash that some critics take to be Platorsquos point in the Hippias Minorand what they accordingly take him to task forsup3⁵

Phillips ndash cf Phillips Weiss n I am grateful to Prof M Edwards who read this paper and improved on its English for what-ever blemishes remaining the responsibility is mine


Kleanthis Mantzouranis

A Philosophical Reception of HomerHomeric Courage in Aristotlersquos Discussionof ἀνδρεία

Homerrsquos representation of the heroic warriors of the Iliad bequeathed to the Greeksparadigmatic examples of martial valour as models for emulation and comparisonheroic figures such as Achilles Hector and Diomedes became a benchmark for sub-sequent discussions of courage and military prowess by poets prose authors andeven philosophers This paper explores how Homeric courage forms part of τὰ ἔν-δοξα that is the reputable views that inform Aristotlersquos discussion of ἀνδρεία inthe Nicomachean Ethics I aim to show how Aristotle responds to the Homericidea of courage and how he appropriates Homer to elucidate his own conceptionof genuine ἀνδρεία I shall start by briefly summarizing Aristotlersquos position

Aristotlersquos discussion of ἀνδρεία as a particular virtue of character (EN III6ndash9) can be divided into two parts In the main body of his exposition (EN1115a6ndash 1116a15 1117a29ndash 1117b22) Aristotle discusses what we may describeas ἀνδρεία proper or genuine ἀνδρεία which he defines as a mean state with re-gard to fear and confidence (EN 1115a6ndash7) Aristotle places ἀνδρεία exclusivelyin the field of battle and thus narrows its scope in comparison to Platosup1 For Ar-istotle to display ἀνδρεία is to show the appropriate amount of fear and confi-dence and act accordingly when faced with the dangers and the fear-inspiringcircumstances of the battlefield (EN 1115a28ndash35) The performance of one ormore courageous actions however does not necessarily make one courageousAccording to Aristotle an action qualifies as a genuine manifestation of the rel-evant virtue only if the agent acts with the proper motivation Courage thereforelike other virtues of character should be displayed lsquofor the sake of the noblersquoτοῦ καλοῦ ἕνεκα (EN 1115b11ndash 13 23ndash24 1122b7)

In the remaining of his discussion (EN 1116a15ndash 1117a28) Aristotle de-scribes and examines certain states which are commonly thought to conduce

By narrowing ἀνδρεία to its most paradigmatic manifestation namely courage displayed inthe battlefield Aristotle responds to Platorsquos Socrates who in the Laches (dndashe) extends thefield of ἀνδρεία to include onersquos courageous stance in the face of various adversities such aspoverty disease or sea-danger For Aristotle the application of ἀνδρεῖος in such cases is ametaphorical use of the word (καθrsquoὁμοιότητα EN a) which extends ἀνδρεία beyond itsproper field cf Stewart I ndash On the different methodology that Plato and Aristotleemploy in their treatment of the particular virtues see Joachim ndash

to courageous behaviour The discussion of these states aims to show how ordi-nary conceptions of courage fail to qualify as proper ἀνδρεία in the Aristoteliansense At the same time by contrasting his own understanding of courage withpopular views about it Aristotle elucidates the true nature and scope of this vir-tue It is this part of Aristotlersquos exposition that is most relevant for the examina-tion of his reception and use of Homer

Aristotle discusses five defective forms of courage First πολιτικὴ ἀνδρείαlsquocitizen couragersquo is the kind of courage displayed by citizen soldiers who aremotivated by a desire to win honour and avoid disgrace and the penalties im-posed by the laws (EN 1116a17ndash 1116b3) The second form is the kind of courageresulting from experience in certain conditions (ἐμπειρία) such as the couragedisplayed by mercenary soldiers (EN 1116b3ndash23) Third comes the couragethat results from spirit or passion θυμός which resembles the ferocity of wildbeasts (EN 1116b23ndash 1117a9) Courage can also be displayed fourth by hopefulpeople (εὐέλπιδες) who feel confident because of past successes (EN 1117a9ndash22) Finally one can display courage as a result of ignorance of the impendingdanger (EN 1117a22ndash28)

It has long been observed by Aristotle scholars that the classification of the de-fective forms of courage has its roots in Platosup2 The role of technical expertise or skill(τέχνη) in the display of courage and the connection between courage and the spir-ited part of the human soul (τὸ θυμοειδές) are recurrent ideas in the discussions ofἀνδρεία in the Platonic dialoguessup3 Even the term πολιτικὴ ἀνδρεία that Aristotle uses(EN 1116a17) seems to have been borrowed from Plato⁴

These Platonic resonances however are only part of the picture of Aristo-tlersquos sources In his discussion of the defective forms of courage Aristotle explic-itly establishes Homer as a source for two of these forms namely πολιτικὴἀνδρεία and the ἀνδρεία of θυμός In each case Aristotle develops his argument

Grant II Experience in a certain skill and courage La dndashe Prt endashb θυμός and cour-age R dndasha Grant II Joachim At R bndashc πολιτικὴ ἀνδρεία is defined as the lsquopower topreserve through everything the correct and law-inculcated belief about what is to be feared andwhat isnrsquotrsquo(trans Grube rev Reeve ) Plato uses the term πολιτικὴ ἀνδρεία to distinguish thecourage of the civilized man from the impetus of animals or slaves who may appear to act coura-geously when driven by their natural instincts but in truth they are not since their actions are notthe result of education inculcated by law The idea that true courage should be cultural not naturaland a result of rational choice is formulated already in fifth-century political discourse Atheniandemocratic ideology in its attempt for self-definition presented Athenian courage as a result offree choice and rational thought in contrast to Spartan courage which was a result of constant hard-ship enforced discipline and external pressure see Bassi ndash Balot

164 Kleanthis Mantzouranis

in two steps He first describes the nature of the defective form of courage inquestion and then furnishes his discussion with citations of andor allusionsto Homer Aristotlersquos use of Homer in this part of the discussion is a purposefulact of reception with a twofold aim firstly to illustrate by means of concrete ex-amples the form of courage described secondly to reinforce his argument by ad-ducing the authority of the poet⁵ This use of Homer to elucidate and strengthena philosophical argument reveals something about the context of reception andAristotlersquos attitude towards the source text itself On the one hand for an exam-ple to achieve its purpose it must be immediately recognizable by those to whomit is addressed The use of Homeric examples therefore suggests that Aristotlersquosaudience was (or should be) able to identify these examples and understandhow they can help illustrate the point just made On the other hand the veryfact that Aristotle adduces Homer to reinforce his argument suggests that inhis view the two defective forms of courage in question are evidenced alreadyin the epics In other words in Aristotlersquos mind Homer has already grasped anessential truth about the nature of courage

Let us then describe the two defective forms of courage as lsquoHomericrsquo and as-sess their status vis-agrave-vis Aristotlersquos genuine ἀνδρεία This discussion will showhow Aristotle responds to the Homeric conception of courage and how he re-works the Homeric material in accordance with his philosophical outlook

a The courage of θυμός

In the epics θυμός is the seat of the affective life it is therefore the physical basisthat produces among other things the passion that prompts one to actcourageously⁶ Aristotle endorses this prevalent conception of θυμός and arguesthat θυμός is lsquomost eagerrsquo (ἰτητικώτατον) to rush on dangers (EN 1116b26ndash27)⁷

For the Greek practice of citing poetry in general and Homer in particular to illustrate or re-inforce a point of view see Halliwell ndash Il ndash ndash ndash Od ndash On Homeric θυμός see Redfield ndash Hobbs Stewart I points to Prt e where Protagoras says of courageous men that theyare confident and ready for action (ἴτας) in circumstances in which most men would be fearfulAs has already been stressed the Homeric idea that θυμός contributes to courage is discussedand elaborated in Platorsquos Republic Although Platorsquos conception of θυμός is not identical tothe Homeric one Plato endorses the Homeric insight about the connection between θυμόςand martial valour and links closely the spirited part of human soul (τὸ θυμοειδές) to the virtueof courage For an extensive discussion of the Platonic conception of ἀνδρεία and its relation to

A Philosophical Reception of Homer 165

To elucidate this form of courage Aristotle uses two sets of Homeric examplesOne set comprises quotations of Homeric formulaic phrases which describethe rousing of a herorsquos spirit usually as a result of the intervention of some god

ἰτητικώτατον γὰρ ὁ θυμὸς πρὸς τοὺς κινδύνους ὅθεν καὶ ῞Ομηρος ldquoσθένοςἔμβαλε θυμῷrdquo καὶ ldquoμένος καὶ θυμὸν ἔγειρεrdquo καὶ ldquoδριμὺ δrsquo ἀνὰ ῥῖνας μένοςrdquoκαὶ ldquoἔζεσεν αἷμαmiddotrdquo πάντα γὰρ τὰ τοιαῦτα ἔοικε σημαίνειν τὴν τοῦ θυμοῦἔγερσιν καὶ ὁρμήν⁸(EN 1116b26ndash30)

For spirit is something which especially spurs people on to face dangers hence we have inHomer lsquohe cast strength into his spiritrsquo and lsquohe stirred up rage and spiritrsquo and lsquofierce ragebreathed through his nostrilsrsquo and lsquohis blood boiledrsquo All such expressions seem to stand forimpetus and the rousing of spirit⁹

The second set of examples builds on the familiar comparison of courageousmen with wild beastssup1⁰ Here Aristotle does not cite but rather alludes to Homericlines and in particular to Homeric similes where a warriorrsquos courageous behav-iour is compared to the sturdy boldness of some animal in a situation of dangerAristotle comments on the bold behaviour of animals

οὐ δή ἐστιν ἀνδρεῖα διὰ τὸ ὑπrsquo ἀλγηδόνος καὶ θυμοῦ ἐξελαυνόμενα πρὸς τὸν κίνδυνον ὁρμᾶνοὐθὲν τῶν δεινῶν προορῶντα ἐπεὶ οὕτω γε κἂν οἱ ὄνοι ἀνδρεῖοι εἶεν πεινῶντεςmiddot τυπτόμενοιγὰρ οὐκ ἀφίστανται τῆς νομῆςmiddot(EN 1116b33ndash 1117a1)

Now rushing into danger because one is driven on by pain and spirit without any sense in advanceof the frightening things one has to face is not courage because on that score even donkeys wouldbe courageous when hungry since they donrsquot stop grazing even when they are beaten

Aristotlersquos image is an allusion to the famous Homeric simile where TelamonianAjax in his slow and unwilling retreat in the face of a Trojan assault is com-pared to an ass who does not stop feeding itself although it is being incessantly

θυμός or τὸ θυμοειδές see Hobbs For a discussion of ἠνορέη (lsquomanlinessrsquo the Homericprecursor of ἀνδρεία) see Graziosi Haubold Aristotle quotes from memory and as a result inaccurately from (a) Il ndash (μέγασθένος ἔμβαλrsquo ἑκάστῳ καρδίῃ) and ndash (μένος δέ οἱ ἔμβαλε θυμῷ) (b) Il ndash(ἔγειρε μένος μέγα θέλγε δὲ θυμόν) (c) Od ndash (τοῦ δrsquo ὠρίνετο θυμός ἀνὰ ῥῖνας δέ οἱἤδη δριμὺ μένοςhellip) (d) the expression ἔζεσεν αἷμα does not occur in Homer cf Stewart I Burnet Irwin

All the translations of the Nicomachean Ethics are taken from Taylor with minor adjustments Cf Pl La e R b


beaten by children (Il 11558ndash65)sup1sup1 From the very beginning of the discussion ofthe ἀνδρεία of θυμός Aristotle compares this form of courage to the fury and fe-rocious spirit of animals

καὶ τὸν θυμὸν δrsquo ἐπὶ τὴν ἀνδρείαν φέρουσινmiddot ἀνδρεῖοι γὰρ εἶναι δοκοῦσι καὶ οἱ διὰ θυμὸνὥσπερ τὰ θηρία ἐπὶ τοὺς τρώσαντας φερόμενα ὅτι καὶ οἱ ἀνδρεῖοι θυμοειδεῖςmiddot(EN 1116b24ndash26)

People also bring spirit under the heading of courage Those who from spirit rush like wildbeasts against those who have injured them also seem courageous since for their part coura-geous people are spirited

The image of wounded beasts attacking their pursuers to which Aristotle com-pares those driven by their spirit into acting courageously is less specific thanthe aforementioned example of the ass Nonetheless given the recurrence ofthe references to Homer in this part of the EN I argue that we can read thisimage as another allusion to a Homeric simileWhen the Trojan Agenor decidesto hold his ground and face the raging Achilles his bold determination is com-pared to that of a leopard which though wounded does not give up its fightagainst those who attack it

ἠΰτε πάρδαλις εἶσι βαθείης ἐκ ξυλόχοιοἀνδρὸς θηρητῆρος ἐναντίον οὐδέ τι θυμῷταρβεῖ οὐδὲ φοβεῖται ἐπεί κεν ὑλαγμὸν ἀκούσῃmiddotεἴ περ γὰρ φθάμενός μιν ἢ οὐτάσῃ ἠὲ βάλῃσινἀλλά τε καὶ περὶ δουρὶ πεπαρμένη οὐκ ἀπολήγειἀλκῆς πρίν γrsquo ἠὲ ξυμβλήμεναι ἠὲ δαμῆναιmiddotὣς Aντήνορος υἱὸς ἀγαυοῦ δῖος Aγήνωροὐκ ἔθελεν φεύγειν πρὶν πειρήσαιτrsquo Aχιλῆος(Il 21573ndash80)

But as a leopard emerges out of her timbered coverto face the man who is hunting her and is neither afraidat heart nor runs away when she hears them baying against herand even though one be too quick for her with spear thrust or spear thrown stuck with theshaft though she be she will not ceaseher fighting fury till she has closed with one of them or is overthrownso proud Antenorrsquos son brilliant Agenorrefused to run away until he had tested Achilles(trans Lattimore 1951 with adjustments)sup1sup2

Cf Stewart I Burnet Irwin

Note the reference to the θυμός of the leopard () as well as to its ἀλκή () which doesnot cease although the animal is hurt at EN bndash Aristotle concludes his response to the


This form of courage can be understood as a sudden emotional impulse thatemerges as a reaction to a certain stimulus and urges one onto unreflective en-gagement with some danger According to Aristotle it is the most natural type ofἀνδρεία (φυσικωτάτη EN 1117a4) it is an irrational purely physical type of cour-age which owes more to natural instincts than to cultural norms or experiencePeople who display this type of courage like wild beasts act because of pain(διὰ λύπην EN 1116b32) and from their passion (διὰ πάθος EN 1117a8ndash9) with-out any appreciation of the danger they face By contrasting the Homeric ἀνδρείαof θυμός to genuine ἀνδρεία Aristotle does not aim to question the role of θυμόςin courage altogether In Aristotlersquos view the spirited element of human naturedoes contribute to the display of courage (συνεργεῖ EN 1116b31) but its role inpromoting courageous behaviour must be subsidiary not primary This is pre-cisely why wild beasts and θυμός-driven humans fail to qualify as properly cou-rageous their spirit is the primary motivational force that incites their coura-geous behaviour For Aristotle θυμός provides only the natural basis requiredfor courageous action and is inadequate by itself to produce genuine ἀνδρεία

φυσικωτάτη δrsquo ἔοικεν ἡ διὰ τὸν θυμὸν εἶναι καὶ προσλαβοῦσα προαίρεσιν καὶ τὸ οὗ ἕνεκα ἀν-δρεία εἶναι καὶ οἱ ἄνθρωποι δὴ ὀργιζόμενοι μὲν ἀλγοῦσι τιμωρούμενοι δrsquo ἥδονταιmiddot οἱ δὲ διὰταῦτα μαχόμενοι μάχιμοι μέν οὐκ ἀνδρεῖοι δέmiddot οὐ γὰρ διὰ τὸ καλὸν οὐδrsquo ὡς ὁ λόγος ἀλλὰδιὰ πάθοςmiddot(EN 1117a4ndash9)

Now courage prompted by spirit seems to be something purely natural but it is when in ad-dition it includes choice and the goal that it is courage And people feel distress when they areroused to anger and pleasure when they retaliate people who fight for these reasons arecombative but not courageous for they do not do it for the sake of the noble or as reasonprescribes but from feeling

The courage of spirit requires two additional elements to become genuineἀνδρεία deliberate choice (προαίρεσις) and proper motivation or direction to-wards the proper goal (τὸ οὗ ἕνεκα) Courageous actions do not consist in rush-ing foolhardily into every danger They must be rationally chosen and dictated byreason (λόγος) after calculating the nature of the impending danger the alterna-

Socratic widening of ἀνδρεία by arguing that people show courage (ἀνδρίζονται) in circumstan-ces which admit of ἀλκή or in which it is καλόν to die In the EE discussion of courage Aristotlecompares the courage of θυμός to the fury of wild boars (ἄγριοι σύες) which display such behav-iour when they are beside themselves (EE andash) Again the image of the distraughtwild boar seems to be an allusion to a Homeric simile at Il ndash Idomeneus is comparedto a wild boar (σῦς) whose back bristles and whose eyes are lsquoshining with firersquo as it stands up toa group of men attacking it


tive courses of action open to one and what one puts at stake by risking onersquoslife in battle Furthermore genuine ἀνδρεία requires proper motivation on thepart of the agent In Aristotlersquos theory of virtue performing virtuous actions isnot enough for making one truly virtuous one must also act for a certain reasonCourageous behaviour motivated by pain or passion does not count as genuineἀνδρεία The truly courageous man is expected to act lsquofor the sake of the noblersquo(διὰ τὸ καλόν or τοῦ καλοῦ ἕνεκα)sup1sup3

b πολιτικὴ ἀνδρεία lsquocitizen couragersquo

Aristotle distinguishes between two forms of πολιτικὴ ἀνδρεία one of which rankshigher than the other The lower form of πολιτικὴ ἀνδρεία is a result of compulsionand fear It is displayed by soldiers who maintain their posts and fight becausetheir commanders use coercive means such as punishments and beatings to en-force their obedience Again Aristotle chooses a Homeric example to elucidatethis form of courage he cites Agamemnonrsquos words to his troops by means ofwhich Agamemnon threatens with death anyone who stays by the ships andavoids fighting (EN 1116a29ndash35)sup1⁴ In its higher form πολιτικὴ ἀνδρεία is motivat-ed by a sense of shame towards the opinion of others (διrsquo αἰδῶ ΕΝ 1116a28) Thislatter form of πολιτικὴ ἀνδρεία ranks higher than the former for in Aristotlersquos viewshame is superior to fear as an incentive to action Fear is what the many (οἱ πολ-λοί) respond to such people do the right thing only to avoid the pain of punish-ment On the other hand responsiveness to shame is a mark of better upbringingand of having already acquired a sense of what is noble and truly pleasant (EN1179b10ndash16) Acting out of shame and the desire to avoid doing what is consid-ered disgraceful suggests that one pays due respect to the opinion of others andhas been properly habituated in acting in accordance with the values of the com-munity In other words whereas fear implies blind conformity to the precepts ofothers with a view to avoiding external sanctions shame requires the internaliza-tion by the agent of the values of the community one who acts out of shame hasmade the values of the community onersquos ownsup1⁵

This higher form of lsquocitizen couragersquo Aristotle says is mostly displayed insocieties where the complementary concepts of honour and shame weigh heavily

On the two requirements see Joachim Deslauriers ndash The reference is to Il ndash but Aristotle wrongly attributes these words to Hector in-stead of Agamemnon cf Stewart I CfWilliams ndash and Cairns ndash ndash ndash who respond to Doddsrsquofamous description of Homeric society as a lsquoshame culturersquo (Dodds ndash)


and are regarded as major motivational factors Aristotle finds that the societywhich best fits this description is the society depicted in the epics so he adducesHomer once again to reinforce his argument and elucidate it by means of twoconcrete examples

δοκοῦσι γὰρ ὑπομένειν τοὺς κινδύνους οἱ πολῖται διὰ τὰ ἐκ τῶν νόμων ἐπιτίμια καὶ τὰ ὀνείδηκαὶ διὰ τὰς τιμάςmiddot καὶ διὰ τοῦτο ἀνδρειότατοι δοκοῦσιν εἶναι παρrsquo οἷς οἱ δειλοὶ ἄτιμοι καὶ οἱἀνδρεῖοι ἔντιμοι τοιούτους δὲ καὶ Ὅμηρος ποιεῖ οἷον τὸν Διομήδην καὶ τὸν ἝκτοραmiddotΠουλυδάμας μοι πρῶτος ἐλεγχείην ἀναθήσειmiddotκαὶ Διομήδης῞Εκτωρ γάρ ποτε φήσει ἐνὶ Τρώεσσrsquo ἀγορεύωνldquoΤυδείδης ὑπrsquo ἐμεῖοrdquo(EN 1116a18ndash26)

Citizens seem to face dangers because of the penalties of the law and public disgrace andhonour and therefore the most courageous seem to be those among whom the cowardlyare disgraced and the courageous honoured Homer depicts people of that kind such as Di-omede and Hector who sayPolydamas will be the first to heap reproach on meandHector will say when he speaks to the TrojanslsquoThe son of Tydeus has fled from mersquo

Aristotlersquos knowledge of Homer becomes evident in this context since the exam-ples he chooses to use from the Iliad are particularly successful in showing howonersquos sense of shame can generate courageous behaviour The first is derivedfrom Hectorrsquos famous monologue before his final battle with Achilles Hector an-ticipates the heavy criticism he will incur from Polydamas for not heeding hisprudent advice and decides to remain outside the walls of Troy and confrontthe raging Achilles (Il 2299ndash 110) In the second example Diomedes forcedby Zeusrsquo thunderbolt to abandon his advance complains that should he hearkento Nestorrsquos advice and retreat before Hector Hectorrsquos boast would make him suf-fer an insufferable loss of face (Il 8146ndash50)

Having clearly illustrated the nature of πολιτικὴ ἀνδρεία Aristotle then goeson to describe its workings and explain how it relates to genuine ἀνδρεία

ὡμοίωται δrsquo αὕτη μάλιστα τῇ πρότερον εἰρημένῃsup1⁶ ὅτι διrsquo ἀρετὴν γίνεται διrsquo αἰδῶ γὰρ καὶ διὰκαλοῦ ὄρεξιν (τιμῆς γάρ) καὶ φυγὴν ὀνείδους αἰσχροῦ ὄντος

This sort most closely resembles the one previously discussed [i e genuine courage] becauseit comes about from virtue i e from shame and the desire for a noble thing (namely honour)and the avoidance of disgrace as something shameful

Cf ΕΝ a μάλιστα ἔοικεν


Aristotlersquos construal of πολιτικὴ ἀνδρεία fits perfectly in the Homeric framework andcaptures the epic representation of military prowess its motivation and its scopeThe martial valour of a Homeric hero is the most evident manifestation of hisἀρετήsup1⁷ which is motivated by his sense of αἰδώς towards his milieu in battle cir-cumstances the single cry for αἰδώς is the most common way to prompt slacking ordiscouraged men back into actionsup1⁸ By displaying his prowess in battle the Homer-ic hero seeks to secure for himself τιμή which entails both respect and a good nameamong his peers and the more concrete material possessions and privileges that ac-company his superior status and social positionsup1⁹ Failure or unwillingness to dis-play courage besmirches onersquos τιμή and results in the disgraceful condition ofbeing open to the reproach of otherssup2⁰ Thus the higher form of Aristotlersquos lsquocitizencouragersquo corresponds to the most typical form of Homeric courage namely couragemotivated by a sense of shame in the face of public criticism

This form of courage Aristotle says is most akin but not tantamount togenuine ἀνδρεία This is due to the status of honour (τιμή) the complementaryconcept of shame as a motive for action Aristotle classifies honour as lsquothe great-est of the external goodsrsquo (EN 1123b20ndash21) but rejects the view of those whoconsider it the supreme good of human life (EN 1095b22ndash26) Honour is indeeda noble motive since it is not distributed haphazardly but is bestowed onlyupon those who promote or are in a position to promote the communityrsquoswell-being (Rh 1361a28ndash30) In this light displaying courage with a view tohonour is finer than being courageous for the sake of acquiring less admirablegoods such as power or wealth In Aristotlersquos theory of virtue however honourdoes not constitute the proper motivation for a truly virtuous action If one fightsbravely being primarily motivated by the honour that customarily ensues fromsuch actions then one is motivated by external rewards rather than by the na-ture of the action itself In Aristotelian terms this amounts to performing an ac-tion for an external end which violates one of the requirements of virtuous ac-tions namely that the action must be chosen for its own sake (προαιρούμενος διrsquoαὐτά EN 1105a32) Aristotlersquos principle that the courageous man should act lsquoforthe sake of the noblersquo (τοῦ καλοῦ ἕνεκα EN 1115b12ndash 13 23ndash24) redirects the

Il ndash ndash ndash ndash ndash ndash Il ndash Ilndash ndash ndash Il ndash ndash ndash ndash


order of priority and focuses on the intrinsic value of the action rather than onthe external rewards that accompany itsup2sup1

c lsquoFor the sake of the noblersquo

Performing an action τοῦ καλοῦ ἕνεκα implies that the agent chooses to act in theway he does because he fully appreciates and is motivated by the intrinsic beau-ty or goodness of his actionsup2sup2 The man of citizen courage (in its higher form) andthe man of genuine ἀνδρεία may indeed prove equally courageous in action Inaddition by displaying courage they act in a way that their social milieu andthey themselves regard as καλόν The man of genuine ἀνδρεία however ration-ally grasps that what renders courageous actions καλόν is their intrinsic good-ness not the praise or honour that customarily ensues from them Unlike theman of citizen courage who acts with a view to honour the man of genuineἀνδρεία is motivated by the intrinsic value of his action What prompts him isthe understanding that such an action is worth doing in itself just because itis the kind of action it is regardless of any favourable consequences orrewardssup2sup3 When the cause justifies the risk the man of genuine courage riskshis life in battle even if no honour is to be gained by his action or even if hisdecision to act courageously is shared by no one but himself

Aristotlersquos analysis therefore shows that πολιτικὴ ἀνδρεία the most typicalform of Homeric courage ranks lower than genuine ἀνδρεία Nonetheless Aristotledoes not overlook or underrate the value of the Homeric conception of courage Ar-istotle often reiterates that becoming truly virtuous and so acting lsquofor the sake of thenoblersquo is not an easy task few people are endowed with the moral and mental ca-pacities that would enable them to achieve this ideal But the city still needs protec-tion and ordinary men to defend it and risk their lives for its sake Therein lies the

There is no tension or incompatibility between doing an action lsquofor the sake of the noblersquo anddoing it lsquofor its own sakersquo a courageous action is seen as noble in virtue of its being courageoussee Rogers Lear ndash Taylor ndash This is only one of the attributes that Aristotlersquos conception of τὸ καλόν entails I focus onthis aspect of τὸ καλόν because it is the one most relevant to the distinction that Aristotledraws between lsquocitizen couragersquo and genuine courage Actions described as καλόν are also ra-tionally chosen demanding praiseworthy fitting or appropriate to the circumstances inwhich they are performed and (more often than not) other-regarding Actions of genuineἀνδρεία display of course all these characteristics For Aristotlersquos conception of τὸ καλόν seeOwens Broadie ndash Rogers Nisters ndash Irwin For a de-tailed discussion of the motivation of Aristotelian ἀνδρεία see Rogers Cf Cairns n Taylor


value of honour and shame as motivational factors being more applicable to ordi-nary people than the rational appreciation of τὸ καλόν the desire for honour and asense of shame in the face of public criticism ensure that the city will not be leftwithout protection As Aristotle observes while professional soldiers are the firstto flee citizen soldiers hold their ground and sacrifice themselves because they pre-fer death to the disgrace of a shameful flight (EN 1116b17ndash20) lsquoCitizen couragersquo pre-serves the city even when the citizens are not so philosophically oriented as to fulfilthe requirements of τὸ καλόν This pragmatic form of courage though defective inphilosophical terms is according to Aristotle the form that most closely resemblesgenuine ἀνδρεία

Conclusion

Homer occupies a prominent place in the part of Aristotlersquos discussion where gen-uine ἀνδρεία is contrasted to five commonly held but defective conceptions of cour-age Aristotle finds that two of these endoxic conceptions πολιτικὴ ἀνδρεία and thecourage of θυμός are formulated already in the epics He therefore appropriatesHomer to elucidate and reinforce his argument by citing and alluding to Homericexamples which provide concrete evidence of the forms of courage in question Ar-istotle singles out these two lsquoHomericrsquo forms as being closer to genuine ἀνδρεία thanthe rest and explains why they are defective and how they can be transformed intogenuine ἀνδρεία Like Homer and Plato Aristotle sees a connection between θυμόςand courage and argues that in order to become true courage the ἀνδρεία of θυμόςrequires deliberation (προαίρεσις) and proper motivation Courageous actions mustbe the product of rational choice and must be performed with a view to a certaingoal Motivation is what distinguishes πολιτικὴ ἀνδρεία from genuine ἀνδρεία aswell lsquoCitizen couragersquo aims at honour which is a noble thing but it does not aimat lsquothe noblersquo τὸ καλόν itself

Aristotlersquos conception of genuine ἀνδρεία underlines the importance of prop-er motivation for virtuous action and therefore refines develops and deepensthe Homeric representation of courage Nevertheless throughout his discussionAristotle acknowledges the validity and value of the Homeric outlook By rank-ing the courage of a Hector or a Diomedes as second-best next to his conceptionof genuine ἀνδρεία Aristotle does justice to the authority of the poet and at thesame time propounds his own view on what it means to be truly courageous byacting lsquofor the sake of the noblersquo


Christina-Panagiota Manolea

Homeric Echoes Pythagorean FlavourThe Reception of Homer in Iamblichus

Introduction

The Neoplatonic philosopher Porphyry (3rd century AD) has included valuableexegetic material in his work Homeric Questions that is based on Aristarchrsquos prin-ciple lsquoὍμηρον ἐξ Ὁμήρου σαφηνίζεινrsquo in terms of methodologysup1 The work in ques-tion is part of a long tradition of commentary that goes back at least to Aristotleand was enormously appropriated in the Byzantine Homeric scholia but none-theless is up to now relatively unexploredsup2 Moreover Porphyryrsquos short mono-graph De antro Nympharum is also a text of the utmost importance as it inter-prets a certain passage of the Odyssey (13102ndash 12) allegorically and is regardedas a major text of ancient literary criticismsup3 Both works show the Neoplatonicphilosopherrsquos knowledge and esteem for Homer and also render Porphyry amajor figure in the history of Homeric reception

Such was the situation with Homerrsquos reception by Porphyry when his stu-dent Iamblichus of Chalcis (3rdndash4th century AD) appeared Iamblichus was a pro-lific Neoplatonic philosopher who elaborated the Platonic system propoundedby Plotinus and Porphyry widely receiving the Pythagorean pseudepigraphaand the Chaldean Oracles and also gave a prominent role to theurgical theoryand practice⁴ But he was also the man who influenced Athenian Neoplatonismmore than any other and also a figure that was hagiographized by posteriors

For Porphyryrsquos work see Lamberton ndash cf Smith For Aristarchus abrief yet inclusive account is found in Janko ndash cf Manolea ndash See Lamberton cf Manolea See Lamberton ndash This analysis of the work in question pioneering in its time isstill valuable especially as a starting point on the workrsquos study Moreover A Smith ( )rightly remarks that the style of approach and presentation found in this work is to be found inmany other works of Porphyry as well He also rightly stresses the philosophical content of theDe Antro Nympharum For an introduction to Iamblichusrsquo philosophy see Dillon ndashWe should note thatDillon is of the opinion that the role of theurgical theory and practice in the thought of Iambli-chus has been given too prominent a role in the past ( ) Nevertheless this element didexist and was also important in Iambichusrsquo and his studentsrsquo thought and everyday practice

who called him lsquodivinersquo⁵ Nevertheless Iamblichusrsquo attitude towards Homer isnot identical with Porphyryrsquos In his existing works he has not provided uswith an appropriation of the Homeric tradition as rich and as elaborate as hismasterrsquos⁶ Therefore it is not surprising to see a lack of attention on the scholarsrsquopart as far as Iamblichusrsquo Homeric passages are concerned

However this does not mean that the Homeric tradition is absent from Iam-blichusrsquo works or that Homer is particularly underestimated by the Neoplatonicphilosopher in question In this paper we shall try to answer a series ofquestions⁷ How was Homerrsquos text received by Iamblichus What are the artisticand intellectual processes involved in his ndashadmittedly limitedndash selection of theHomeric material Did the receiversrsquo knowledge of Homer play a role in Iambli-chusrsquo choice What is the purpose for Homerrsquos presence in Iamblichusrsquo philo-sophical works It will be demonstrated that quotations from both the Iliadand the Odyssey do appear in some surviving philosophical works of Iamblichusthat primarily aimed not at the Homeric textrsquos elaboration but at the expressionof Iamblichusrsquo own Neoplatonic beliefs The existing Homeric passages (tracedin only three extant philosophical works of Iamblichus namely the De vita Py-thagorica the Protrepticus and the De mysteriis) will be examined and briefly an-alyzed in order to demonstrate that the Homeric tradition is employed in somecases for anecdotological purposes moreover it will be shown that Homeric ref-erences are rather well placed in Iamblichusrsquo philosophical discussions on cos-mology and metaphysics and bear a distinctly Pythagorean flavour

a De Vita Pythagorica

(i) At 911ndash13 Iamblichus says that Pythagoras left Samos by night with a certainHermodamas surnamed lsquothe Creophylianrsquo and was said to descend from Creophy-luswho was Homerrsquos host⁸ Iamblichus had already mentioned Creophylus as one

We shall only mention the sophist Eunapius whose Life of Iamblichus is hagiographicalthough ill informed as Dillon rightly remarks ( ) The expression lsquoὁ θεῖος Ἰάμβλιχοςrsquois found in Syrianus and Proclus (Neoplatonic School of Athens th century AD) as well asin writers of the School of Ammonius (Neoplatonic School of Alexandria th century AD) For instance Lamberton has argued that Iamblichus paid little attention to the inter-pretation of Homermdashin his own words lsquomore important [hellip] is the almost complete lack of concernfor the interpretation of early poetry that characterizes Iamblichus and his immediate cyclersquo See Hardwick De vita Pyth ndash νύκτωρ λαθὼν πάντας μετὰ τοῦ Ἑρμοδάμαντος μὲν τὸ ὄνομα Κρεοφυ-λείου δὲ ἐπικαλουμένου ὃς ἐλέγετο Κρεοφύλου ἀπόγονος εἶναι Ὁμήρου δὲ ξένου τοῦ ποιητοῦ

176 Christina-Panagiota Manolea

of the eminent teachers of Pythagoras (88ndash11) Creophylus is known from manyancient sources to have been closely related to Homer although in a rather blurredway⁹ But given the fact that Pythagoras himself was by birth and studentship per-sonally involved in the SamosCreophylus tradition of the transmission of the Ho-meric textsup1⁰ Iamblichus could not but have treated Creophylus favourably thusshowing consciously or unconsciously a quite early close relation between Pytha-goras and Homer Now as to the descendant of Creophylus Hermodamas who iscalled lsquothe Creophylianrsquo Iamblichus in the passage that we are discussing men-tions him as the man who taught Pythagoras and travelled with him to see Pher-ecydes Anaximander and Thales We therefore see how Homeric tradition andphilosophy are encountered in this Pythagoras-Hermodamas relation

˂οὗ δεῖ δοκεῖ ˃ γενέσθαι φίλος καὶ διδάσκαλος τῶν ἁπάντων μετὰ τούτου πρὸς τὸν Φερεκύδην διε-πόρθμευε καὶ πρὸς Aναξίμανδρον τὸν φυσικὸν καὶ πρὸς Θαλῆν εἰς Μίλητον For information on Creophylus Burkert ndash is still useful Yet Creophylusrsquo relation toHomer is challenging in itself There is an ancient discussion on the authorship of the poem Oe-chaliae Halosis as to whether it should be attributed to Creophylus rather than Homer For a recentbrief yet illuminating account of this complex issue see Graziosi ndash Graziosi rightlyremarks that there is a group of authors (Stasinus Lesches and Creophylus) who are clearly sub-ordinated to Homer are presented as his relatives or friends and they are said to have been givenby Homer some of his poems as gifts To speak only of Creophylus ancient sources refer to him asHomerrsquos host (Sextus Empiricus Adv Math ndash Κρεοφύλου πόνος εἰμί δόμῳ ποτὲ θεῖον ἀοι-δὸν δεξαμένου) while Aelius Aristides describes him as an ἑταῖρος of Homer (Πρὸς Καπίτωναndash ὁ γὰρ Κρεόφυλος [hellip] ὁ τοῦ Ὁμήρου ἑταῖρος It is Strabo who informs us that OechaliaeHalosis is said to have been given to Creophylus by Homer as a gift but also mentions that Cal-limachus states the opposite and links the whole issue with the story of the hospitality (Strabo Κρεώφυλος ὅν φασι δεξάμενον ξενίᾳ ποτὲ Ὅμηρον λαβεῖν δῶρον τὴν ἐπιγραφὴν τοῦ ποι-ήματος ὃ καλοῦσιν Οἰχαλίας ἅλωσιν Καλλίμαχος δὲ τοὐναντίον ἐμφαίνει διrsquo ἐπιγράμματος τινος ὡςἐκείνου μὲν ποιήσαντος λεγομένου δrsquo Ὁμήρου διὰ τὴν λεγομένην ξενίαν) It is indeed Callimachuswho in Epigram attributes the Oechaliae Halosis to Creophylus For a discussion of Straboand Callimachusrsquo evidence see Graziosi ndash We should not forget either that Platodoes not have a positive opinion about Creophylus (R andashb) Nevertheless Graziosi seemsto consider that negative evidence for Creophylus was not influential in antiquity In our case Iam-blichus does not seem willing to speak of the authorship of the Oechaliae Halosis or to speak neg-atively of Creophylus in general Iamblichus was in all probability familiar with the Platonic opin-ion about Creophylus and maybe with Callimachusrsquo opinion as well He nevertheless does notchoose to touch the issue in question There is a discussion in modern scholarship concerning what seems to be a double traditionin the Homeric text transmission namely the SamosCreophylus tradition and the ChiosHomer-idae tradition For an account of the double traditions the disagreement between scholars andwhat seems to be a rather convincing conclusion see Graziosi ndash

Homeric Echoes Pythagorean Flavour The Reception of Homer in Iamblichus 177

What is important however is the fact that Iamblichusrsquo teacher Porphyry men-tioned Hermodamasrsquo association with Pythagoras in his own De vita Pythagoricasup1sup1

We should not forget that the two works bearing the same title and written by themaster and the student present many similarities and often use the same sourcesbut they also display considerable differences as to their aim and contextsup1sup2

(ii) At 6414ndash 15 we have a Pythagorean reading of epic poetry as selectedpassages from Hesiod and Homer are reported to have been used by Pythagorasin order to cure the soulsup1sup3 Furthermore we cannot but observe the epithetἐξειλεγμένοις (lsquoselectedrsquo) as it places Iamblichus in the tradition not only of Py-thagoras but also of Plato who actually in the Republic expressed severe reser-vations on poetry and art in general but in the end accepted the use of selectedpoems that would undeniably result in the proper education of the youthsup1⁴ Iam-blichus repeats his opinion on the use of selected passages at 9220ndash22 usingalmost identical words with his first referencesup1⁵ What is important is the factthat the Homeric tradition is used in order to cure the soul (πρὸς ἐπανόρθωσινψυχῆς)We are dealing with the healing power of the epics of Homer and Hesiodor as has been notedsup1⁶ with a ritual use of Homeric poems Iamblichus has

Porphyry De vita Pyth ndash(ἐπανελθόντα δrsquo εἰς τὴν Ἰωνίαν ἐντεῦθεν τὸν Πυθαγόρανπρῶτον μὲν Φερεκύδῃ τῷ Συρίῳ ὁμιλῆσαι δεύτερον δrsquo Ἑρμοδάμαντι τῷ Κρεοφυλείῳ ἐν Σάμῳἤδη γηράσκοντι) and ndash (νοσήσαντα δὲ τὸν Φερεκύδην ἐν Δήλῳ θεραπεύσας ὁ Πυθαγόραςκαὶ ἀποθανόντα θάψας εἰς Σάμον ἐπανῆλθεν πόθῳ τοῦ συγγενέσθαι Ἑρμοδάμαντι τῷ Κρεοφυλείῳ)For both passages see Makris ad loc See Makris ndash De vita Pyth ndash χρῆσθαι δὲ καὶ Ὁμήρου καὶ Ἡσιόδου λέξεσιν ἐξειλεγμέναις πρὸς ἐπα-νόρθωσιν ψυχῆς The use of the epic tradition by early Pythagoreans has been adequatelystressed by Delatte ndash Boyanceacute ff Buffiegravere ndash Detienne ndash According to Lambertonrsquos analysis ( ndash) the evidence for early Pytha-gorean concern with Homer is considerable but we should nevertheless bear in mind that whenwe refer to their allegories we should not insist too strongly on distinct categories of physicalmoral and mystical allegory For all those issues cf Makris ndash n cf also Man-olea ndash For a discussion on Platorsquos attitude towards art in general and poetry in particular the bib-liographical references are numerous and date from the

th century In fact the matter is farfrom being closed From the huge bibliography on Platorsquos attitude towards art in general it isworth mentioning T Gouldrsquos influential article (Gould ) For Platorsquos attitude towards poetryan interesting account is to be found in Murray ndash Furthermore a brief but nice dis-cussion on Platorsquos attitude towards Homer in particular can be found in Richardson ndash On this issue cf Murray ndash Manolea ndash De vita Pyth ndash ὑπελάμβανον δὲ καὶ τὴν μουσικὴν μεγάλα συμβάλλεσθαι πρὸς ὑγείανἄν τις αὐτῇ χρῆται κατὰ τοὺς προσήκοντας τρόπους ἐχρῶντο δὲ καὶ Ὁμήρου καὶ Ἡσιόδου λέξεσιδιειλεγμέναις πρὸς ἐπανόρθωσιν ψυχῆς Lamberton


probably taken the whole idea from Porphyry who in his De vita Pythagoricasup1⁷sustains exactly the same thing

(iii) At 2220ndash26 Homer is acknowledged to have done the right thing when heexalted the king of the gods with the title lsquofather of gods and mortalsrsquosup1⁸ The poet isimmediately afterwards described as a myth maker nevertheless Iamblichuspoints out that the characteristics he ascribed to Zeus were right from a Pythagor-ean point of view In these words of Iamblichus we realize a clearly Pythagorizingattempt at giving a solution to the Platonic reservations towards poetrysup1⁹

(iv) Moreover at 2327ndash247sup2⁰ we find an interesting moralizing interpreta-tion of the Iliad the whole poem deals with nothing less than the disastrous con-sequences of ἀκρασία (lsquolack of self-controlrsquo) of a single man Lambertonsup2sup1 hastaken the man to be meant to have been Paris According to this interpretationhad the younger son of Priam had some self-control neither the barbarians (Tro-jans) nor the Greeks would have suffered terribly as they did If we follow thisinterpretation Iamblichus claimed that the Trojans faced the consequence ofwar ie the defeat and the destruction of their city The Greeks in their turnfaced difficulties when they sailed back home and were also granted with aten-year and a thousand-year punishment As far as the Trojans are concernedthe interpretation is fine but in the case of the Greeks we have some problemsWhy is the sailing back home mentioned It has nothing to do with Paris whohad already been killed by Neoptolemus And what about the ten-year and thethousand-year sentence as well as the maidens from Locroi

It seems that each of the two parties suffered because of one man but it wasnot the same man for both parties For the Trojans it was Paris but for the Greeksit was AjaxWe know that the rape of Cassandra by Ajax the Locrian took placeat the altar of Athena where Cassandra had sought refuge and that it was

De vita Pyth καὶ ἐπῇδε τῶν Ὁμήρου καὶ Ἡσιόδου ὅσα καθημεροῦν τὴν ψυχὴν ἐδοκίμαζε CfMakris ad loc De vita Pyth ndash ὅθεν καὶ τὸνὍμηρον τῇ αὐτῇ προσηγορίᾳ τὸν βασιλέα τῶν θεῶν αὔξ-ειν ὀνομάζοντα πατέρα τῶν θεῶν καὶ τῶν θνητῶν πολλοὺς δὲ καὶ τῶν ἄλλων μυθοποιῶν παραδε-δωκέναι τοὺς βασιλεύοντας τῶν θεῶν τὴν μεριζομένην φιλοστοργίαν παρὰ τῶν τέκνων πρὸς τὴνὑπάρχουσαν συζυγίαν τῶν γονέων καθrsquoαὑτοὺς περιποιήσασθαι πεφιλοτετιμημένους See above n De Vita Pyth ndash φανερὸν δὲ εἶναι καὶ διὰ τῆς ἀντικειμένης ἀντιθέσεωςmiddot τῶν γὰρβαρβάρων καὶ τῶν Ἑλλήνων περὶ τὴν Τροίαν ἀντιταξαμένων ἑκατέρους διrsquoἑνὸς ἀκρασίαν ταῖς δει-νοτάταις περιπεσεῖν συμφοραῖς τοὺς μὲν ἐν τῷ πολέμῳ τοὺς δὲ κατὰ τὸν ἀνάπλουν καὶ μόνης˂ταύτης˃τῆς ἀδικίας τὸν θεὸν δεκαετῆ καὶ χιλιετῆ τάξαι τὴν τιμωρίαν χρησμῳδήσαντα τήν τετῆς Τροίας ἅλωσιν καὶ τὴν τῶν παρθένων ἀποστολὴν παρὰ τῶν Λοκρῶν εἰς τὸ τῆς Aθηνᾶς τῆς Ἰλιά-δος ἱερόν Lamberton


avenged afterwards by Poseidonsup2sup2 So if in the case of the Greeks we perceive theman who did not control himself to have been Ajax we interpret the passage cor-rectly Iamblichus is clearly referring to the sentence imposed on the habitants ofLocroi and the maidensrsquo account for the Locrian custom to send every year twovirgins of their noblest families to serve in the temple of Athena Ilias ThereforeLambertonrsquos interpretation of the audacious man is incorrect (actually it wasAjax and not Paris)

Iamblichus thus proves himself to have been undoubtedly familiar with Cas-sandrarsquos story In any case we should bear in mind that we are dealing with amoralizing interpretation of the Trojan War which can well be characterizedas Pythagoreansup2sup3

(v) At 3110ndash16sup2⁴ Iamblichus mentions the effort of Calypso to bribe Odysseusby giving him immortality at the cost of forgetting and abandoning his legal wifePenelope This Odyssey element is nicely exploited in the tradition of Pythagorasrsquoteaching as he is supposed to have been the one who made use of the episodeand stressed that it took place near CrotonWe may welcome this moralizing Pytha-gorean use of a Homeric heroine as a clear shift from Plotinuswho at Enn I 6816ndash21 did not even make the distinction between Circe and Calypsosup2⁵

(vi) At 347ndash358sup2⁶ Pythagoras is reported to have claimed and proven that hehimself in a previous life had been Euphorbus son of Panthoos (the one who

This is a story of the wider tradition of the Trojan War It is found in the Iliou Persis and theIlias Parva cited in Proclusrsquo account For Cassandra as a prophetic figure and for her bad fatesee Davreux passim Mason ndash Aeacutelion ndash Cassandrarsquos rape hasalso been depicted in art (for example in fifth-century pottery Cassandra is often depicted at themoment that she clutches the image of Athena and Ajax seizes her) See Lamberton De Vita Pyth ndash λέγεται δὲ καὶ τοιοῦτόν τι διελθεῖν ὅτι περὶ τὴν χώραν τῶν Κροτω-νιατῶν ἀνδρὸς μὲν ἀρετὴ πρὸς γυναῖκα διαβεβόηται Ὀδυσσέως οὐ δεξαμένου παρὰ τῆς Καλυψοῦςἀθανασίαν ἐπὶ τῷ τὴν Πηνελόπην καταλιπεῖν ὑπολείποιτο δὲ ταῖς γυναιξὶν εἰς τοὺς ἄνδρας ἀποδεί-ξασθαι τὴν καλοκαγαθίαν ὅπως εἰς ἴσον καταστήσωσι τὴν εὐλογίαν See Lamberton ndash De vita Pyth ndash Aλλὰ μὴν τῆς γε τῶν ἀνθρώπων ἐπιμελείας ἀρχὴν ἐποιεῖτο τὴν ἀρί-στην ἥνπερ ἔδει προειληφέναι τοὺς μέλλοντας καὶ περὶ τῶν ἄλλων τὰ ἀληθῆ μαθήσεσθαι ἐναρ-γέστατα γὰρ καὶ σαφῶς ἀνεμίμνησκε τῶν ἐντυγχανόντων πολλοὺς τοῦ προτέρου βίου ὃν αὐτῶνἡ ψυχὴ πρὸ τοῦ τῷδε τῷ σώματι ἐνδεθῆναι πάλαι ποτὲ ἐβίωσε καὶ ἑαυτὸν δὲ ἀναμφιλέκτοιςτεκμηρίοις ἀπέφαινεν Εὔφορβον γεγονέναι Πάνθου υἱόν τὸν Πατρόκλου καταγωνιστήν καὶ τῶνὉμηρικῶν στίχων μάλιστα ἐκείνους ἐξύμνει καὶ μετὰ λύρας ἐμμελέστατα ἀνέμελπε καὶ πυκνῶς ἀνε-φώνει τοὺς ἐπιταφίους ἑαυτοῦ

αἵματί οἱ δεύοντο κόμαι Χαρίτεσσιν ὁμοῖαιπλοχμοί θrsquo οἳ χρυσῷ τε καὶ ἀργύρῳ εὖ ἤσκηντοοἷον δὲ τρέφει ἔρνος ἀνὴρ ἐριθηλὲς ἐλαίης


wounded Patroclussup2⁷ and later got killed by Menelaus)sup2⁸ Pythagoras is also reportedto have cited and sung along with his lyre the corresponding Homeric passage(Il 1751ndash60) We notice that he is reported to have sung it more frequently thanany other Homeric passage The Pythagorean flavour of the context of the episodeis evidentsup2⁹ What is more exactly the same story appears at Porphyryrsquos De vita Py-thagorica 264ndash17sup3⁰ whereas the fact that Euphorbus was the first in the line of Py-thagorasrsquo lives is also briefly mentioned at 454ndash5 of the same worksup3sup1

(vii) At 655ndash 15sup3sup2 the line from Od 4221 is quoted in an anecdotological ref-erence Iamblichus holds that Empedocles sat turned his lyre played a sooth-ing calming melody and sang the aforementioned verse which actually reportsa soothing drug being prepared by Helensup3sup3 The result is that Empedocles savedboth his host Anchitos from being murdered and a young man from committingthe murder Pythagoras is reported to have done more or less the same It shouldbe noted that both Porphyry and Iamblichus mention that Pythagoras actually

χώρῳ ἐν οἰοπόλῳ ὅθrsquo ἅλις ἀναβέβρυχεν ὕδωρκαλὸν τηλεθάον τὸ δέ τε πνοιαὶ δονέουσιπαντοίων ἀνέμων καί τε βρύει ἄνθεϊ λευκῷἐλθὼν δrsquo ἐξαπίνης ἄνεμος σὺν λαίλαπι πολλῇβόθρου τrsquo ἐξέστρεψε καὶ ἐξετάνυσσrsquo ἐπὶ γαίηςmiddotτοῖον Πάνθου υἱὸν ἐυμελίην ΕὔφορβονAτρείδης Μενέλαος ἐπεὶ κτάνε τεύχεrsquo ἐσύλα

Il ndash where Euphorbus cowardly hits the disarmed Patroclus with a spear hurledat the small of his back and then retreats to the ranks For an analysis of the passage see Janko ad loc Il ndash For a brief presentation of all the Homeric passages that include Euphorbussee Edwards ad loc For a discussion of the issue of Pythagorasrsquo own metempsychosis that includes many refer-ences to ancient sources as well as to secondary bibliography see Makris ad loc Porphyry De vita pyth ndash The only difference is that instead of ἀπέφαινε Εὔφορβοντὸν Πάνθου Iamblichus wrote ἀπέφαινε Εὔφορβον γεγονέναι Πάνθου υἱόν τὸν Πατρόκλουκαταγωνιστήν The rest of the quotation is exactly the same It is evident that in an era of inter-textuality Iamblichus used his masterrsquos work without bothering to change the exact words of thepassage in question Ibid ndash ἀνέφερεν δrsquoαὐτὸν εἰς τοὺς πρότερον γεγονότας πρῶτον μὲν Εὔφορβος λέγωνγενέσθαι Ibid ndash Ἐμπεδοκλῆς δὲ σπασαμένου τὸ ξίφος ἤδη νεανίου τινὸς ἐπὶ τὸν αὐτοῦ ξενο-δόχον Ἄγχιτον ἐπεὶ δικάσας δημοσίᾳ τὸν τοῦ νεανίου πατέρα ἐθανάτωσε καὶ ἀίξαντος ὡς εἶχεσυγχύσεως καὶ θυμοῦ ξιφήρους παῖσαι τὸν τοῦ πατρὸς καταδικαστήν ὡσανεὶ φονέα Ἄγχιτονμεθαρμοσάμενος ὡς εἶχε τὴν λύραν καὶ πεπαντικόν τι μέλος καὶ κατασταλτικὸν μεταχειρισάμενοςεὐθὺς ἀνεκρούσατο τὸ νηπενθὲς ἄχολόν τε κακῶν ἐπίληθον ἁπάντων κατὰ τὸν ποιητήν καὶ τόν τεἑαυτοῦ ξενοδόχον Ἄγχιτον θανάτου ἐρρύσατο καὶ τὸν νεανίαν ἀνδροφονίας For the verse in question see Heubeck West Hainsworth ad loc


used the healing power of musicsup3⁴ In the case we are discussing though it isHomer that both Empedocles and Pythagoras were reported to have sungWe re-gard the passage as evidence on the prestige and usefulness which certain Ho-meric material used to have in Pythagorasrsquo circle We should also mention thatPlutarch interpreted the verse in question as allegory of Helenrsquos bewitchingeloquencesup3⁵ It seems that both Empedocles and Pythagoras had realized thisfact and according to Iamblichusrsquo account used the verse appropriately

(viii) An echo of Il1313 (οὐ μέν με κτενέεις ἐπεὶ οὔ τοι μόρσιμός εἰμι) istraced at 11726ndash9sup3⁶ Pythagoras is reported to have had suspicions that Phalariswants to murder him but at the same time knows that he is not fated to die atthe hands of Phalaris The whole concept of fate which dominates peoplersquos livesis a topos in ancient Greek tradition Iamblichusrsquo use presupposes its knowledgeby the readerWe should perhaps add that the verse in question was used by an-cient writers such as Flavius Philostratussup3⁷ Eusebiussup3⁸ and also EustathiusArchbishop of Thessalonicasup3⁹

(ix) At 13118ndash22 there is a reference to Od 11582ndash92 where Odysseus meetsTantalus during his journey to the Underworld⁴⁰ It has been pointed out⁴sup1 that in

For the corresponding passages in both Porphyry and Iamblichusrsquo De vita Pyth as well asfor relevant bibliography see Makris ndash n See Plutarch Mor b cf Heubeck West Hainsworth ad loc De vita Pyth ndash ὁ δὲ Φάλαρις καὶ πρὸς ταῦτα ἠναισχύντει τε καὶ ἀπεθρασύνετοαὖθις οὖν ὁ Πυθαγόρας ὑποπτεύων μὲν ὅτι Φάλαρις αὐτῷ ῥάπτοι θάνατον ὅμως δὲ εἰδὼς ὡςοὐκ εἴη Φαλάριδι μόρσιμος ἐξουσιαστικῶς ἐπεχείρει λέγειν Philostr VA ndash δός εἰ βούλοιο κἀμοὶ τόπον εἰ δὲ μή πέμπε τὸν ληψόμενόν μου τὸσῶμα τὴν γὰρ ψυχὴν ἀδύνατον μᾶλλον δὲ οὐδrsquoἂν τὸ σῶμα τοὐμὸν λάβοις

οὐ γάρ με κτενέεις ἐπεὶ οὔτοι μόρσιμός εἰμιCf also ibid 881ndash5 ὧδε μὲν δὴ τῷ ἀνδρὶ τὰ ἐκ παρασκευῆς εἶχεν ἐπὶ τελευτῇ δrsquoεὗρον τοῦ

λόγου τὰ τελευταῖα τοῦ προτέρου τὸοὐ γάρ με κτενέεις ἐπεὶ οὔτοι μόρσιμός εἰμικαὶ τὰ πρὸ τούτου ἔτι ἀφrsquoὧν τοῦτο

Eus Contra Ieroclem ndash ἐν τῷ δικαστηρίῳ αὐτὰ δὴ ταῦτα ἀναφωνῆσαι δός εἰ βού-λει κἀμοὶ τόπον εἰ δὲ μή πέμπε τὸν ληψόμενόν μου τὸ σῶμα τὴν γὰρ ψυχὴν ἀδύνατον μᾶλλον δὲοὐδrsquoἂν τὸ σῶμα τοὐμὸν λάβοιςmiddot

οὐ γἀρ με κτενέεις ἐπεὶ οὔτοι μόρσιμός εἰμικαὶ δὴ ἐπὶ τούτῳ τῷ περιβοήτῳ ῥήματι ἀφανισθῆναι τοῦ δικαστηρίου φησὶν αὐτόν καὶ ἐν

τούτοις τὸ περὶ αὐτοῦ καταστρέφει δρᾶμα Schol Eust on Il (van der Valk) λέγει δὲ μόρσιμον ἀπολύτως ἐνταῦθα ὁ ποιητὴς τὸνμοίρᾳ ὑποκείμενον De vita Pyth ndash αὐτὸν δὲ συνεπικρύπτεσθαι πολὺ τῶν λεγομένων ὅπως οἱ μὲν καθα-ρῶς παιδευόμενοι σαφῶς αὐτῶν μεταλαμβάνωσιν οἳ δrsquo ὥσπερὍμηρός φησι τὸν Τάνταλον λυπῶν-ται παρόντων αὐτῶν ἐν μέσῳ τῶν ἀκουσμάτων μηδὲν ἀπολαύοντες Heubeck Hoekstra ad loc


the Odyssey no reason for Tantalusrsquo punishment is given ndash the poet takes forgranted his audiencersquos knowledge of the cause of these sufferings The latter isIamblichusrsquo point as Tantalus could neither eat nor drink despite the factthat everything was placed around him this was exactly the case with Pythago-rasrsquo teachings which were all around yet those who were not trained could notprofit from them We see the criticism Iamblichus addresses to those who havenot made the same choice The readersrsquo familiarity with Tantalus story has un-doubtedly played its role to Iamblichusrsquo choice to place it in this context

(x) At 13717ndash23⁴sup2 Iamblichus says that no Pythagorean called Pythagoraswith his name when they wanted to refer to him in his lifetime they calledhim divine (lsquogodlikersquo τὸν θεῖον) whereas after his death lsquoThat Manrsquo (ἄνδρα) Iam-blichus rightly mentions that in the Odyssey the shepherd Eumaios is embar-rassed to utter the name of Odysseus in spite of the fact that the king is absentThen the corresponding verses are quoted (Od 14144ndash5) We are dealing withthe well-known issue of how the Pythagoreans showed their respect towards Py-thagoras through sacred silence (εὐφημία) an element common in many mysticcults⁴sup3 The fact that a Homeric parallel is being used in the context of such animportant issue speaks of Homerrsquos prestige in the Pythagoreans

(xi) At 13921⁴⁴ the common Homeric expression ποιμὴν λαῶν⁴⁵ is reported tohave been used by the Pythagoreans in order to denote that ordinary people arenothing less than cattle which need a shepherd In fact Iamblichus holds thatHomer actually denoted a preference towards oligarchy by using this expressionThis view about ordinary people was of course fitted to the oligarchic characterof the Pythagorean societies Thus this passage is a rather interesting testimony

De vita Pyth ndash ἐπὶ μὲν γὰρ τῷ μηδένα τῶν Πυθαγορείων ὀνομάζειν Πυθαγόρανἀλλὰ ζῶντα μέν ὁπότε βούλοιντο δηλῶσαι καλεῖν αὐτὸν θεῖον ἐπεὶ δὲ ἐτελεύτησεν ἐκεῖνον τὸνἄνδρα καθάπερ Ὅμηρος ἀποφαίνει τὸν Εὔμαιον ὑπὲρ Ὀδυσσέως μεμνημένονmiddot

τὸν μὲν ἐγών ὦ ξεῖνε καὶ οὐ παρεόντrsquoὀνομάζειναἰδέομαιmiddot πέρι γάρ μrsquoἐφίλει καὶ ἐκήδετο λίην

For the sacred silence (εὐφημία) in general see Burkert For thesacred silence in the Pythagoreans as well as for Pythagorasrsquo authority for the antecedentssee Barnes ndash De vita Pyth ndash τὴν αὐτὴν ταύτην γνώμην ὑπὲρ Πυθαγόρου μεμνημένους ἐν μέτρῳτοὺς μαθητὰς λέγεινˑ

τοὺς μὲν ἑταίρους ἦγεν ἴσον μακάρεσσι θεοῖσιτοὺς δrsquoἄλλους ἡγεῖτrsquoοὔτrsquoἐν λόγῳ οὔτrsquoἐν ἀριθμῷτὸνὍμηρον μάλιστrsquoἐπαινεῖν ἐν οἷς εἴρηκε ποιμένα λαῶνˑ ἐμφανίσκειν γὰρ βοσκήματα τοὺς ἄλ-

λους ὄντας ὀλιγαρχικὸν ὄντα See for example Il


of how any work of art and its elements may be used freely by antecedents so asto serve not only artistic but also political purposes

b Protrepticus

In the Protrepticus a work in which Pythagorean and Platonic elements play amajor role⁴⁶ we find two references that actually refer to well-known episodesfrom the Odyssey ndash yet their transmission is an indirect one

(i) At 6922ndash709⁴⁷ we read that the famous weaving trick of Penelope(Od 292ndash95) is a useless activity of the irrational man whose passions imprisonit during the night while philosophy frees it during the dayWhat is important isthat we are dealing with an indirect reception of Homer through Plato as theProtrepticus passage which we are discussing (6922ndash709) actually belongs tothe section 6718ndash709 where Phaedo 82bndash84b is quoted and actually reprodu-ces Phaedo 84andashb In this case then the Homeric reference is actually Platorsquoschoice The latter as we have noted is treated by Iamblichus as being in harmo-ny with Pythagorasrsquo spirit

(ii) Similarly the reference to Achillesrsquo words that he would rather be the lastman on earth but still alive than a king in Hades as he currently is (Od 11489ndash90) actually belongs to a passage where the Republic is used by Iamblichus Pro-trepticus 781ndash824 actually quotes R 514andash517c To be more specific the refer-ence to Achillesrsquo words is found at Protrepticus 8023ndash816⁴⁸ and actually repeats

Iamblichusrsquo Protrepticus has been characterized as an anthology of Platonic philosophyMany of its passages are no other than known Platonic passages carefully chosen and elaborate-ly interwoven between one another as L Benakis notes (Benakis ) but still Platorsquos pas-sages are believed to be in harmony with Pythagorasrsquo spirit (Benakis ) The work alsocontains a major part of Aristotlersquos Protrepticus For the workrsquos relation to Aristotlersquos Protrepticussee P Kotzia-Panteli ndash Protrepticus ndash ἀλλrsquoοὕτω λογίσαιτrsquoἂν ψυχὴ ἀνδρὸς φιλοσόφου καὶ οὐκ ἂν οἰηθείητὴν μὲν φιλοσοφίαν χρῆναι ἑαυτὴν λύειν λυούσης δὲ ἐκείνης αὑτὴν παραδιδόναι ταῖς ἡδοναῖς καὶλύπαις ἑαυτὴν πάλιν αὖ ἐγκαταδεῖν καὶ ἀνήνυτον ἔργον πράττειν Πενελόπης τινὰ ἐναντίως ἰστὸνμεταχειριζομένηςmiddot ἀλλὰ γαλήνην τούτων παρασκευάζουσα ἑπομένη τῷ λογισμῷ καὶ ἀεὶ ἐν τούτῳοὖσα τὸ ἀληθὲς καὶ τὸ θεῖον καὶ τὸ ἀδόξαστον θεωμένη καὶ ὑπrsquo ἐκείνου τρεφομένη ζῆν τε οἴεταιοὕτω δεῖν ἕως ἂν ζῇ καὶ ἐπειδὰν τελευτήσῃ εἰς τὸ ξυγγενὲς καὶ εἰς τὸ τοιοῦτον ἀφικομένη ἀπηλ-λάχθαι τῶν ἀνθρωπίνων κακῶν Protrepticus ndash τιμαὶ δὲ καὶ ἔπαινοι εἴ τινες ἦσαν αὐτοῖς τότε παρrsquoἀλλήλων καὶ γέρατῷ ὀξύτατα καθορῶντι τὰ παριόντα καὶ μνημονεύοντι μάλιστα ὅσα τε πρότερα αὐτῶν καὶ ὕστεραεἴωθε καὶ ἅμα πορεύεσθαι καὶ ἐκ τούτων δὴ δυνατώτατα ἀπομαντευομένῳ τὸ μέλλον ἥξειν δοκεῖςἂν αὐτὸν ἐπιθυμητικῶς αὐτῶν ἔχειν καὶ ζηλοῦν τοὺς παρrsquoἐκείνοις τιμωμένους τε καὶ ἐνδυναστεύ-οντας ἢ τὸ τοῦ Ὁμήρου ἂν πεπονθέναι καὶ σφόδρα βούλεσθαι ἐπάρουρον ἐόντα θητευέμεν ἄλλῳ


R 516dndashe Nonetheless it is worth noticing that although Plato himself hadcondemned and censored the Homeric verses in question at R 386c he usedthem at 516dndashe without reservationndashand so did Iamblichus without saying any-thing on the matter We therefore conclude that we are dealing with another in-direct transmission of Homer through Plato who used the famous words ofAchilles in his discussion of the cave myth We should not forget either that inIamblichusrsquo work in question Plato is employed in a Pythagorean perspective

c De Mysteriis

At De mysteriis 81818⁴⁹ there is a negative reference to Homeric gods accordingto the philosopher it is not appropriate to refer to Homeric gods as they may beturned by prayer The latter characteristic is clearly stated at Il 9497 Iamblichusobviously expresses his disagreement with a common feature of Homeric godsthus placing himself in the chain of the philosophers who criticized Homer onthe image of the gods he provides his audience or his readers

Conclusion

On the basis of the exploration of the Homeric passages in Iamblichus the firstthing to remark is that Iamblichus in some cases of his De vita Pythagorica seemsto have taken the Homeric material directly from Porphyryrsquos De vita Pythagoricawhereas in the Protrepticus he used Platonic material which contained Homericelements But still all Homeric passages in Iamblichus have not been indirectlytransmitted We have a rather satisfying number of passages where Iamblichushimself chose to include Homer Moreover we should mention the fact that inIamblichusrsquo existing works the number of passages from the Odyssey are notconsiderably less in number compared to those from the Iliad This is somethingto note as in most writers of the Hellenistic age and Late Antiquity the quota-tions from the Iliad are considerably more numerous This may be attributedto the possibility of Iamblichusrsquo having an ear towards the Odyssey After allthe adherence to the text of the Odyssey might well be attributed to Porphyryrsquosinfluence In any case Iamblichus was certain that his own audience would

ἀνδρὶ παρrsquoἀκλήρῳ καὶ ὁτιοῦν ἂν πεπονθέναι μᾶλλον ἢ ἐκεῖνά τε δοξάζειν καὶ ἐκείνως ζῆν οὕτωςἔγωγε οἶμαι πᾶν μᾶλλον πεπονθέναι ἂν δέξασθαι ἢ ζῆν ἐκείνως De mysteriis ὥστε οὐδrsquo ὅπερ ἐκ τῶν Ὁμηρικῶν σὺ παρέθηκας τὸ στρεπτοὺς εἶναιτοὺς θεούς ὅσιόν ἐστι φθέγγεσθαι


be familiar with both Homeric poems and so he would be free to choose what-ever material he saw fit for his own purposes

We should also point out that the majority of Homeric references are to befound in the De vita Pythagorica a work that actually aims at providing the read-er with a Pythagorean way of living and thinking while the Protrepticus seems tobear Platonic elements which are considered in a Pythagorean perspective Ofcourse as a proper Neoplatonist Iamblichus widely receives Platonic philosophyand this might account for the only negative reference to Homer in the De mys-teriis In any case the Pythagorean flavour of the Homeric reception actuallyshows that Homerrsquos prestige in Iamblichusrsquo eyes was far from being negligible

Moreover Iamblichusrsquo reception of Homer is developed in the context of hisown Neoplatonic philosophy that bears Pythagorean elements The selection ofHomer as a source text in cases where philosophical matters are discussed is byno means accidental Having undoubtedly a sound knowledge of Homer as hiseducation denotes Iamblichus does not refer to Homer much he neverthelessdoes so in cases where his master used to do so or when he considers it fit tohis argumentation He knows his audience to be familiar with the Homerictextndashnevertheless his aim is not to explain Homer as his teacher Porphyrydid but to enrich his own Neoplatonic philosophical exegesis



Maria Kanellou

Ἑρμιόνην ἣ εἶδος ἔχε χρυσέης Aφροδίτης(Od 414) Praising a Female throughAphrodite ndashFrom Homer into Hellenistic Epigram

It is firstly in the Homeric epics that one finds the idea of a woman being praisedthrough her comparison to one of the goddesses especially Aphrodite the arche-type of beauty and sexuality formulas of the type εἶδος ἔχε χρυσέης Aφροδίτης(Od 414) are usually employed for this purposesup1 My aim in this chapter is to ex-amine the reception of this motif in the surviving poems of the Hellenistic epi-grammatists and to exemplify how its transformations are closely connected toand influenced by several factors changes in the religious practices that tookplace during the Hellenistic era the use of the goddess Aphrodite within theframework of the Ptolemaic political propaganda and the generic characteristicsof specific sub-categories of epigrams An appreciation of the motifrsquos reuse in thepoetry of the archaic and classical era is essential because it enables the identi-fication of the advances which the Hellenistic epigrammatists brought about

With the exception of the Homeric epics no surviving poetic text that datesto the archaic and classical periods openly equates a mortalrsquos charms with a god-dessrsquo beauty as we shall see through characteristic case-studies the praise is al-ways somehow restrained and the gap between mortals and gods is alwaysmaintained On the contrary in the Hellenistic era and especially in the Melea-grean epigrams (1st century BC) the motif is transformed in manners that tran-scend the gap between deities and humans Let us first examine two Sapphicfragments (frr 964ndash5 and 311ndash5 Voigt) which exemplify the restraint in the re-ception of the motif during the archaic times

I would like to thank AGriffiths SChatzikosta LFloridi RHoumlschele and above all CCareyfor the critical reading and comments on earlier drafts of this chapter It goes without saying thatany views expressed are mine alone See the Homeric formulae ἰκέλη χρυσέῃ Aφροδίτῃ (Οd Il ) andοὐδrsquo εἰ χρυσείῃ Aφροδίτῃ κάλλος ἐρίζοι (Ιl ) In a similar vein in Od ndash Athenabestows on queen Penelope irresistible divine attractiveness In Od ndash Odysseus extolsNausicaarsquos godlike virginal beauty by asking her whether she is a goddess or a mortal and thenby comparing her to Artemis in stature and comeliness His praise is restrained because heentertains the possibility of the girl being a goddess and never states that she is a goddess (cfOd ) For the topic of the comparison of men with gods see Bieler passim

σε θέαι σrsquo ἰκέλαν ἀρι-γνώται σᾶι δὲ μάλιστrsquo ἔχαιρε μόλπαι (fr 964ndash5)

(She honoured) you as being an easilyrecognized goddess and took most delight in your songsup2

φαίνεταί μοι κῆνος ἴσος θέοισινἔμμενrsquo ὤνηρ ὄττις ἐνάντιός τοιἰσδάνει καὶ πλάσιον ἆδυ φωνεί-σας ὐπακούεικαὶ γελαίσας ἰμέροενhellip(fr 311ndash5)

He seems as equal to gods to methe one who sits opposite youand listens nearby to your sweet voiceand lovely laughterhellip(trans Campbell 2002 with minor adjustments)

In fr 964ndash5 Atthis is commended for resembling a goddess In fr 311ndash2 the manwho sits opposite to a woman and listens to her voice and laughter is said to belsquoequal to the godsrsquo This phrase either denotes that the man is blessed to see thewoman or extols his ability to resist her attractiveness in either case it simulta-neously praises her beauty indirectly In both fragments the hyperbole is con-trolled as the statements are expressed as forming subjective thoughts andnot an objective incontrovertible truth The reason for this caution in the formu-lation of praise lies in the religious considerations of Sapphorsquos era expressingsuperiority over the gods would be profoundly dangerous because it would pro-voke their wrathsup3 Sappho herself highlights the religious beliefs of her timewhen she says in fr9621ndash23 lsquoit is not suitable for us to rival goddesses in love-liness of figurersquo In Homer the hyperbole is permitted as the epics praise mythicheroes and heroines not living contemporaries

Ibycus fr 288 Davies proves that similar modes of praise were used for themale beloved and moreover preserves a variation of the motif which as weshall see was widely imitated and refreshed by the Hellenistic epigrammatiststhe boyrsquos seductive charms are extolled as deriving from the co-operation of agroup of deities

For the supplement ἔτι]σε and the interpretation of the MS σεθεασϊκελαν see Page See eg Hdt Pi P ndash I ndash See also Call Ap and Williams ndash for further relevant passages

190 Maria Kanellou

Eὐρύαλε γλαυκέων Χαρίτων θάλος lt gtκαλλικόμων μελέδημα σὲ μὲν Κύπριςἅ τrsquo ἀγανοβλέφαρος Πει-θὼ ῥοδέοισιν ἐν ἄνθεσι θρέψαν

Euryalus offshoot of the blue-eyed Gracesdarling of the beautiful-haired (Seasons) the Cyprianand soft-lidded Persuasionnursed you among rose-blossoms(trans Campbell 2001 with minor adjustments)

It should be stressed that Ibycus does not equate Euryalus either to Aphrodite or herattendants his beauty is definitely idealized but he is not portrayed as excelling hispatron deities⁴ The precise means through which each deity makes him irresistibleis left vague but the audience can easily envisage a chain of attributes⁵

From the relevant poetic texts of the classical era I use as my case-study(due to space limitations) Aristophanes Ec 973ndash75⁶ The motif is here used ina burlesque of lyric love songs especially of the paraclausithyron⁷ a girl is ex-tolled through her association with multiple deities

ὦ χρυσοδαίδαλτον ἐμὸνμέλημα Κύπριδος ἔρνοςμέλιττα Μούσης Χαρίτων

Breitenberger ( ) is wrong to suggest that Euryalus lsquoin his beauty [hellip] seems equal tothese divine beings or even superior since due to his origin he combines all of their qualitiesrsquoWhat the poem does is to make him a favourite of the gods his beauty and charm reflect divinefavour Elsewhere the Graces and the Seasons adorn Aphrodite and their role implies the granting ofalluring beauty and seductiveness HHomVenndash and Od ndash (after her affair withAres) and Cypr frndash DaviesBernabeacute (before Parisrsquo Judgment) As far as Persuasion is con-cerned she can confer physical attraction the power of persuasion and alluring talk (cf egRufinus AP = Page Meleager AP = GP Meleager AP = GP and Leontius Scholasticus APl ) Aphrodite can be thought of as bequeathing variouscharms such as beauty and seductiveness (cf eg Hes Th ndash describing Aphroditersquosprovince and referring to these attributes) Similar is the tenor of Ibycus S (a) ndash Davies Another interesting passage is E Hecndash where Polyxena says that among young girls shewas conspicuous like the gods in all but her mortality Here the hyperbole is explicitly tempered bya firm statement of the unbridgeable boundary between mortals and immortal gods Cf Od ndashwhere Nausicaa is said to resemble the immortal goddesses in stature and beauty The princess ismortal while the goddesses are deathless and this maintains strict boundaries between them For the lsquolove-duetrsquo (Ar Ec ndash) as a sophisticated literary parody of the paraclausithyronsee Olson ndash

Praising a Female through Aphrodite 191

θρέμμα Τρυφῆς πρόσωπονἄνοιξον ἀσπάζου με∙διά τοι σὲ πόνους ἔχω

Oh my golden work of artmy darling scion of Cyprishoneybee of the Muses nurslingof the Graces the image of Delightopen ndash welcome meitrsquos for you that I am suffering so(ed and trans Sommerstein 2007 with minor adjustments)

As far as Aphrodite is concerned a metaphorical relationship is implied betweenthe girl and the goddess (through the use of the term ἔρνος) with the praisestressing the formerrsquos beauty and sexuality⁸ Her characterization as the honey-bee of the Muse(s) extols her singing skills (a bee produces honey)⁹ but alsopoints to the distress that she has caused the boy because of his longing forher (a bee can also sting cf Ec 968ndash70) Her description as lsquothe very imageof Delightrsquo is also ambiguous both stressing the softness of her skin and imply-ing her luxuriousnesssup1⁰ So as in Ibycusrsquo fr288 Davies the girl is not equatedwith and does not surpass her benefactors the praise is restrained and mortalsremain at armrsquos length from the divine

When we now move on to the epigrams at the first stages of the genrersquos devel-opment as a literary genre and throughout the third century BC no clear and unam-biguous comparison between a common mortal woman and the goddess exists Istart my analysis of the epigrammatic material with Nossis whose collectiondates from 280 or 270 BCsup1sup1 AP 6275 (= 5 GP) and AP 9332 (= 4 GP) exemplifythis tendency for maintaining a clear boundary between mortals and gods inboth of them only very indirect links are created between the devotees and Aphro-dite the poems toy very discreetly with the idea of a mortal woman resembling thedeity in that they all share the same qualities of beauty andor slynesssup1sup2

See LSJ sv ἔρνος Ι ΙΙ One can compare γλαυκέων Χαρίτων θάλος in Ibycus fr Cf Ussher See LSJ sv τρυφή Ι ΙΙ Cf Sommerstein See Gutzwiller ndash Gutzwiller ( ) is fundamental for the interpretation of these epigrams She arguesthat the women and Aphrodite are linked together by shared qualities lsquoin both external appear-ance and its internal reflectionrsquo Her analysis focuses on the thematic links among the devoteesand not between them and Aphrodite I revisit the epigrams with the aim to show the speciallink that is created between the women and the goddess For the interrelation between Aphro-dite and her devotees as expressed in votive epigrams see also Natsina ndash

192 Maria Kanellou

ἐλθοῖσαι ποτὶ ναὸν ἰδώμεθα τᾶς Aφροδίταςτὸ βρέτας ὡς χρυσῷ δαιδαλόεν τελέθειεἵσατό μιν Πολυαρχὶς ἐπαυρομένα μάλα πολλάνκτῆσιν ἀπrsquo οἰκείου σώματος ἀγλαΐας(AP 9332 = 4 GP)

Let us go to the temple and see Aphroditersquos statuehow intricately it is adorned with goldPolyarchis set it up enjoying the benefits of the great wealththat she has from the beauty of her own body(trans Gutzwiller 1998 with minor adjustments)

χαίροισάν τοι ἔοικε κομᾶν ἄπο τὰν Aφροδίτανἄνθεμα κεκρύφαλον τόνδε λαβεῖν Σαμύθαςδαιδάλεός τε γάρ ἐστι καὶ ἁδύ τι νέκταρος ὄσδειτούτῳ καὶ τήνα καλὸν Ἄδωνα χρίει(AP 6275 = 5 GP)

With delight I think Aphrodite has received this gifta headband from Samytharsquos hairFor it is variegated and smells somewhat of sweet nectarwith this she too anoints handsome Adonis

In AP 9332 Nossis plays with the natural assumption that since Aphrodite is thegoddess of seduction and seduction is the trade of the hetaerae she and herdevotee share the same qualities Implicit clues suggest a certain degree of re-semblance between Polyarchis and Aphrodite Specifically it is the adjectivesχρυσῷ and δαιδαλόεν (l2) describing the statue that hint at these shared qual-ities as they create a triangular link between the goddess her devotee and thedevoted object At a first glance the epithet χρυσῷ refers to the gilt surface of thestatue (or to the metal from which it is madesup1sup3) and δαιδαλόεν to an elaboratepattern on its surface (perhaps to the garment that covers the statuersquos body)sup1⁴But χρυσῷ also encapsulates the goddessrsquos beauty which is mirrored in herstatuesup1⁵ and anticipates the explanation provided for the source of Polyarchisrsquo

We can take the statue to be gilted (cf Gow-Page ii Gutzwiller ) or (lesslikely) follow the lemmatist (C) and take it to be made entirely of gold ― this hyperbole wouldhighlight Polyarchisrsquo wealth Derivatives of δαιδάλλω are often used in the praise of objects that are decorated with intri-cate motifs see eg Il ndash of the shield made by Hephaestus AR ndash of themantle that Athena gave to Jason Mosch of Europarsquos golden basket Cf Ar Ec The adjective constitutes Aphroditersquos most common characterization from archaic times on-wards See eg Od Il For thecharacterization of Aphrodite as lsquogoldenrsquo see Friedrich ndash For a funny reading of theHomeric epithet see Luc J Tr Other poets in a scoptic context link the epithet with prostitution


wealth it was the beauty of her body that enabled her to make such an offering(l4)sup1⁶ Similarly the adjective δαιδαλόεν can be interpreted as a double-entendrethat indicates the lsquocunningrsquo nature both of Aphrodite whose figure the statuerepresentssup1⁷ and of Polyarchis who devoted the object to the goddess Onemay juxtapose the adjectiversquos use in the epigram to Hes Th 574ndash75 wherethe word stands for the embroidered design of Pandorarsquos veil but most impor-tantly hints at the cunning of its wearer and of the gods who created Pandora towreak vengeance upon humans ζῶσε δὲ καὶ κόσμησε θεὰ γλαυκῶπις Aθήνηἀργυφέῃ ἐσθῆτι∙ κατὰ κρῆθεν δὲ καλύπτρην δαιδαλέην χείρεσσι κατέσχεθεθαῦμα ἰδέσθαι lsquohellipand with her hands she (ie Athena) hung an intricatelywrought veil from her head a wonder to seersquosup1⁸

Nossis AP 6275 illustrates the dedication of another object ie of a head-band by a woman called Samytha The adjective δαιδάλεος (l3) describing theobjectsup1⁹ most probably creates a verbal link with δαιδαλόεν in AP 93322 andcan be considered as a pointer towards the womanrsquos crafty nature a character-istic that she shares with Aphrodite Moreover the nectar used by Samytha linksher to Aphrodite since it is (supposedly) the same one with the nectar that thegoddess used to anoint Adonisrsquo body (see the emphatic use of τούτῳ in l4) Thishyperbolic statement accentuates the praise of the sensual appeal of the dedicat-ed object and incidentally implies that it is worthy of its recipient It praises Sa-mytha embellishing her with divine beauty and sexuality A comparison withSappho fr9418ndash20 Voigt discloses the development in the mode of praise καὶπhellip[ ] μύρωι βρενθείωι [ ]ρυ[]ν ἐξαλltεgtίψαο κα[ὶ [βασ˩]ιληίωι In the Sapphicfragment the girlrsquos sexuality is praised through the idea that she anoints herselfwith flowery myrrh the customary means for beautifying queens In the epi-gram in a more hyperbolic manner Samytha uses nectar However despite

(an easy association as Aphrodite was the patroness of the hetaerae) see eg AP = GP andAP = GP For the association between the gods and gold see Williams Gutzwiller ndash There is rich intertextual background on Aphroditersquos wily nature Eg in Hes Th deceits(ἐξαπάτας) form part of her realm of power in HHomndash she herself connects her powerover gods with skills that have to do with seduction and trickery in lyric poetry she is charac-terized as lsquowile-weavingrsquo Sapph fr Voigt παῖ˩ Δ[ί]ος δολ[όπλοκε Simon fr ndash PMGἢ δολοπλ[όκου helliprsquoΑφροδίτ[ας and fr PMG hellip δολομήδεος Aφροδίτας Bacch Dith hellip δόλιος άφροδίτα HesTh ndash is also noted by Gutzwiller Translation by Most () slight-ly altered The term δαιδάλεος denotes that the headband was embroidered or that it consisted of var-ious colours (Gow-Page ii )

194 Maria Kanellou

the exaggeration Samytha is only indirectly linked to the goddess and a clearboundary is maintained between them

By examining now the epigrams of Posidippus and Callimachus who flour-ished during the 3rd century BC we detect that these court poets associated onlythe Hellenistic queens to Aphrodite and did not openly compare any otherwoman to the goddess Only AP 5194 (= 34 GP) which might have been writtenby a court poetsup2⁰ associates a girl with Aphrodite However as we shall seethere is no effort to identify the girl with the deity Three Posidippean epigramsopenly equate Arsinoe II (316 BCndash270 BC or 268 BCsup2sup1) with Aphrodite and refer tothe queenrsquos cult at her temple on Cape Zephyriumsup2sup2

ἔνθα με Καλλικράτης ἱδρύσατο καὶ βασιλίσσηςἱερὸν Aρσινόης Κύπριδος ὠνόμασενἀλλrsquo ἐπὶ τὴν Ζεφυρῖτιν ἀκουσομένην AφροδίτηνἙλλήνων ἁγναί βαίνετε θυγατέρεςοἵ θrsquo ἁλὸς ἐργάται ἄνδρεςmiddot ὁ γὰρ ναύαρχος ἔτευξεντοῦθrsquo ἱερὸν παντὸς κύματος εὐλίμενον(1165ndash 10 AB = 12 GP)

Here Callicrates set me up and called methe shrine of Queen Arsinoe-AphroditeSo then to her who will be called Zephyritis-Aphroditecome you pure daughters of the Greeksand you too toilers on the sea For the captain builtthis shrine to be a harbour safe from every wave

τοῦτο καὶ ἐν πόντῳ καὶ ἐπὶ χθονὶ τῆς ΦιλαδέλφουΚύπριδος ἱλάσκεσθrsquo ἱερὸν Aρσινόηςἣν ἀνακοιρανέουσαν ἐπὶ Ζεφυρίτιδος ἀκτῆςπρῶτος ὁ ναύαρχος θήκατο Καλλικράτηςἡ δὲ καὶ εὐπλοίην δώσει καὶ χείματι μέσσῳτὸ πλατὺ λισσομένοις ἐκλιπανεῖ πέλαγος(119 AB = 13 GP)

ie Posidippus who was definitely a court poet or Asclepiades for whom it is uncertainwhether he worked under Ptolemaic patronage or not For the ascription of the epigram see Gui-chard ndash Sens No firm conclusion can be drawn for the authorship Arsinoersquos death is dated to BC (see Cadell ndash) but the alternative date of BC has been proposed as well (Grzybeck ndash) The temple was erected by Callicrates the naval admiral of the Ptolemies For Callicratessee Bing ndash Cf Stephens ndash for the identification of thearmed Arsinoe with Athena in AB Bing identifies the goddess in this epigramwith Aphrodite APl (A) = GP (AsclepiadesPosidippus) also praises a Ptolemaic queenmost probably Berenice I by associating her with Aphrodite I am not analyzing this epigramdue to space limitations


Both on the sea and on land make offerings to this shrineof Cypris Arsinoe PhiladelphusShe it was ruling over the Zephyrian promontorywhom Callicrates the captain was the first to consecrateAnd she will grant safe sailing and in the middle of the stormwill smooth the vast sea for those who entreat her

καὶ μέλλων ἅλα νηῒ περᾶν καὶ πεῖσμα καθάπτεινχερσόθεν Eὐπλοίᾳ lsquoχαῖρεrsquo δὸς Aρσινόῃπό]τνιαν ἐκ νηοῦ καλέων θεόν ἣν ὁ Βοΐσκουναυαρχῶν Σάμιος θήκατο Καλλικράτηςναυτίλε σοὶ τὰ μάλιστα(391ndash5 AB)

Whether you are ready to cross the sea in a ship or to fasten the cableto shore say lsquogreetingsrsquo to Arsinoe of fair sailinginvoking the reverend goddess from her temple which was dedicatedby the Samian captain Callicrates son of Boiscusespecially for you sailor(ed and trans AustinBastianini 2002 with minor adjustments)

The epigrams mirror Ptolemaic self-fashioning After gathering together the culttitles which reflect Arsinoersquos identification with the deity I investigate the reli-gious implications of this representation of the queensup2sup3 In 116 AB Arsinoersquosname is juxtaposed with that of the goddess (l6) and then it is suppressed asshe is called lsquoZephyritis Aphroditersquo (l7) in 1191ndash2 AB it is used along with Aph-roditersquos title lsquoCyprisrsquo and the appellation is preceded by the cult title Philadel-phus which as Fraser states softens the incestuous nature of Arsinoersquos mar-riage to her brother and lays emphasis on their mutual powersup2⁴ in 392 AB thequeen takes on Aphroditersquos cult title Euploiasup2⁵ Although it is uncertain towhat extent these cult titles reveal different degrees of association to Aphroditeit is likely that the main factor is a desire for variation

Fraser ( i ndash) discerns three modes of identification of the Hellenistic kings andqueens with the gods (i) identification by adoption of their attributes (ii) identification by jux-taposition and (iii) complete identification in which the royal name is suppressed Fraser i For Aphrodite Euploia see Pirenne-Delforge passim I believe that this mode of iden-tification with the divine does not compartmentalize the diverse powers of the deified queen itprovides her worshippers with a way of invoking particular powers of the deified queen For Ar-sinoe Euploia see Robert ndash Cf also the anonymous ChicLitPap noII colii (Powell ndash) where Arsinoe is said to lsquogovern the searsquo (κρατοῦσα σὺ πόντον) For thispapyrus see Barbantani ndash

196 Maria Kanellou

All three poems commemorate directly or indirectly the role of Arsinoe II as amarine deity at Cape Zephyrium Callicratesrsquo dedication aimed to promote thequeen as the patroness of the maritime empire and this formed part of hisplan to expand the influence of the Ptolemaic navy throughout theMediterraneansup2⁶ Moreover it is possible that 1168 AB where the chaste daugh-ters of the Greeks are invited to worship Arsinoe evokes her role as a goddess ofmarriage In fact the queen has the same double cultic function in CallimachusAthen7318b (= 51ndash4Pf = 14 GP) where Selenaiarsquos dedication of a nautilus toArsinoe II is both an offering for the protection of sailors by the deified queenand a symbol of the girlrsquos hope for a good marriagesup2⁷ Similarly to the epigramsquoted above in Callimachus fr 5 Pf Arsinoe is concisely addressed as lsquoCyprisrsquo(l2) the appellation emphatically identifying her with Aphrodite hellipἀλλὰ σὺ νῦνμε Κύπρι Σεληναίης ἄνθεμα πρῶτον ἔχεις (lsquobut Cypris I am yours a first offeringfrom Selenaearsquo) In addition in 11610 AB the temple is projected as offeringsanctuary from any sort of adversity (εὐλίμενον) the adjective παντός opensup the semantic field of the term κύματος which thus symbolizes any kind ofadversity and misfortune The ambiguity of the phrase also allows for the possi-bility that the queen was worshipped at Cape Zephyrium under additional roles― the lack of further sources relating to the nature of her worship there may haveled us to mistakenly narrow the spectrum of her actual religious functions Apapyrus of 2521 BC which preserves the names of various streets in Alexandriaderiving from Arsinoersquos diverse religious roles includes the appellation lsquoArsinoeEleēmonrsquo (lsquoArsinoe of pityrsquo) Another papyrus dating to the second century BCcontains the cult title lsquoArsinoe Sōzousarsquo (lsquoArsinoe the Saviourrsquo) Both titles proj-ect the queenrsquos benevolence and it is intriguing that lsquoEleēmonrsquo (lsquoThe Mercifulrsquo)was also a cult title for Aphroditesup2⁸ It is exactly her kindness that the Posidip-pean epigrams also stress at their closure (1169ndash 10 AB 1195ndash6 AB and397ndash8 AB)sup2⁹ Along with the papyri they exemplify that this was a feature ofher deified persona which she shared with Aphroditesup3⁰

Robert ndash Gutzwiller Cf Fraser i ndash ii ndash Note also that Posidippus AB implies Arsinoersquosbenevolence since a dedication is offered to her by a manumitted slave woman (see Stephens ) For the projection of Arsinoersquos benevolence in Posidippusrsquo epigrams cf Stephens ndash Cf APl (A) = GP (Asclepiades or Posidippus) which also praises a Ptolemaic queen(most probably Berenice I) by associating her with Aphrodite


Leaving aside Arsinoe II I turn our attention to AP 5194 = 34 GP since it isessential to examine the motif rsquos transformation in this poem given that it mighthave been written by a court poet (PosidippusAsclepiades)

αὐτοὶ τὴν ἁπαλὴν Εἰρήνιον εἶδον ἜρωτεςΚύπριδος ἐκ χρυσέων ἐρχόμενοι θαλάμωνἐκ τριχὸς ἄχρι ποδῶν ἱερὸν θάλος οἷά τε λύγδουγλυπτήν παρθενίων βριθομένην χαρίτωνκαὶ πολλοὺς τότε χερσὶν ἐπrsquo ἠιθέοισιν ὀιστούςτόξου πορφυρέης ἧκαν ἀφrsquo ἁρπεδόνης

The Εrotes themselves looked on soft Eirenionwhilst leaving Cyprisrsquo golden chambersa sacred shoot from head to feet as ifcarved from white marble laden with a virginrsquos gracesand then they let fly from their hands many arrowsagainst young men sent from the purple bow-strings(trans Paton 1999 with minor adjustments)

Similarly to Ibycus fr288 Davies Eirenion is only indirectly associated to Aphro-dite Her praise starts immediately with the use of the adjective ἁπαλὴν a com-mon laudatory description in erotic poetrysup3sup1 The image of the Erotes coming outof Aphroditersquos chamber is a natural one since they are her childrensup3sup2 They formthe intermediaries between Eirenion and Aphrodite connecting the girl with thegoddess Aphrodite is not the one meeting her but it is her children who see Eir-enion by chance and start shooting men as soon as they gaze upon her Accord-ing to this interpretation the praise of Eirenion is accentuated because it is as ifthe Erotes themselves fall prey to her attractiveness The notion highlights herimpact on male viewerssup3sup3

In addition Eirinion is a ἱερὸν θάλος (l3) the characterization emphasizing hersupernatural beautysup3⁴ It is the adjective ἱερὸν meaning lsquofilled with or manifestingdivine power supernaturalrsquosup3⁵ which adds an element of hyperbole the girl exhibitsdivine beauty from head to toe As in Ibycus fr288 Davies the phrase implies a spe-cial bond between Eirenion and a deity (or deities) responsible for her supreme

For the use of ἀπαλός in poetry see Sens The MSS reading ἐρχόμενοι has been emended into ἐρχομένην see Sens ndash Theparticiple ἐρχομένοι can be defended since the distich makes perfect sense as transmitted Sens ( ) also notes that the Erotes act as surrogates for men and adds that theirgaze stands for that of the youths For her other characterizations within the distich see Guichard ndash Sens ndash LSJ sv ἱερός Ι

198 Maria Kanellou

beautyWhile these benefactors remain unnamed Aphrodite naturally comes to thereaderrsquos mind as she is mentioned in the first distichsup3⁶ So if indeed the poem waswritten by a court poet it is in line with the pronounced reluctance observed in theircorpus to equate commoners with Aphrodite

This narrow and highly specialized range of application of the motif withinthe work of the court poets is very interesting I suggest that it can be directlyrelated to the proximity of these poets to the centre of power and their role asdisseminators of the Ptolemaic propaganda Since we are at the first stages ofthe dissemination of the official propaganda equating the Hellenistic queenswith Aphrodite the indiscriminate random and repeated comparison of ordina-ry mortals to the goddess could have the potential of diluting this propaganda

Outside now of the Ptolemaic court and later in time (2nd century BC) themotif is employed by Antipater of Sidon in AP 9567 (= 61 GP) in which a theat-rical artist called Antiodemis is praised as lsquothe nursling of Aphroditersquo (l 2Παφίης νοσσὶς) and AP 7218 (= 23 GP) where the dead hetaera Lais is eulogisedby her tomb with a series of hyperboles that involve Aphrodite As AP 95672 hassimilar implications to Ibycus fr288 Davies I focus on AP 7218 (= 23 GP) thatarticulates the praise in a much more open emphatic and hyperbolic way

τὴν καὶ ἅμα χρυσῷ καὶ ἁλουργίδι καὶ σὺν Ἔρωτιθρυπτομένην ἁπαλῆς Κύπριδος ἁβροτέρηνΛαΐδrsquo ἔχω πολιῆτιν ἁλιζώνοιο ΚορίνθουΠειρήνης λευκῶν φαιδροτέρην λιβάδωντὴν θνητὴν Κυθέρειαν ἐφrsquo ᾗ μνηστῆρες ἀγαυοίπλείονες ἢ νύμφης εἵνεκα Τυνδαρίδοςδρεπτόμενοι Χάριτάς τε καὶ ὠνητὴν Aφροδίτηνἧς καὶ ὑπrsquo εὐώδει τύμβος ὄδωδε κρόκῳἧς ἔτι κηώεντι μύρῳ τὸ διάβροχον ὀστεῦνκαὶ λιπαραὶ θυόεν ἆσθμα πνέουσι κόμαιᾗ ἔπι καλὸν ἄμυξε κατὰ ῥέθος Aφρογένειακαὶ γοερὸν λύζων ἐστονάχησεν Ἔρωςεἰ δrsquo οὐ πάγκοινον δούλην θέτο κέρδεος εὐνήνἙλλὰς ἂν ὡς Ἑλένης τῆσδrsquo ὕπερ ἔσχε πόνον

I hold Lais who exalted in her wealth and her purple dress and in her amourswith the power of Eros more delicate than tender Cypristhe citizen of sea-girt Corinthmore sparkling than the white water of Peirenethe mortal Cytherea who had more noble suitorsthan Tyndareusrsquo daughter

Cf Sens ndash


plucking her charms and mercenary favourssup3⁷Her very tomb smells of sweet-scented saffronher skull is still soaked with fragrant ointmentand her anointed locks still breathe a perfume as of frankincenseFor her the Foam-born tore her lovely faceand sobbing Eros groaned and wailedIf she had not made her bed the public slave of gainGreece would have pains for her as for Helen(ed and trans Gutzwiller 1998sup3⁸ with minor adjustments)

In this poem the tomb speaks as if it was Laisrsquo last and perpetual lover Alreadyin the second line the hetaera is praised as being lsquomore delicate than tenderCyprisrsquo The hyperbolic phrase obviously presents her as superior to the goddessin softness of the skin This development in the reception of the motif can be at-tributed to the generic characteristics of the sub-genre of fictitious sepulchralepigrams (to which our epigram belongs) since extravagant statements are acommon feature of praises of the deadsup3⁹ Also as we shall see later on in detailthere is a scoptic element in the epigram which inevitably undermines the praiseof Laisrsquo beauty It is quite interesting that there is flexibility in the employment ofthe motif since the epigrammatist (in the voice of the tomb) moves betweenover-exaggerated praises and more restrained ones In l 5 the expression τὴνθνητὴν Κυθέρειαν limits the hyperbole of the praise as it emphasizes Laisrsquo mor-tality stressing human limits and firmly binding her superiority to the humanworld In parallel the hetaera is eulogized as being superior to lsquothe daughterbride of Tyndareusrsquo in beauty (ll 5ndash6) The phrase is ambiguous since νύμφηcan mean both lsquobridersquo and lsquomaidenrsquo and therefore can refer either to Leda orHelen It is the second comparison with Helen in the epigramrsquos closure whichwill lead the reader to interpret this phrase as referring to Helen as well Afterall in general terms the disloyal Helen is a better yardstick for comparison

For the metonymic use of the Graces and Aphrodite see the analysis of the epigram For thedefence of the MSS reading ἀγαυοί altered by Gow-Page ( ii ) into ἄγερθεν see White ndash Ι alter the translation slightly and in the original I printἜρωτι (l) Χάριτάς and Aφροδίτην (l) For Lais cf Athb Supposedly in an engraved epigram on a stone hydria marking hertomb in Thessaly Greece is said to have been enslaved by her divine beauty Eros begot her andCorinth reared her On the narratives on her death see McClure ndash For the heroiza-tion of the deceased and their association with the gods in funerary epigrams of the stndashrd cen-tury AD see Wypustek passim In sarcophagi and tomb statues of the second century ADthe deceased themselves appear in the form of gods eg the depiction of a wife can allude toAphroditeVenus (especially to lsquoCapitoline Venusrsquo) the allusion stressing her beauty and wom-anly virtues including sexual modesty For this topic see ZankerEwald ndash

200 Maria Kanellou

with a hetaera than her mother Leda⁴⁰ Lais is more beautiful than Helen sinceas the tomb says more men were subjugated to her beauty as opposed to theSpartan princess The formula μνηστῆρες ἀγαυοί reserved in Homer forPenelope⁴sup1 is attached here to Helen Lines 11ndash 12 also praise the hetaera Aph-rodite and Eros are depicted as mourning her death The description of their be-reavement reflects great pathos and sorrow (Aphrodite tears her face and Erosgroans and weeps)

However the encomium of Laisrsquo beauty constitutes only one side of the epi-gram the paradoxes included in Laisrsquo hyperbolic praise point towards the humourthe tomb speaks as if Lais retains her beauty in death as if her body is not decayedbut able to preserve in the grave the scent of the saffron perfume and myrrh Thisincompatibility between her praise (ll 9ndash10) and the realistic image of a decayedbody in a grave⁴sup2 makes the praise seem almost grotesque There are two furtherpoints which reduce the hetaera from a high class courtesan to a simple prostitutethus creating a melange of praise and satire In l 7 the metonymic use of the god-dess and her companions praises Laisrsquo charms beauty sexual skills and attractive-ness However the use of ὠνητήν highlights the venality of this divine beauty andthe idea suggests a slight under-hand irony against Lais Moreover the phraselsquoplucking her charms and mercenary favoursrsquo is placed at the end of her comparisonwith Helen which seems to suggest that the commercialization of her splendourprovided Lais with more suitors than the princess The last distich expresses thisidea in a much more open and emphatic way The concept of Lais having lsquomadeher bed the public slave to profitrsquo emphasizes her venality πάγκοινον and δούληνcharacterizing her bed degrade her to a common prostitute available to anyonewho was able to pay⁴sup3 In addition the idea of going to war for a prostitute is in itselfparadoxical and has a double effect On the one hand it undercuts the comparisonwith Helen and suggests that the comparison should be taken humorously On theother hand it potentially cuts Helen down to size since it is stressed that Helen cre-ated ponos for Greece⁴⁴

For the parody of Helen in scoptic poems (based on her common use as a symbol of disloy-alty or an archetype of beauty) see eg AP and AP (Lucilius) with Floridi ndash and ndash and AP (Palladas) where Penelope and Helen are employed tostress that all women are disastrous for men See Od and Cf AP = GP (with Gutzwiller ) if we take the verb ἕζετrsquo as present andnot as imperfect (l ἇς καὶ ἐπὶ ῥυτίδων ὁ γλυκὺς ἕζετrsquo Ἔρως) then the image of Archeanassa aspreserving her beauty in tomb is incongruous with the realistic state of bodies in graves As Penzel ( ) notes there is an indirect allusion to Aphrodite Pandemos For a different reading of the epigram see Gutzwiller ndash


It is therefore Meleager who breaks new ground in the reception of themotif within epigrams In AP 5137 (= 43 GP) within a purely erotic context He-liodora is emphatically associated and metaphorically identified with AphroditeGrace and Peitho

ἔγχει τᾶς Πειθοῦς καὶ Κύπριδος Ἡλιοδώραςκαὶ πάλι τᾶς αὐτᾶς ἁδυλόγου Χάριτοςmiddotαὐτὰ γὰρ μίrsquo ἐμοὶ γράφεται θεός ἇς τὸ ποθεινόνοὔνομrsquo ἐν ἀκρήτῳ συγκεράσας πίομαι

Pour in (wine) for Heliodora Peitho and for Heliodora Cyprisand again for the same Heliodora the sweet-speaking GraceBecause for me she herself is inscribed as the one goddess whose desirablename I drink mixed with pure wine⁴⁵

The loverrsquos toasts acquire a special meaning which derives from the form of thetoasts themselves that imitates official cult titles The phrase τᾶς Πειθοῦς καὶ Κύ-πριδος Ἡλιοδώρας mimics cult titles in which the names of queens and kingswere placed in juxtaposition with that of a god to express identification withthe specific deity (eg Aρσινόης Κύπριδος in 1166AB) In the same vein thecharacterization τᾶς αὐτᾶς ἁδυλόγου Χάριτος imitates cult titles where thename of the queenking is fully repressed This phraseology constitutes a hyper-bolic praise of the beloved that (metaphorically) apotheosizes her Heliodora isglorified as a goddess who combines the (erotic) powers of the three female god-desses If we compare this epigram to eg Ibycus fr 288 Davies and Ar Ec 973ndash75 both passages exalting a person for combining attributes offered by a groupof deities the difference in the degree of hyperbole is obvious Here Heliodora isnot the proteacutegeacutee of the goddesses but she is identified with them This hyperbol-ic praise has a double application on the one hand it stresses the loverrsquos com-plete infatuation for Heliodora on the other hand it highlights the womanrsquos pre-eminence in beauty and all methods of allurement lsquoPeitho Heliodorarsquo denotesher expertise in persuasive speech lsquoCypris Heliodorarsquo having multiple associa-tions alludes inter alia to her supernatural beauty attractiveness expertise inseductiveness and sexual pleasure in the same manner lsquoGracersquo underlinesher beauty sweet voice (this attribute is emphasized by the adjective ἁδυλόγου)charm and attractiveness In this context it is noteworthy that Heliodorarsquos voiceis also praised in AP 5141 (= 44 GP) via hyperbolic phraseology that includescomparison with the divine The lover (Meleager) swears in the name of Erosthat he prefers to hear a whisper from Heliodora than Apollorsquos lyre-playing

My translation

202 Maria Kanellou

ναὶ τὸν Ἔρωτα θέλω τὸ παρrsquo οὔασιν Ἡλιοδώρας φθέγμα κλύειν ἢ τὰς Λατοΐδεωκιθάρας lsquoBy Eros I swear I had rather hear Heliodorarsquos whisper in my ear thanthe harp of the son of Letorsquo⁴⁶

The phrase αὐτὰ γὰρ μίrsquo ἐμοὶ γράφεται θεός (l 3) carries on this idea of He-liodorarsquos metaphorical apotheosis What is more the phrase has a metapoeticfunction The verb γράφεται alludes to the act of writing poetry and suggeststhat Heliodorarsquos apotheosis stands for her prominent position within the Melea-grean corpus (17 epigrams are devoted to her)⁴⁷ Moreover the verb both throughits allusion to the act of writing and of inscribing epigrams implies the perpet-uality that this lsquogoddessrsquo gains through Meleagerrsquos poetry It can further act as anintratextual marker which points towards the other Meleagrean epigrams thatlink the girl with the divine world (AP 5140 5195 5196)

Garrison attributes the belovedrsquos apotheosis to Meleagerrsquos lsquoerotic extremismrsquothat lsquorobs man of his reason his independence and his individualityrsquo In Mele-ager Garrison argues we have the image of the extreme lover whose lsquoerotic statebecomes a part of him and it emerges in religious imagesrsquo⁴⁸ Garrisonrsquos explan-ation is useful for appreciating the effect of this kind of hyperbole which under-lines the loverrsquos passion for and infatuation with the object of his desire How-ever it does not get us any closer to understanding how Meleager was able touse such a degree of hyperbole I believe that the answer is to be found in spe-cific changes that concern the religious beliefs and practices of the Hellenisticera Firstly the cultic practice of the deification and assimilation of kings andqueens to the Greek Olympian gods which was added to the traditional religiouspractices of the Greeks blurred the boundaries between mortals and gods Peo-ple became gradually more accustomed to the idea of mortals (albeit their rulers)being deified This change certainly did not happen overnight as the survivingmaterial suggests earlier Hellenistic poets were reluctant to present the belovedas equal or superior to a god and only the court poets assimilated their queensand kings with the Olympian gods But the use of the motif within the frame ofPtolemaic propaganda probably enabled its transfer to the erotic domain withthe passing of time

What is more from the second century BC at the latest ordinary men andwomen recently dead were offered cultic honours and were spoken of as lsquoher-oes heroinesrsquo For instance the citizens of Amorgos established (at the end ofthe second century BC) in honour of Aleximachus who died at a young age

Cf Gutzwiller Trans Paton Gutzwiller Garrison


monthly public contests that started with a sacrifice in front of his statue andwere followed by a public feast In addition Artemidorus from Perge after dec-ades of service to the Thereans and their deities received himself after his deathcultic honours appropriated to a hero⁴⁹ These cases exemplify the broadening ofthe scope of people to whom cultic honours were offered During the classicalera this meant heroes athletes and famous poets (such as Archilochus) How-ever by the second century BC mere mortals could likewise receive such hon-ours This change in cult practice could have enabled the blurring of boundariesbetween mortal and divine in poetry In other words the praise in poetry of amortal as being equal or superior to a god gradually stopped being connectedwith the idea of expressing disrespect towards gods and impiety Since by Mele-agerrsquos time these cult practices were well-established (and not new cultic phe-nomena) this can explain why the poet lsquoapotheosizedrsquo his beloveds more sys-tematically than his predecessors why Heliodora is praised as lsquoone goddessrsquo

To sum up we cannot draw a homogeneous picture of the reception of the Ho-meric motif in poetry There is a gradual development in the degree of hyperboleemployed that depends upon a nexus of factorsWithin the genre of epigrams Nos-sisrsquo dedicatory poems simply create indirect links between Aphrodite and her dev-otees In the hands of the court poets the motif acquires religious and political im-plications and its application within the frame of Ptolemaic propaganda led to areluctance on the part of the court poets to openly compare any other femalewith the goddess A more adventurous transformation of the motif takes place inAntipaterrsquos AP 7218 (= 23 GP) and it is the fact that this is a sepulchral epigramand the underlying humour that permits the hyperbole Meleagerrsquos AP 5137 (= 43GP) constitutes the apex in the motifrsquos reception in the epigrams of the Hellenisticperiod⁵⁰ The comparison and (metaphorical) assimilation of a beloved to Aphroditea concept that would be inconceivable during the archaic and classical times is at-tributed to the religious changes that took place during the Hellenistic era andwhich had become established cult practices by Meleagerrsquos time allowing a gradualclosing between the Greeks and their gods

Cf Jones ndash Mikalson ndash In the post-Meleagrean epigrammatists it becomes common to openly compare andor as-similate women with the goddess and this fact confirms the changes in the reception of themotif during the Hellenistic era See eg AP = GP (Marcus Argentarius) AP = Page AP = Page and AP = Page (Rufinus) The motif was further adaptedby the poets of the Cycle of Agathias (th century AD) see eg AP = Viansino (PaulusSilentiarius) AP = Viansino (Julianus of Egypt)

204 Maria Kanellou

Karim Arafat

Pausanias and Homer

The second-century AD traveller and writer Pausanias was dianooumenos or anintellectualsup1 Not a self-promoting sophist like many of his time ndash I think first ofAelius Aristides the lsquostar sophistrsquo in Ruth Webbrsquos descriptionsup2 ndash but someonewho showed his knowledge of literature and art when he felt it necessary andon occasion refrained from expressing his views something no self-respectingsophist would do Thus he says lsquothough I have investigated very carefully thedates of Hesiod and Homer I do not like to state my results knowing as I dothe carping disposition [hellip] especially of the professors of poetry at the presentdayrsquo (9303) Similarly he says of the Theogony that lsquosomersquo believe it to be byHesiod (8181) and he casts doubt on attributions to poets such as Eumelus(211)

One manifestation of his learning is the frequency with which he refers to orquotes from earlier authors some 125 in totalsup3 Although his prototype is Hero-dotus it is the poets whom he cites most often Above all he refers and defersto Homer of whom he calls himself lsquoan attentive readerrsquo (242) He quotes Homerover 20 times and cites him another 250 Hesiod is quoted eight times and cited50 while Pindar is quoted 23 times and cited five times and Stesichorus is quot-ed 13 times⁴ It is clear that Homer more than any other writer dominates Pau-saniasrsquo thinking In this article I shall look behind the headline statistics and geta sense of how Pausanias saw and used Homer and why Characteristically hedoes not tell us much but I think we can make some safe inferences

First why Homer not for example Hesiod or Pindar Partly because author-ity comes from chronological primacy and from the sense that Homer is the orig-inal source and not a derivative one Pausanias does not explicitly say that hesees Homer as the first poet but it is often implicit It is repeatedly clear fromhis writings on art that for him antiquity confers sanctity and similarly thevery remoteness in time of Homer conferred on him an unmatchable authority

Then there is Pausaniasrsquo belief that the Iliad and the Odyssey are the su-preme poems in terms of quality Consistent with this is his view of the epic The-baid He quotes the seventh-century Ephesian poet Callinus as saying that the

References to the text of Pausanias are from the Teubner edition of Rocha-Pereira ndashTranslations are from Frazer Vol I with minor adjustments Webb Habicht opcit

author was Homer and adds lsquomany respectable persons have shared his opin-ion Next to the Iliad and Odyssey there is certainly no poem which I esteemso highlyrsquo (995) He speaks similarly of the lsquohymns of Orpheusrsquo lsquofor poeticalbeauty they may rank next to the hymns of Homer and they have received stillhigher marks of divine favourrsquo (93012 cf 1143) In both these cases thepoems are ranked below Homer but enhanced by approaching the quality ofHomer Pausanias refers to many other epicsmdashsuch as the Cypria (3161 42710261 4 10312) Little Iliad (3269) Minyad (4337 10282 7 10313) and Nau-pactia (103811)ndashbut he uses them purely as resources for information on for ex-ample mythology or heroic genealogy commenting on their authorship but noton their quality which is precisely what sets the Homeric poems apart in hisopinion

I think there is also something more personal in Pausaniasrsquo reverence forHomer There may be a natural geographical sympathy as Homerrsquos traditionalhome island of Chios is not far from Pausaniasrsquo apparent own home-city of Mag-nesia ad Sipylum in Lydia in Asia Minor⁵ He says he has heard different storiesabout the origins of Homerndashand of his motherndash but that he will not give his opin-ion on Homerrsquos native land (10243) It is striking that he rejects here an oppor-tunity to claim broadly common origins with Homer of all people Similarly as Imentioned he ‛investigated very carefully the dates of Hesiod and Homerrsquo (9303)This is reminiscent of Herodotusrsquo phrase lsquoI suppose Hesiod and Homer flourish-ed not more than four hundred years earlier than Irsquo (2532) Pausanias may heresimply be imitating Herodotus as he often does although it is extremely unlike-ly that he would not have his own views in any case the claim shows the im-portance of Homeric scholarship to an intellectual of Pausaniasrsquo time I seethis as precisely the sort of occasion when he differs strikingly from other writersof the second sophistic in not showing off his knowledgendashone might say in mak-ing a show of not showing off unless of course he is bluffing and knows lessthan he claims

Another reason I would suggest for Pausaniasrsquo reverence for Homer is thatas he says Homer lsquohad travelled into far countriesrsquo (123) and Pausanias maywell have seen him as a fellow-geographer and even as a prototype periegetetherefore as a model for his own travels and descriptions Pausaniasrsquo work isafter all centred on descriptions of places and what they contain Homer men-tions nearly 350 places in the Iliad alone and the use of the Odyssey as a geo-graphical manual continues to our own day with the recently-revived debate

Arafat and n

206 Karim Arafat

over the identity of the Homeric Ithaca⁶ Pausanias uses Homer as the (not lsquoanrsquo)authority for the foundation or names of cities or their belonging to a particularterritory or people (eg 413ndash4 etc) Thus he gives us the Homeric names of theislands of Aeolus (10113) and of Delphi (1065) Still in Phocis he mentions thatthe cities which in his day no longer existed were once renowned lsquochieflythrough the verses of Homerrsquo (1032) In discussing the most Homeric of main-land Greek cities Mycenae (2154ndash 167) lsquothe city which led the Greeks in theTrojan warrsquo he does not use Homer for his description of the sitendashdespite notingthat the walls were Cyclopean as at Tiryns-beyond mentioning the tombs of theAtreids and of those returning from Troy and even then he does not directlymention Homer But he would hardly need to as he is making the safe assump-tion that his readers would know the connectionWhere he does mention Homeris in explaining that the city was named after a woman called Mycene (2164)

It is his view of rivers as natural boundaries defining and separating placesand yet linking them that reflects the broadest scope of Pausaniasrsquo geographyreal or imagined Thus the Argolid is linked with Asia Minor through the riverAsopos which lsquothey sayrsquo comes from the river Maiander (253) and the westernPeloponnese is linked with Magna Graecia through the waters of the Alpheios(572ndash3 8542ndash3 cf 7232) Rivers and seas are central to Pausaniasrsquo workand here too Homer has a key role as a source for many names of rivers andfor stories associated with them Most references are purely recording withHomer again seen as authoritative eg in book 1 (1175) Pausanias mentionsthe Acherusian Lake and the rivers Acheron and Kokytos calling the latter lsquoa joy-less streamrsquo and adding lsquoit appears to me that Homer had seen these things andboldly modelled his descriptions of hell on them and that in particular he be-stowed on the rivers of hell the names of the rivers in Thesprotisrsquo In book 8he says that Homer introduced the name of Styx into his poetry citing theoath of Hera in Iliad 15 (36ndash37) where Homer says lsquoWitness me now earthand the broad heaven above and the down-trickling water of Styxrsquo Pausaniasconcludes lsquothis passage is composed as if the poet had himself seen thewater of the Styx drippingrsquo (8182) Incidentally he opts for Homerrsquos accountafter rejecting those of Hesiod Linus and Epimenides (8181ndash2) Both these pas-sages emphasize the importance of travelling and of autopsy of seeing for one-self both themes central to Pausaniasrsquo methodology

Thus it is clear that Pausanias sees Homer as a prototype geographer andtraveller and therefore as a model for his own work The same criteria apply

Eg BittlestoneDiggleUnderhill Graziosi b

Pausanias and Homer 207

also to Herodotus and it is interesting that Pausanias makes what is in many re-spects parallel use of a historian and an epic poet

As geography is central to Pausaniasrsquo work so are two further areas forwhich he finds information in Homer namely religion and art Pausaniasgives no critique of Homerrsquos view of the gods and makes surprisingly little explic-it use of him but as so often he still sees him as a supremely influential andauthoritative figure to give a small example he says that the poems of Homerdetermine how Hermes and Heracles are viewed (8324) On occasion he usesHomer to clarify a cult practice as at Olympia where he says lsquoI forgot to askwhat they do with the boar after the athletes have taken the oath With the an-cients it was a rule that a sacrificed animal on which an oath had been takenshould not be eaten by man Homer proves this clearly For the boar on thecut pieces of which Agamemnon swore that Briseis was a stranger to his bedis represented by Homer as being cast by the herald into the searsquo (52410ndash 11see Iliad 19266ndash68)

I turn now to art much of which is mythological and therefore narrative andso inevitably lends itself to comparison with written accounts those of Homerabove all Pausaniasrsquo primary use of Homer is again as an authority usuallyfor identification of figures or narrative details The lost wall-paintings of theClassical period are the obvious examples particularly those of the PaintedStoa at Athens and the Cnidian Lesche at Delphi described in detail by Pausa-nias Here I shall say nothing of the Homeric influence on or lsquoaccuracyrsquo of thepaintings ndash that has been assessed by many scholars already⁷ Instead I mentiona lesser-known painting which Pausanias saw at Plataea by Onasias of the mid-fifth century showing Euryganea who Pausanias alone (as far as I know) tellsus was known to be the mother of Oedipusrsquo children from lsquothe author of thepoem they call the Oedipodiarsquo (9511) Euryganea is shown lsquobowed with griefat the battle between her childrenrsquo The unnamed author Pausanias citesseems not to be sufficient authority since he starts by citing Homer as proofthat Oedipus had no children by Iocaste (Od 11271ndash73) Pausanias has strongviews on Oedipus finding Sophoclesrsquo version of his death lsquoincrediblersquo (1287)and citing Homerrsquos differing account as his sole authority apparently withoutsecond thought indeed he never disagrees with Homer The nearest he comesis when he says (10313) that the Ehoiai and the Minyad give different accounts

The commentary of Sir James Frazer (V ndash) is still invaluable in this respect Mostscholarship on the wall-paintings is concerned with reconstructing them from Pausaniasrsquo ac-count eg Stansbury-OrsquoDonnell and although he does discuss their relationshipto Homer particularly in his article (eg ndash ndash )

208 Karim Arafat

of the death of Meleager from Homer He simply states the disagreement withoutgiving an opinion

So far I have spoken of lost works where we are at an obvious disadvantagein assessing Pausaniasrsquo accuracy in general and specifically in his use of HomerOf surviving works where we would hope to be on more solid ground probablythe best-known example is the central figure of the west pediment of the templeof Zeus at Olympia the huge dominant figure with his right hand stretched outto quieten the fighting Lapiths and Centaurs Pausanias calls him Peirithous atwhose wedding the fight erupted (5108) Scholars almost universally agree thatthis is rather Apollo primarily on the grounds that the centre should be held bya god that the figure is much taller than the other figures that Peirithous shouldbe the same size as Theseus who is also depicted and that Peirithous should bemore agitated considering that it is his bride whose abduction is being attemptedbefore his eyes⁸ All good reasons why then does Pausanias call him Peiri-thous Simply because he says Peirithous was a son of Zeus to whom the tem-ple was dedicated and who was depicted in the centre of the east pediment AtDelphi describing the paintings of the Cnidian Lesche he notes (102910) thatHomer calls Theseus and Peirithous lsquochildren of the godsrsquo (Od 11631) In thesame way the Seasons are depicted on the throne of the statue of Zeus at Olym-pia because lsquoin poetry the Seasons are described as daughters of Zeusrsquo (5117)The logic for identifying Peirithous at Olympia is unimpeachable in literary andgenealogical terms but incompatible with sculptural conventions of which weare I think rather more conscious than Pausanias would have been althoughhe does say he has read what he calls lsquothe historians of sculpturersquo (5233)

Homer is also called upon in the intriguing case of the necklace of Eriphylewhich Pausanias tells us was said to be preserved in his time in the sanctuary ofAdonis and Aphrodite at Amathos in Cyprus Pausanias denies that the necklaceat Amathos is genuine because it lsquois of green stones fastened together with goldrsquo(9413) whereas Homer in the Odyssey says Eriphylersquos necklace was simply lsquopre-cious goldrsquo (Od 11327) At first this looks like precision on the part of someone asinterested in materials and techniques as Pausanias but sheer fussiness in termsof literary criticism However Pausanias strengthens his case by adding lsquonotthat Homer was ignorant of the necklaces composed of various materialsrsquoThus he cites two references in the Odyssey to lsquogolden necklaces [hellip] strung at

Eg AshmoleYalouris ( ndash) say that Apollo is the lsquopatron of all the arts and of allthat makes life humane and decent His presence ensures that civilized man shall prevailrsquo Roll-ey ( ) says that this is Pausaniasrsquo lsquoseule erreur inexcusable hellip Apollon qui nrsquoa aucuneplace dans le sanctuaire reacutepond a la regravegle qursquoun dieu se dresse au centre des frontonsrsquo Board-man ( ) calls Apollo lsquodispenser of law and orderrsquo see also Stewart and others


intervals with amber beadsrsquo one of them a gift to Penelope from one of her sui-tors Pausanias concludes that Homer knew of necklaces made of gold andbeads and would have described the necklace of Eriphyle as such if it hadbeen since he calls it simply lsquoprecious goldrsquo it cannot be the one Pausaniassaw in Amathos Thus Pausanias is led to a reasoned conclusion by the synthe-sis of his technical and literary knowledge rather than the unthinking adherenceto Homer of which he is often accused Incidentally Pausaniasrsquo often-expressedinterest in technique extends to the period of the Trojan war when he denies forexample that a bronze statue of Athena was from the Trojan spoils and that abronze Poseidon was dedicated by Achilles because bronze-casting had notyet been invented (8147 10385ndash7) Conversely he deduces from his readingof Homer that lsquoweapons in the Heroic Age were all of bronzersquo and finds confir-mation of this in the spear of Achilles which he saw at Phaselis and thesword of Memnon which he saw at Nicomedia since lsquothe blade and the spikeat the butt-end of the spear and the whole of the sword are of bronzersquo (338)Clearly there is some wishful thinking in this conclusion but it demonstratesclearly his belief in the literal truth of Homer

Homer personifies chronological remoteness and Pausanias uses him to ap-proach as nearly as possible the art and artists of earliest antiquity Here I thinkof Hephaestus and Daedalus works by both of whom Pausanias claims to haveseen citing Homer in his support in both cases An obvious example is theshield of Achilles made by Hephaestus and described in detail by Homer(Il 18478ndash608) Pausanias has to rely on his literary source for his descriptionof this lost masterpiece exactly as we have to rely on Pausanias for our under-standing of for example the lost wall-paintings from Athens and Delphi Ifwe make more of our source than we should it is because we have no othersource no means of forming a truly independent objective judgement Anotherfactor is relevant and indeed central here namely Pausaniasrsquo insistence on au-topsy which I mentioned earlier apropos of Homerrsquos own travelsWherever pos-sible he went to see the places or works of art that he described on occasiongoing to great lengths to do so and he is reluctant to comment on works hehas not seen It may be for this reason that his one extended passage aboutthe shield of Achillesndashconcerning Linus who was killed by Apollo for vyingwith him in songndash has more literary and historical than artistic content citingPamphus lsquoauthor of the oldest Athenian hymnsrsquo (9298 cf 7219) and Sapphoand ending with the removal of the bones of Linus to Macedonia by Philip II andhis subsequently sending them back to Thebes (9296ndash9)

Pausanias describes only one work he believes to be by Hephaestus in thispassage from book 9 lsquothe god whom the Chaeroneans honour most is the sceptrewhich Homer says Hephaestus made for Zeus and Zeus gave to Hermes and

210 Karim Arafat

Hermes to Pelops and Pelops bequeathed to Atreus and Atreus to Thyestesfrom whom Agamemnon had it This sceptre they worship naming it a spearand that there is something divine about it is proved especially by the distinctionit confers on its owners [hellip] it was brought to Phocis by Electra daughter of Aga-memnon There is no public temple built for it but the man who acts as priestkeeps the sceptre in his house for the year and sacrifices are offered to itdaily and a table is set beside it covered with all sorts of flesh and cakesrsquo(94011ndash 12) He concludes lsquoof all the objects which poets have declared and pub-lic opinion has believed to be works of Hephaestus none is genuine save thesceptre of Agamemnonrsquo (9411)⁹

This strongly expressed sentiment is interesting for showing that Pausaniasis willing to disagree with writers including poets on principle and that he willalso disagree with and distance himself from lsquopublic opinionrsquo unsurprisinglyfor someone who is dianooumenos and has studied sculpture books An exampleof a work which he sees as wrongly attributed to Hephaestus is the third bronzetemple at Delphi (10511ndash2) although he does not say who does believe it was byHephaistos perhaps he is again referring to lsquopublic opinionrsquo Still on the bronzetemple he adds that he does not believe lsquothe story about the golden songstresseswhich the poet Pindar mentions in speaking of this particular templersquo He meansPaean 8 lsquobrazen were the walls and of bronze were the supporting pillars andover its pediment sang six enchantresses made of goldrsquo (68ndash71) and adds lsquohereit seems to me Pindar merely imitated the Sirens in Homerrsquomdasheffectively a doubledenigration of Pindar compared to Homer

On one occasion Pausanias approaches Hephaestus the artist indirectlysaying that Homer lsquocompares the dance wrought by Hephaestus on the shieldof Achilles to a dance wrought by Daedalus never having seen finer works ofartrsquo (8163 ref Il 18590ndash604) I presume that this is the dance of Ariadnewhich Daedalus carved in white marble and which Pausanias saw at Knossos(9403ndash4) He tells us nothing else about it Elsewhere he mentions thatlsquoHomer says Daedalus made images for Minos and his daughtersrsquo (746)

One final observation on Homer and art Pausanias mentions many statuesof poets such those of Corinna at Thebes (9223) and Pindar at Athens (183)but it is striking that he mentions only one lsquolikenessrsquo (eikona) of Homer(10242) One might have expected Homer to have been honoured with more stat-ues although one might equally recall Pausaniasrsquo words that lsquoin [Homerrsquos] daysthey did not yet know how to make bronze imagesrsquo (8147) an observation whichapplies equally to stone images However that may be the likeness of Homer that

Most recently on the sceptre Pirenne-Delforge


Pausanias mentions has rare kudos from its positioning lsquoon a monumentrsquo in thepronaos of the temple of Apollo at Delphi and from its being accompanied by thetext of an oracle given to Homer

Blest and unhappy for thou were born to be bothThou seekest thy father-land but thou hast a mother-land and no fatherlandThe isle of Ios is the father-land of thy mother and it in deathShall receive thee but beware of the riddle of young children

The first line of this oracle pithily stating the lot that Fate had given Homer mayserve to remind us that Pausanias gives no other writer the human dimension hegives Homer Otherwise he only very occasionally gives writers characteristicsnotably describing Tyrtaeus as lsquoa school-master generally thought to be apoor-witted creaturersquo (4156) perhaps unsurprising given that lsquoin all the wideworld there is no people so dead to poetry and poetic fame as the Spartansrsquo(382) Pausanias visited the grotto in the territory of Smyrna lsquowhere they saythat Homer composed his poemsrsquo (7512) and he visited his tomb as he didthose of Pindar and Corinna Where he sets Homer apart is in his references tohis ill-fortune lsquoNever I think did fortune show her spiteful nature so plainlyas in her treatment of Homer For Homer was first struck blind and then as ifthis great calamity were not enough came pinching poverty and drove himforth to wander the wide world a beggarrsquo (2332ndash3) This poverty may be relatedto the humility Pausanias attributes to Homer saying that he lsquoesteemed the lar-gess of princes less than the applause of the peoplersquo (123) In spite of this Pau-sanias says Homer lsquobore up against his misfortune and continued to composepoetry to the lastrsquo (4337) I wonder if Pausanias identified with him whetherhe wandered unappreciated in his own lifetime Did Pausanias have an infirmitytoo perhaps as a result of age given the length of his travels variously estimatedas around twice or even three times the length of Odysseusrsquo wanderings Hisfear expressed towards the end of his travels that he may not get as far as Del-phi (8371) perhaps hints that he did

Whatever Pausaniasrsquo reasons his affinity with Homer is evident and as Imentioned earlier he never disagrees with him This absolute faith in Homercauses problems for example to quote William Hutton on a passage of book1 (1125) lsquoPausaniasrsquo source for the state of the Epeirote naval and culinary ex-pertise in the third century BC is none other than Homerrsquosup1⁰ Jas Elsner draws thiscontrast between Pausaniasrsquo and Philostratusrsquo view of Homer lsquoFor PausaniasHomer is a sanctification of Greece to be followed with respect and an arbiter

Hutton

212 Karim Arafat

in matters of interpretation For Philostratus Homer is an excuse to displaylearning and an appropriate springboard from which to launch into his own cre-ative interpretationrsquosup1sup1 This is fair but inevitable given Pausaniasrsquo and Philostra-tusrsquo very different approaches and agendas To quote Ruth Webb on the Eikonesof Philostratus lsquoits sophistication makes it a special use of ekphrasis that shouldbe ranked alongside the novels for its conscious play with fictionrsquosup1sup2 somethingone could not say of Pausanias I do think though that there is a Procrusteantouch to Elsnerrsquos criticism of Pausanias for example he says of a passage inbook 9 lsquoHomer can prove that a pile of stones at Thebes (9182) is the tombof Tydeusrsquosup1sup3 In fact Pausanias simply reports the use made of Homer(Il 1411) by what he calls lsquothe Theban antiquariesrsquo as often elsewhere he refersto local writers or exegetes (local guides) He does not comment on the passageof Homer nor does he express an opinion on whether the stones he sees atThebes are the tomb of Tydeus

The uses Pausanias makes of Homer are many and varied but he is aware ofHomerrsquos wider value summarising his thoughts by saying lsquoHomerrsquos ideas haveproved useful to mankind in all manner of waysrsquo (4288) Quite so

Elsner n Webb Elsner n


Maria Ypsilanti

The Reception of Homeric Vocabulary inNonnusrsquo Paraphrase of St Johnrsquos GospelΕxamination of Themes and Formulas inSelected Passages

The work of the fifth century AD poet Nonnus of Panopolis in Egypt entitled Par-aphrasis or Metabole of the Gospel of St John is a poem in hexameters whichversifies the prose narration of the Fourth Gospel It is the only extant Greekpoem paraphrasing a text of the New Testament although in Latin there are sev-eral surviving samplessup1 In fact as is attested mainly by church historians thefourth and principally the fifth-century Christian paraphrases flourishedThese are rewritings either of Biblical texts or of Acts of Saints probably writtenin various poetic metressup2 The paraphrase expands upon the original employingthe rhetorical process of amplificatio to do so This is achieved mainly throughembellishment of the original text with verbal abundance (copia verborum)tropes and figures (ornatus) and variation (variatio) of the original vocabularyand phrases as Roberts points out drawing on Quintilianrsquos account of the para-phrase as a genresup3 The dactylic verse employed by Nonnus in his paraphrasenaturally invites the use of epic diction in this process of expanding Biblicalprose The poem is in fact full of Homeric vocabulary and formulas in variationHowever the poet does not merely employ epic poems as his source texts He

Juvencusrsquo Evangeliorum Libri IV Aratorrsquos Historia Apostolica Seduliusrsquo Carmen Paschale (NewTestament) verse-paraphrases of the Old Testament are Claudius Marius Victoriusrsquo AlethiaCyprianusrsquo Heptateuch Avitusrsquo De Spiritalis Historiae Gestis Dracontiusrsquo Laudes Dei is a poempart of which is a paraphrase of the Genesis The other major extant Christian Greek poeticparaphrasis is Pseudo-Apollinarisrsquo hexameter Paraphrasis of Davidrsquos Psalms dealing with anOld Testament text The less important hexameter Greek texts based on the Bible known as theCodex Visionum should be also here mentioned See further Whitby Roberts ndash Cf Quint Inst sua brevitati gratia sua copiae alia tralatisvirtus alia propriis hoc oratio recta illud figura declinata commendat and illud virtutisindicium est fundere quae natura contracta sunt augere parva varietatem similibus voluptatemexpositis dare et bene dicere multa de paucis Cf also neque ego paraphrasin esse inter-pretationem tantum volo sed circa eosdem sensus certamen atque aemulationem

also enriches his work with vocabulary and expressions taken from tragedy andother poetry as well⁴

It is a remarkable feature although perhaps not surprising given the infinitepossibilities offered by the text of Homer that it is used by later authors of worksof widely varying subject-matter and styles Poets who compose hexameters onepic themes such as Quintus Smyrnaeus Triphiodous Colluthus and Nonnus inhis Dionysiaca not surprisingly incorporate in their verses Homeric referencesadapted to their work in accord with the specific requirements of each scenetheir personal taste and their ideas of literary imitatio variatio⁵ As for NonnusrsquoParaphrase scholars have indeed occasionally traced reminiscences of certainscenes and settings of earlier poetry in this work⁶ However the subject-matterof the Paraphrase ie the narration of Biblical episodes does not generallyallow systematic echoes of more extensive passages images and motifs drawnfrom the poetic past since consistent mythological allusion is not appropriatefor the task that Nonnus is undertaking Thus the reception of epic and otherpoetry in the Paraphrase occurs mainly on the lexical level and consists in thecreative adaptation of phrases Still at times the poet makes use of somewider motif that tradition offers him developing it to the extent that his narrativeand the spirit of his work let him An important aspect of the use of Homer byauthors of late Antiquity and especially by Christian authors is the process ofphilosophical or religious interpretation whereby these authors use Homericterms and passages now however endowed with new meaning andor lsquometa-physicalrsquo depth⁷ In adapting Homeric vocabulary in his Paraphrase Nonnuscan either remain on a more lsquosuperficialrsquo level as it were employing the Homer-ic diction for purely decorative purposes or endow these terms with theologicalsignificance according to the needs of religious exegesis that obviously arose inthe procedure of paraphrasing a biblical text Furthermore it has been argued

For example the Wedding at Cana has been regarded as described in terms of a Bacchic feastand echoes from the Bacchae of Euripides have been also traced in it see Bogner ForHomeric echoes and for similarities between the Dionysiaca and the Paraphrasis in this scenesee Shorrock ndash For echoes from Callimachusrsquo Hecale and from Euphorion see Hol-lis ndash For examples of this much-discussed matter see Maciver ndash (with reference toQuintus and Nonnus and with further bibliography) For Homeric adaptation in Quintus seefor instance Maciver passim For instance the Feeding of the Five Thousand has been seen as recalling a Homeric φιλοξε-νία see MacCoull f For Dionysiac elements of the imagery of Par (including alsoresemblances with verses from the Dionysiaca) see also Livrea on Par See Agosti The basic work on this handling of Homer mainly by Neoplatonists is Lam-berton

216 Maria Ypsilanti

that elements of everyday Christianity of fifth-century Egypt were incorporated inthe Nonnian biblical reformulation of the Homeric diction Having the presenceof the Church in mind Nonnus addresses an educated audience that recognizesand appreciates the combination of epic language with religious practice⁸ Non-nus of course employs the Hellenistic technique of variation deftly adjustingthe various poetic echoes in his text rather than merely stitching together versesand half-verses borrowed from the epic so that his poem is by no means a Ho-meric cento⁹ Examples of the Nonnian incorporation of Homeric vocabulary inthe Paraphrase and the consequent attainment of multiple poetic aims will beexamined in the present paper

A very common Homeric formula υἷες Aχαιῶν (for instance Il 1162 22814114 6255) is readily adjusted by Nonnus to a Biblical context Just as inHomer the lsquosons of the Achaeansrsquo are the Aχαιοί themselves so Nonnus usesυἷες Ἰουδαίων (76) to denote the Jews which is exactly what the Gospel alsosays Ἰουδαῖοι in 71 The transfer of epic words bearing heavy pagan overtonesto a Christian context is especially noticeable when terms describing divinitiesand their qualities or activities in the epic are applied to the Trinitarian Godor to a super-human creature in Nonnus Characteristic is the use of ὀμφή thetypical term for the voice of the gods in Homer (for instance Il 241 θείηhellipὀμφή 20129 θεῶνhellipὀμφῆς Od 3215 and 1696 θεοῦ ὀμφῇ) always at verse-end In the Paraphrase the noun appears in the Homeric metrical position usu-ally accompanied by an adjective manifesting its divine provenance exactly ashappens in the epic 193 θεοδινέοςhellipὀμφῆς 349 5106 8139 and 15103 θέσκε-λοςον ὀμφή(ν) 353 θεσπεσίηςhellipὀμφῆςsup1⁰ 5127 θεοδέγμονοςhellipὀμφῆς 5141 ὑπέρ-τερον ὀμφήν 7162 θεηγόροςhellipὀμφή 12166 and 14116 ἔνθεον ὀμφήν Nonnus isnot the only writer who transfers this epic noun to a Christian context The factthat it occurs elsewhere in Christian literature designating the divine voicesup1sup1

clearly illustrates the adaptation of such pagan terminology to texts of thenew religion Now to describe what in John is simply called δαιμόνιον (theJews stating that it is a δαιμόνιον which dictates Christrsquos words) Nonnus uses vo-

It has been suggested more specifically that for the Feeding of the Five Thousand Nonnustransfers liturgical elements into Homeric vocabulary and style MacCoull For an examination of the same Biblical episode in Nonnusrsquo Paraphrase and in Eudociarsquos Ho-meric Centos and for the consequent demonstration of their differences see Whitby For the adjective θεσπέσιος often used by Cyril whose commentary on St Johnrsquos GospelNonnus used systematically see Agosti on Par For ὀμφή as the divine voice in Nonnussee also Stegemann n For instance in the Vision of Dorotheus (P Bodmer ) Christ is referred to as πατέρrsquoὀμφῆς see further Agosti on Par Cf also Christodorus AP θέσπιδος ὀμφῆς

The Reception of Homeric Vocabulary in Nonnusrsquo Paraphrase of St Johnrsquos Gospel 217

cabulary borrowed from Homer and from tragedy so sketching this daemonimaginatively and with exaggeration as is to be expected In 8158 f δαιμόνιονis conceived as a gad-fly who drives people crazy ὅττι σε λύσσης δαίμονοςἠερόφοιτος ἀλάστορος οἶστρος ἐλαύνει Here the image is created by combiningthe famous Aeschylean ἀλάστωρ δαίμων (for instance Pers 354 Ag 1501sup1sup2) to-gether with a Homeric touch realized through the word ἠερόφοιτος an adjectivethat Nonnus is particularly fond ofsup1sup3 and which is in a slightly varied form aHomeric rarity in both Iliadic passages where it appears it is attributed to thechthonian deity Erinys (Il 9571 and 1987 ἠεροφοῖτις Ἐρινύς) It has been arguedthat in Homer the epithet describes a movement in the darkness rather than amovement in the airsup1⁴ In Nonnus the adjective has simply the sense of lsquomovingin the airrsquosup1⁵ and does not convey any negative connotation In fact in Book Oneof the Paraphrase ἠεροφοίτης describes the throng of angels moving up anddown the sky (1215) It is remarkable that after Homer there is no other passagein extant literature where this adjective occurs except for one instance in Ae-schylus (fr 282 R ἀερόφοιτος) Much later it appears again In addition to Non-nus other poets who employ ἠερόφοιτος are Oppian Manetho and Paul the Si-lentiary the adjective being comparable to οὐρανοφοίτης frequently used byGregory of Nazianzus who attributes it to St John and to St Paul inter aliossup1⁶As regards the fact that in Book One of the Paraphrase the adjective is associatedwith movement of angels and in Book Eight it qualifies a daemonic power it isevident that Nonnus uses the terms offered by the poetic past with a freedomand flexibility that does not prevent him from putting such terms in even com-pletely contrasting contextssup1⁷

Descriptions creating visual and acoustic stimulus inspired by Homer are oc-casionally used by Nonnus to elaborate a brief or plain phrase in the Gospel Thepoet refers repeatedly to death as an ἀχλυόεν βέρεθρον (6157 11184 ἀχλυόεν-

For this Aeschylean motif see further Fraenkel on Ag Ἠερόφοιτος or ἠεροφοίτης see for instance Dion See Hainsworth on Il See Vian on Dion See further De Stefani on Par A variatio of this adjective again applied on the δαιμόνιον attributed to Christ by the Jews(John δαιμόνιον ἔχεις) appears in Par δαίμονος ἠερίοιο Ἠέριος in Homer describesthe cranes (Il ) the tribe of the Cicones (Od ) and twice Thetis (Il ) Thisadjective appears again like ἠερόφοιτοςης very frequently in Nonnusrsquo poetry In the Dionysiacait seldom qualifies a divinity but in the Paraphrase apart from accompanying the daemon in it is also employed for the voice of the Holy Spirit ( φωνῆς ἠερίης θεοδινέα βόμβον)in its only other occurrence in the Paraphrase it is attributed to the winds see

218 Maria Ypsilanti

τοςhellipβερέθρου 1244 ἀχλυόεντιhellipβερέθρῳ) In other instances Hades is aβέρεθρον without return (2104 κόλπον ἀνοστήτοιο βερέθρου occurring in the Di-onysiaca as wellsup1⁸) or simply a βέρεθρον (856 and in 11155) The image of thedark chasm is the result of the combination of two themes Leaving aside thecommonplace that the Underworld is dark again ultimately Homeric(Il 15191 Aΐδης δrsquo ἔλαχε ζόφον ἠερόεντα) when one looks at ἀχλύς with deathin mind reminiscence of Homeric passages emerges once more The first motifused in the Nonnian verses in discussion is that of death (or fainting) as amist ἀχλύς falling on onersquos eyes cf Il 5696 16344 κατὰ δrsquo ὀφθαλμῶνκέχυτrsquo ἀχλύς 20421 Od 2288 On the other hand Hades as a βέρεθρον isalso a variation of the Iliadic description of Tartarus as an abyss in the depthsof the earth even lower than Hades Il 813 f ἤ μιν ἑλὼν ῥίψω ἐς Τάρταρον ἠερ-όεντα τῆλε μάλrsquo ἧχι βάθιστον ὑπὸ χθονός ἐστι βέρεθρον a passage discussed byPlato (Phaedo 112a) Nonnus is moreover probably recalling the idea that Hadesis a βέρεθρονwhich appears in other epic poets namely Apollonius and QuintusSmyrnaeus who also modeled their phrases on the Iliadic linesup1⁹ It is remarkablethat Christian poetry too exploited this theme as is evident in the poetry of Ro-manus the Melodist who says when speaking of the fall of the Devil (33207) καὶἐν βαράθρῳ κατηνέχθη Ἅιδου Now the origin of this presentation of the noise ofthunder described as βροντή in the Gospel (1229 καὶ ἀκούσας ἔλεγεν ὅτι βροντὴγέγονεν) is clearly Homeric The Gospel here narrates how some took Godrsquos voicefor thunder from heaven Nonnus takes the opportunity offered by the text itselfand adorns his diction with vocabulary that bears clear epic overtones when hesays (12116 f) λαὸς ἐπεσμαράγησεν ὅτι ζαθέων ἀπὸ κόλπων βρονταίη βαρύδου-πος ἐπέκτυπεν αἴθριος ἠχώ (lsquoand the people roared because a thunder-likeloud heavenly echo resoundedrsquo) Firstly the poet replaces the simple ἔλεγεν ofthe Gospel with ἐπεσμαράγησεν a variation of the verb σμαραγέω This denotesinarticulate noises caused by the elements such as thunder or the sea breakingon the shore or birds and appears three times in Homer (Il 2210 2463 21199)sup2⁰In the last passage σμαραγέω designates the noise of Zeusrsquo thunder Διὸς μεγά-λοιο κεραυνόν δεινήν τε βροντήν ὅτrsquo ἀπrsquo οὐρανόθεν σμαραγήσῃ Nonnus trans-fers the verb to a similar context but interestingly attributes it to human voices

Dion εἰ πέλε νόστιμος οἶμος ἀνοστήτοιο βερέθρου Ap Rh διὲξ Aίδαο βερέθρων QS and μέχρις ἐπrsquo Aιδονῆος ὑπερθύμοιοβέρεθρον see Campbell ad loc cf ὑπrsquo ἠερόεντι βερέθρῳ Nonnus uses (ἐπι)σμαραγεῖν also in the Dionysiaca to render various noises and clamour andin [Oppian] the verb is used for the echo of the forest (Cyn ) and of the waters (Cyn )For the verb meaning lsquoresoundrsquo rather than lsquogleamrsquo as some thought having confused its rootwith that of σμάραγδος (lsquoemeraldrsquo) see Kirk on Il ndash


this accomplishing an impressive variatio since quite unexpectedly it is not thethunder itself that σμαραγέει but the people who think they hear a thunder Itshould be here added that in the only other instance in which σμαραγέω appearsin the Paraphrase it describes the voice of Christ who addresses Lazarus andcommands him to come out of the tomb (11157 εἶπε καὶ ἐσμαράγησε διαπρυσίῃτινὶ φωνῇ) The use of the verb is again exceptional and striking here enhancingthe notion of the supernatural character that the words of Christ possess Nowthe adjective Nonnus attributes to the thunder βαρύδουπος in Par 12117 is aword first found in Moschussup2sup1 which the Panopolite poet uses very frequentlyin the Dionysiaca of various deities and noisessup2sup2 In the present passage com-bined as it is with the following verb ἐπέκτυπεν it is a variation ofβαρύκτυποςsup2sup3 which qualifies Zeus in the Homeric hymn to Demeter (Cer 3334 441 460) and in Hesiod (Th 388 Op 79)sup2⁴ at the same time the adjectivefurther recalls the Homeric ἐρίγδουπος for lsquothe husband of Herarsquo (ἐρίγδουποςπόσις Ἥρης in Il 7411 10329 13154 1688 Od 15180 Ζηνὸς [hellip] ἐριγδούποιοin Il 12235 15293) Thus Nonnus evokes in a manifold fashion the Homeric no-tion of Zeus who thunders when the poet speaks of the Jews who assume theyhear a βροντή The doctum audience is once more invited to recognize the trans-fer of a memorable epic pattern to an entirely different environment and the so-phistication the author employs as he adapts it to a Christian narrative

Variation can be achieved in a particularly subtle way by exploiting the po-tential of a Homeric image in a highly allusive manner in what is a purely Hel-lenistic fashion In Book 21 of the Paraphrase Nonnus narrates the scene wherethe disciples meet Christ while they are fishing in Lake Tiberias The net is calledeither δίκτυονsup2⁵ as in the Gospel or λίνονsup2⁶ and the net imagery is recurrenteven when it is absent from the original as typically happens in the ParaphraseThe fish-net is called λίνον once in Homer in Il 5487 It is interesting to observethat Peterrsquos garment τὸν ἐπενδύτην in the Gospel (217) is conceived of as alinen veil by Nonnus and is depicted as πολύτρητος (2139 καὶ λινέῳ πεπύκαστοπολυτρήτῳ χρόα πέπλῳ lsquoand covered his body with a linen robe full of holesrsquo)

Moschus uses the adjective for Poseidon (Eur ) For instance Dion There is also a self-variation with Dion f (ἐρωτοτόκῳ δὲ φαρέτρῃ βρονταίης βαρύ-δουπος ἐδουλώθη κτύπος ἠχοῦς) on the arrow of Eros which strikes Semele For the adjective see West on Hes Th and f Σίμων hellipὑπηνέμιον λίνον ἕλκων f λίνα κολπώσαντεςhellip πόντιον αὐτοκύλι-στον ἀνείρυον ἐσμὸν ἀλήτην οὐκέτι δὲ σθένος εἶχον ὑποβρύχιον λίνον ἕλκειν fκαὶ οὐ λίνον ἔνδοθι πόντου σχίζετο τοσσατίων νεπόδων βεβαρημένον ὄγκῳ

220 Maria Ypsilanti

In this description the poet is playing with the Homeric image of the fish-netswhich are lsquofull of holesrsquo (Od 22386 δικτύῳhellipπολυωπῷ) Having presented Pe-terrsquos garment as λίνεον whose cognate λίνονsup2⁷ qualified the nets a little earlierand having further attributed to it an adjective (πολύτρητος) similar to that de-scribing the nets in Homer (πολυωπός) Nonnus uses words playfully reminiscentof the Homeric idea of the πολυωπὸν δίκτυον which is also taken up by Oppian(Hal 3579) as λίνου πολυωπὸν ὄλεθρον (on the dangerousness of the net for thefish) In fact Nonnus transfers the image of the epic nets to the clothes of Peterthrough the semantic transition offered by the meanings of λίνον Πολύτρητος isalso Homeric appearing three times in the Odyssey and typically attributed tothe spongesup2⁸ and both Suda and Eustathius underline its likeness toπολυωπόςsup2⁹ A λίνεος πέπλος described as fine-crafted and suitable for warriorsto be worn under the breast-plate dresses the fighter Morrheus in Dion 35197 fκαὶ λινέῳ κόσμησε δέμας χιονώδεϊ πέπλῳ οἷον ἔσω θώρηκος ἀεὶ φορέουσιμαχηταί Thus Nonnus produces a self-variation which is emphasized in thatit holds the same metrical position where adjective and noun stand in bothpoems In the Dionysiaca the λίνεος πέπλος is decorative as is emphasized bythe verb κόσμησε and the adjective lsquowhite like snowrsquo and by the fact that it isfound in a heroic environment in the Paraphrase it is on the other hand acloth imagined as ragged and of extremely poor quality indeed suitable for fish-ermen Nonnusrsquo phrase is anyway somewhat paradoxical since linen is usuallythe material of the chiton a masculine garment while peplos is the feminine gar-ment more embellished and luxurioussup3⁰ This identification however is not al-ways retained by Nonnus since elsewhere he invariably uses πέπλος and χιτώνsup3sup1In any case πέπλος still bears epic connotations of luxury and finenesssup3sup2 and

See for instance Chantraine sv λίνον the thread of linen was originally used for fishing Od and σπόγγοισι πολυτρήτοισι Eustathius puts in parallel πολύτρητος and πολυωπός in his comment on Od ( f ὅρα δὲ τὸ πολύτρητον οἰκειότατον ὂν σπόγγοις ὥσπερ δικτύοις τὸ πολυωπόν) and on ( πολύτρητοι δὲ σπόγγοι πρός τινα ἴσως ὁμοιότητα τοῦ πολυωπὸν δίκτυον)see also Suda sv πολυωπόν∙ τὸ πολύτρητον δίκτυον Et Gud sv πέπλος διαφέρει πέπλος καὶ χιτώνmiddot χιτὼν λέγεται τὸ ἁπλοῦν καὶ λινοῦνπεριβόλαιονmiddot πέπλος δὲ τὸ ποικίλον καὶ γυναίκιον ἱμάτιον cf EM sv χιτών ἐπὶ μὲν γὰρ ἀνδρῶνλέγεται χιτώνmiddot ἐπὶ δὲ γυναικῶν πέπλος Dion where the cloth woven on the loom is called πέπλος and χιτών in the sameline For instance Il where the πέπλος is χαριέστατος and μέγιστος Od f where theπέπλοι are λεπτοὶ ἐύννητοι where they are παμποίκιλοι where the πέπλος iscalled περικαλλέα In the two other instances where πέπλος is used in the Paraphrase theword has connotations of splendour literal ( θεοκμήτῳ τινὶ πέπλῳ on the shinning gar-


forms a sharp contrast with its adjective lsquofull of holesrsquo and its position in a con-text of poverty and deprivation

The following example demonstrates Homeric variatio in the service of reli-gious exegesis Nonnus renders the Gospelrsquos σκηνοπηγία (72) with a combinationof words which both remains very close to the original and at the same timebears clear Homeric overtones the phrase πηγνυμέναις κλισίῃσιν (78) which oc-curs in variation also in Dion 24125 (κλισίας πήξαντες) retains the etymology ofthe noun employed in the Gospel keeping πήγνυμι and only changing σκηνή toκλισίη its Homeric equivalent and is also by a happy coincidence reminiscentof Homerrsquos εὔπηκτος κλισίη (Il 9663 and 24675 μυχῷ κλισίης εὐπήκτου) Nonnusplayfully uses a phrase recalling the Iliadic setting but applies it to a differentcontext The σκηναί of the Jews rendered by the term κλισίαι are not lsquotentsrsquo likethose of the Iliadic warriors but rather huts made from branches of trees (theHebrew term is lsquosoukkotrsquo) as befits a rural festival that σκηνοπηγία is Moreoverπήγνυμι in the word σκηνοπηγία expresses the fact that the branches are pushedinto the ground while in Homer the tents are εὔπηκτοι because the pieces ofwood which support them are strong well-made εὐπαγῆ as Eustathius noteson Il 9663sup3sup3 It is interesting to observe that κλισίην πήγνυμι occurs again inthe other Greek biblical poem Ps Apollinarisrsquo Paraphrase of the Psalms to ren-der the verb κατασκηνόω used in the Septuagintsup3⁴ It is evident that κλισίη offersthe most convenient solution for the poetic transformation of the common σκηνήand its cognates for authors who chose the epic style for their paraphrase Thelearned audience of both Ps Apollinaris and Nonnus appreciates the transferof a standard Iliadic expression to a totally dissimilar context in which the Ho-meric terminology can be still present albeit endowed with a different meaningand describing acts belonging to a totally diverse cultural environment In Non-nus this transfer is all the more successful since his participle πηγνύμεναι func-tioning as an adjective directly and powerfully recalls the Homeric adjective ofthe κλισίη from the same root εὔπηκτος Yet Nonnusrsquo capacity for variety can

ment of the resurrected Christ) or supposed ( f ἐπὶ χροῒ πέπλα βαλόντες Σιδονίης στίλβοντασοφῷ σπινθῆρι θαλάσσης concerning the ἱμάτιον πορφυροῦν with which the soldiers dressedChrist in mockery as it is described in the Gospel in ) Eust Il ff ὅτι οἴκου μὲν οἰκεῖον ἐπίθετον τὸ εὔδμητον ἤτοι εὐδόμητον κλισίας δὲμάλιστα τὸ εὔπηκτον διὰ τὸ εὐπαγὲς τῶν ἐρειδόντων αὐτὴν ξύλων Aχιλλεὺς οὖν εὗδε μυχῷ κλισίηςεὐπήκτου οὕτω που καὶ πηκτὸν ἄροτρον λέγεται δῆλον δὲ ὅτι καὶ μέγαρόν που εὔπηκτον ὥσπερκαὶ εὔτυκτον (cf also Il Od κλισίην εὔτυκτον) PG vol Migne in Par (σοῖσι παρrsquo αὐλείοις κλισίην πήξοιτο μελάθροις rendering Da-vidrsquos κατασκηνώσει ἐν ταῖς αὐλαῖς σου in Psalm ) and in (κλισίην σθεναρήν ἑο πάντοτεπήξει rendering Davidrsquos καὶ γὰρ ὁ κύριος κατασκηνώσει εἰς τέλος in Psalm )

222 Maria Ypsilanti

go further and deeper still In Par 732 f Jesus refuses to participate in the festivaland Nonnus describes this statement by once more employing κλισίη and attrib-uting to it a cognate of πήγνυμι as an adjective οὔπω ἐγὼ κλισίας νεοπηγέας ἄρτιγεραίρων εἰς τελετὴν ὁσίην ἐπιβήσομαι (to render the Johannine ἐγὼ οὐκ ἀνα-βαίνω εἰς τὴν ἑορτὴν ταύτην in 78) With κλισίας νεοπηγέας Nonnus again ach-ieves a creative adaptation of the Homeric εὔπηκτος κλισίη but this time isalso moving in the realm of biblical interpretatio as he adds to the text termsthat further clarify the content νεοπηγέας in addition to being one more variatioof εὔπηκτος lends an eschatological dimension to Christrsquos words as the lsquonewrsquorite will replace the old Jewish one since the new religion is to surpass andrenew outdated Judaism and its ritualssup3⁵

Another noteworthy Homeric adaptation occurs at Par 11188f Here the act ofthe high-priests in coming and meeting in council is rendered with the sentence καὶἄφρονες ἀρχιερῆες εἰς ἀγορὴν ἀγέροντο πολύθροον ᾗχι γερόντων εἰς ἓν ἀγειρο-μένων πρωτόθρονος ἕζετο βουλή (lsquoand the senseless high-priests gathered in theclamorous assembly where the elders sitting in the first thrones used to come to-gether in councilrsquo) rendering the simple Johannine συνέδριον (1147) Several Ho-meric expressions are blended in this image and the spirit of the Homeric settingsechoed in this passage is reversed First we have a verbatim reproduction of the fig-ura etymologica ἐς δrsquo ἀγορὴν ἀγέροντο of Il 18245sup3⁶ which stands also in the samemetrical sedes occupying the first hemistich Nonnus further enhances this figure bythe ἀγειρομένων of the next line which multiplies the etymological play This tripleoccurrence of cognates is partly parallel to the passage just mentioned whereἀγορήν reappears in the next line (Il 18246 ὀρθῶν δrsquo ἑσταότων ἀγορὴ γένετrsquo)but even more notably it is parallel to the Iliadic οἳ δrsquo ἀγορὰς ἀγόρευον ἐπὶ Πριάμοιοθύρῃσι πάντες ὁμηγερέες ἠμὲν νέοι ἠδὲ γέροντες (2788ndash89 lsquothey were speaking inpublic at the doors of Priamus all gathered together young and old peoplersquo) More-over the image of the eldersrsquo sitting in council is a variation on Il 253 βουλὴν δὲπρῶτον μεγαθύμων ἷζε γερόντων and the ἀγορὴ πολύθροος is a variation on the ἀγο-

See Caprara Cf Eustathius ad loc ( f) ἐτυμολογικὸς δὲ συνήθης τρόπος τὸ ἐς ἀγορὰν ἀγέροντοApollonius Rhodius also uses the phrase in the same sedes in Although this phrasedoes not recur in Homer in order to justify Eustathiusrsquo description of it as lsquousualrsquo we have sim-ilar etymological schemas like οἳ δrsquo ἐπεὶ οὖν ἤγερθεν ὁμηγερέες τε γένοντο in Il and αὐτὰρἐπεί ῥrsquo ἤγερθεν ὁμηγερέες τrsquo ἐγένοντο in Il Od and See also Kirk onIl ndash


ρὴν πολύφημον of Od 2150sup3⁷ The notion of wisdom and prudence inherent in theHomeric image of the leadersrsquo assembly stressed by Nonnusrsquo explicit statement thatthe meeting is principally made by the γέροντες is contrasted with the foolishnessof the ἄφρονες high-priests who plan to kill Jesus This is an illustrative case of Ho-meric imitation through opposition and also yet one more example of Nonnusrsquo hos-tile attitude toward the Jews a stance influenced by Cyril of Alexandriasup3⁸

These are only a few examples of the reception and adaptation of Homericvocabulary and formulas in the Metabole of the Gospel by Nonnus It is evidentthat the poet is repeatedly echoing epic phrases and achieves expected variatioby changing such phrases slightly or even considerably and by modifying thecontext in which these reminiscences appear Thus he creates a poem writtenin a Homeric style rather than merely a Homeric cento He frequently enhancesthe sophistication of his work by combining more than one source in his text sothat a Homeric phrase can find its way in the work of Nonnus through its use insome later epic author In addition epic motifs can be combined with themesfrom other poetry eg tragedy and result into new images creatively adjustedinto Nonnian narration according to the Alexandrian literary practice Thepoet incorporates in his verses terms and imagery drawn from the poetic pastwith an extraordinary flexibility being ready to place them in a pagan or in aChristian context and in opposite settings with equal ease Interestingly biblicalinterpretatio is moreover occasionally realized through the employment of epicphraseology Characteristic passages from both Nonnus and other Christianpoets demonstrate that narratives wholly alien to the mythical heroic worldcan be vested with the elaboration of epic splendour and furthermore that Ho-meric language and Homeric allusion can even be used to articulate ideologicalpositions and to convey fundamental theological notions and doctrinal concepts

The creative use of Il and Od by Nonnus who further combines them with otherHomeric lines can be contrasted with the use made of them by Eudocia who integrates themverbatim in her cento ( and ) See Caprara passim cf also above with n For the Jewsrsquo deranged state of mind inparticular cf Par Ἑβραῖοι μανιωδέες ἄφρονι θυμῷ ὑμεῖς ἄφρονα μῦθον ἐπεφθέγξασθεμανέντες Ἰουδαίης μανιώδεες ἄρτι πολῖται See further Agosti ndash

224 Maria Ypsilanti


Helen Peraki-Kyriakidou

Trees and Plants in Poetic EmulationFrom the Homeric Epic to Virgilrsquos Eclogues

It is obvious that a brief list of two or three lines in length cannot have the samefunction as an epic-sized catalogue ndash such as a battle-catalogue ndash of say 10lines or longer It is true that in a catalogue each name may gain a place inhuman memorysup1 In a long catalogue however the portion of that memoryeach name holds may be indeed meagre Things function differently in a smalllist of names each constituentmdashwhether a proper name or notmdashproportionatelyholds a more prestigious position in the poetic text even more so if that list be-longs to the pastoral genre like the Eclogues Considering the size of a bucolicwork a short catalogue is no longer short In such catalogues each part retainsits value what matters however is not only the entry of an item but also withwhat other similar items the catalogue is formed and above all what the aim ofeach catalogue is In this paper we shall deal with short lists of two to three linesmore or less consisting of names of trees and plants Homer has given us a num-ber of such catalogues

In the Iliad there are five such cataloguessup2 Three of them are found in epicsimilies and display a purely epic character portraying the tension and force ofthe fight One of them appears in two occasions with exactly the same compara-tum and comparandum and with the same aim It is found at 13389ndash93=16482ndash86 In both instances the fall of a hero at the time of the fight is likened to thefelling of trees by the hands of carpenters (τέκτονες ἄνδρες 13390 = 16483)sup3

The third one appears at 16765ndash71 where the fierceness of the battle is com-pared with the strong winds in a wood and the noise the tall trees make asthey clash each other⁴ The tension⁵ thus created is such that the listenerreaderis under the impression that each fallen tree represents nothing more than abrief moment in the phase of destruction Each tree of the simile ndash usually a

Minchin ff Kyriakidis xiv-xvi At least three names distributed in two or more lines should be regarded as a catalogue Kyr-iakidis xiii In the present case however I would like to bring into the discussion alsosome instances of one-line catalogues see next note Cf Il ff which according to Skutsch ( fr ) is the model of EnnAnn ndash Sk (see below) In the latter passage the catalogue covers only one line () It is useful though to includeit into our discussion See below Kyriakidis passim mainly Part I lsquoStructure and Contentsrsquo

tall treendash falls The poetic purpose is similar in the fourth catalogue occurring at21350ndash52 when Hephaestus burns everything together with Achillesrsquo victims

καίοντο πτελέαι τε καὶ ἰτέαι ἠδὲ μυρῖκαικαίετο δὲ λωτός τε ἰδὲ θρύον ἠδὲ κύπειροντὰ περὶ καλὰ ῥέεθρα ἅλις ποταμοῖο πεφύκει

Burned were the elms and the willows and the tamarisksburned were the lotus and the rushes and the galingalewhich grew abundantly round the fair streams of the river⁶

The trees are the victims of divine wrath in a fashion similar to the human vic-tims of Achilles since the true perpetrator was Hera scheming against the Tro-jans The character of these catalogues is purely epic there is tension and mag-nitude the slayers and the slain are also there

In the Iliad however there is one instance of a vignette-catalogue whichcould draw the attention of a bucolic poet⁷ It is from the scene where Zeusmakes love to Hera

Ἦ ῥα καὶ ἀγκὰς ἔμαρπτε Κρόνου παῖς ἣν παράκοιτινmiddotτοῖσι δ᾽ ὑπὸ χθὼν δῖα φύεν νεοθηλέα ποίηνλωτόν θ᾽ ἑρσήεντα ἰδὲ κρόκον ἠδ᾽ ὑάκινθονπυκνὸν καὶ μαλακόν ὃς ἀπὸ χθονὸς ὑψόσ᾽ ἔεργε(Il 14346ndash49)

At that Cronusrsquo son clasped his wife in his armsand beneath them the bright earth made fresh-sprung grass to growand dewy lotus and crocus and hyacinththick and soft that kept them from the ground

No large trees are mentioned and the violence is absent The scene has the char-acteristics of springtime⁸ it is almost a locus amoenus a creation of the poeticimagination which ndash according to scholarsndash has its roots in the same epicwork⁹ This catalogue is different in nature and significance from the previousones If there is anything epic in it it is the divine nature of the participantsHere as in the Virgilian catalogue which will be discussed below ldquothe earth un-

In the Iliadic passages I follow the translation of MurrayWyatt with minor adjustments Janko on ndash lsquoVerses f are richly paralleled in post-Homeric eposrsquo Janko ( on ndash) commenting on the word ποίη recognizes spring flowers in thescene such as the hyacinth Elliger Griffin

228 Helen Peraki-Kyriakidou

asked throws up a carpet of spring flowers beneath the loversrdquosup1⁰ Virgil perhapssaw in this catalogue elements pertaining to his imagery in Eclogue 4 when na-ture itself brings gifts to the puer nullo hellip cultu (418)sup1sup1

In our discussion however the Odyssey proves to be more revealing At4602ndash04 Telemachus compares Laconia fit for horsemanship (ἱππήλατος)with rugged Ithaca

σὺ γὰρ πεδίοιο ἀνάσσειςεὐρέος ᾧ ἔνι μὲν λωτὸς πολύς ἐν δὲ κύπειρονπυροί τε ζειαί τε ἰδ᾽ εὐρυφυὲς κρῖ λευκόν(Od 4602ndash604)

For you are lord of a wide plainwhere there is abundant lotus and galingaleand wheat and spelt and broad-eared white barleysup1sup2

With this catalogue Telemachus claims that Ithaca cannot be ἱππήλατος (4607)The very plants contained in the catalogue define the qualities of the place

In Book 7 the surroundings of Alcinousrsquo palace are described It is full oftrees yielding fruit all year round

ἔκτοσθεν δ᾽ αὐλῆς μέγας ὄρχατος ἄγχι θυράων 112τετράγυοςmiddot περὶ δ᾽ ἕρκος ἐλήλαται ἀμφοτέρωθενἔνθα δὲ δένδρεα μακρὰ πεφύκασι τηλεθάονταὄγχναι καὶ ῥοιαὶ καὶ μηλέαι ἀγλαόκαρποι 115συκέαι τε γλυκεραὶ καὶ ἐλαῖαι τηλεθόωσαιτάων οὔ ποτε καρπὸς ἀπόλλυται οὐδ᾽ ἀπολείπειχείματος οὐδὲ θέρευς ἐπετήσιοςmiddot ἀλλὰ μάλ᾽ αἰεὶζεφυρίη πνείουσα τὰ μὲν φύει ἄλλα δὲ πέσσειὄγχνη ἐπ᾽ ὄγχνῃ γηράσκει μῆλον δ᾽ ἐπὶ μήλῳ 120αὐτὰρ ἐπὶ σταφυλῇ σταφυλή σῦκον δ᾽ ἐπὶ σύκῳsup1sup3

Janko on ndash See below The translation of the passages from the Odyssey is based on MurrayDimock withminor adjustments Equally simple is the imagery in Theocr Id ndash

καὶ τὸ ῥόδον καλόν ἐστι καὶ ὁ χρόνος αὐτὸ μαραίνειmiddotκαὶ τὸ ἴον καλόν ἐστιν ἐν εἴαρι καὶ ταχὺ γηρᾷmiddot[λευκὸν τὸ κρίνον ἐστί μαραίνεται ἁνίκα πίπτειmiddotἁ δὲ χιὼν λευκά καὶ τάκεται ἁνίκα dagger παχθῇmiddot]Fair is the rose too yet time withers itfair in spring is the stock but ages fast[white is the lily but it withers in a short while

Trees and Plants in Poetic Emulation From the Homeric Epic to Virgilrsquos Eclogues 229

ἔνθα δέ οἱ πολύκαρπος ἀλῳὴ ἐρρίζωταιτῆς ἕτερον μέν θ᾽ εἱλόπεδον λευρῷ ἐνὶ χώρῳτέρσεται ἠελίῳ ἑτέρας δ᾽ ἄρα τε τρυγόωσινἄλλας δὲ τραπέουσιmiddot πάροιθε δέ τ᾽ ὄμφακές εἰσιν 125ἄνθος ἀφιεῖσαι ἕτεραι δ᾽ ὑποπερκάζουσινἔνθα δὲ κοσμηταὶ πρασιαὶ παρὰ νείατον ὄρχονπαντοῖαι πεφύασιν ἐπηετανὸν γανόωσαιἐν δὲ δύω κρῆναι ἡ μέν τ᾽ ἀνὰ κῆπον ἅπαντασκίδναται ἡ δ᾽ ἑτέρωθεν ὑπ᾽ αὐλῆς οὐδὸν ἵησι 130πρὸς δόμον ὑψηλόν ὅθεν ὑδρεύοντο πολῖταιτοῖ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἐν Aλκινόοιο θεῶν ἔσαν ἀγλαὰ δῶρα(Od 7112ndash32)

But outside the courtyard close to the doorsthere is a great orchard of four acres and a hedge runs about it on either sideIn it grow trees tall and luxuriantpears and pomegranates and apple-trees with their bright fruitand sweet figs and luxuriant olivesThe fruit of these neither perishes nor failsin winter or in summer but lasts throughout the yearand continually the West Wind as it blows quickens to life some fruits and ripensothers pear upon pear waxes ripe apple upon applecluster upon cluster and fig upon figThere too is his fruitful vineyard plantedone part of which a warm spot on level groundis being dried in the sun while other grapes men are gatheringand others too they are treading but in front are unripe grapesthat are shedding the blossom and others that are turning purpleThere again by the last row of the vinesgrow trim garden beds of every sort blooming the year throughand in the orchard there are two springs one of which sends its water throughout all the gar-den while the other opposite to it flows beneath the threshold of the courttoward the high house from this the townsfolk drew their waterSuch were the glorious gifts of the gods in the palace of Alcinous

The orchard (ὄρχατος 7112) has a specific size (τετράγυος) and well-set bounda-ries (113 περὶ δ᾽ ἕρκος ἐλήλαται ἀμφοτέρωθεν) The trees and fruits of the twocatalogues (to the degree to which the second corresponds to the first) do notseem to have any other distinct presence in the epic outside the catalogue inall its versions as we shall see they have no role therefore in the feasts of

and white is the snow but it wastes away on the ground] (trans Gow 19522 with minor ad-justments)

See also Id 2710 (ΔΑΦΝΙΣ) ἁ σταφυλὶς σταφὶς ἔσταιmiddot ὃ νῦν ῥόδον αὖον ὀλεῖται (lsquoThe grapewill become a raisin and what is now a rose will wither and diersquo trans Gow 19522)


the aristocracy at the palace of Alcinous Although in the Odyssey there is noscene in which men are fed with this kind of fruits nevertheless the scenedescribedsup1⁴ gives a sense of opulence Indeed Alcinousrsquo societysup1⁵ bears the char-acteristics of an affluent aristocratic societysup1⁶ The passage closes with the re-minder that whatever the orchard contains trees plants springs are the giftsof the gods to Alcinous (132 τοῖ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἐν Aλκινόοιο θεῶν ἔσαν ἀγλαὰ δῶρα)sup1⁷

Again the description consists of pieces contained in a sort of locus amoenusa utopia according to Sheinsup1⁸ suitable to a bucolic environment trees watersprings This kind of description according to Hunter is characterized by a lsquotyp-icalityrsquo to the degree that ldquoall landscape description in literature is more or lesslsquotypicalrsquordquosup1⁹ This lsquotypicalityrsquo facilitates the cataloguersquos accommodation in differ-ent contexts Furthermore the double ndashof a sortndash appearance of the cataloguewithin the same narrative unit and its reappearance in very different parts ofthe epic as we shall see below denotes its formulaic character which meansthat it can serve different poetic aims in different poetic environments One ele-ment which enhances the dynamics of repetitiveness is the absence of humanactivity or of human toil as Edwards (1993) notesndash with the exception of courseof the verbs τρυγόωσιν (7124) and τραπέουσιν (7125) in our passage where thesubject remains an abstraction This latter point as Edwards acknowledges isa non-Homeric characteristic and transfers the focus from the action to theresultsup2⁰ All these elements permit us to say that the description of the orchardseems to have characteristics of a rather generic value

The passage can be considered to be part of court poetry For Theocritus or Virgil howeverthe description of the surrounding space contains elements that could be recognized as pastoralAt the same time we should not forget that Theocritus has served court poetry within the frameof his pastoral (eg Id ) According to John Rundin ( n ) as the trees bear fruits all the year round lsquothenet result of this is summed up in the observation that because they have unfailing supplies thePhaeacians like to sit around on expensive coverlets eating and drinking (Od ndash)rsquo Dalby ( ) doubts that the Odyssey refers to an lsquoaristocraticrsquo society and that thepoets used to sing only for its members One of his examples is the garden of Alcinous withits fruits where at no time is there anybody who eats any of its fruits It is rather similar to what Virgil would have described as the gifts of the Earth in Eclogue when the puer is born (see below) Schein Hunter Edwards lsquoThe passage exhibits the same careful and orderly division of spacenoted in the descriptions of Achillesrsquo Shield and of the founding of Scheria with perhaps thesame cosmogonic implications The beauty order and continuous fertility of the gardenwarmed by gentle Zephyr distinguish Alcinousrsquo garden as an example of the enchanted locusamoenus as much as it is a working farm This distinction is emphasized by the strange absence


In the description of Alcinousrsquo palace besides trees and running water(7129ndash30) we have the blowing wind Zephyrus (119) which helps the fruitsripen The presence of Zephyrus in particular is noteworthy for elsewhere thisvery wind is described as δυσαής (stormy) as in Il 23200sup2sup1 whereas here it isa favourable mild wind as again in the Odyssey in the Elysian fields (Οd4563) at line 4567sup2sup2

οὐ νιφετός οὔτ᾽ ἂρ χειμὼν πολὺς οὔτε ποτ᾽ ὄμβροςἀλλ᾽ αἰεὶ ζεφύροιο λιγὺ πνείοντος ἀήταςὨκεανὸς ἀνίησιν ἀναψύχειν ἀνθρώπους(Od 4566ndash68)

There is no snow nor heavy storm nor even rainbut Ocean always sends up blasts of the shrill-blowing West Windthat they may give cooling to men

We cannot but notice that the space of the palace therefore shares some detailswith the description of the Underworld As a matter of fact in the palace of Al-cinous the hero will immerse himself in his past and revive it with his narrativeto the Phaeacians as though he is experiencing a form of katabasis

This overlapping between features of the palace and the Netherworld is con-firmed at Nekyia 11588ndash90sup2sup3 There Tantalusis punished for the hybris he hasshown in life (not registered in the epic) He strives to drink water but alwaysfails At the same time every attempt of this poor man to grasp the fruits of

of any reference to labour and laborers from the garden precinct In the entire passage only thesubjectless τρυγόωσιν () and τραπέουσιν () referring to the harvesting and crushing ofthe grapes adumbrate the necessity of labour in this description which otherwise eclipses anentire class of the population (the vast majority) and a fundamental social relationship Sucha complete ellipsis of a verbrsquos subject is uncharacteristic of Homer and distracts attentionfrom the activity itself to its result The processes of cultivation dressing and irrigation more-over are submerged in the passage as are those of gathering the fruits of the orchard or harvest-ing the vegetablesrsquo Strab See also Il ndash and Stanford on Od West on ff As expected the reappearance of the catalogue from the orchards of Alcinousrsquo palace in theUnderworld has been discussed on the basis of epic orality This repetition is what Combellack( ) calls lsquoformulary illogicalitiesrsquo lsquoAs usual the poet shows no concern to modify thephraseology designed for a normal situation so as to make it appropriate for the abnormal sit-uation he happens to describersquo Orality however should not have been in the priorities of aLatin poet Nonetheless one cannot ignore the fact that every time a passage is in a new envi-ronment it should retain a functional role there contextually This catalogue of trees repeated inthe narrative of the Underworld should be read as an integral part of the description there


the trees with rich foliage over the pond fails as the wind tosses them away tothe clouds (591ndash92)

δένδρεα δ᾽ ὑψιπέτηλα κατὰ κρῆθεν χέε καρπόνὄγχναι καὶ ῥοιαὶ καὶ μηλέαι ἀγλαόκαρποισυκέαι τε γλυκεραὶ καὶ ἐλαῖαι τηλεθόωσαιmiddotτῶν ὁπότ᾽ ἰθύσει᾽ ὁ γέρων ἐπὶ χερσὶ μάσασθαιτὰς δ᾽ ἄνεμος ῥίπτασκε ποτὶ νέφεα σκιόεντα(Od 11588ndash92)

And trees high and leafy let hang their fruits from their topspears and pomegranates and apple trees with their bright fruitand sweet figs and luxuriant olivesBut as often as that old man would reach out towards these to clutch themwith his hands the wind would toss them to the shadowy clouds

The transference of the scene is perfectly served by the formulaic character of thecatalogue retaining once again features of a locus amoenussup2⁴ (treeswater) thatthe dead man cannot enjoy he cannot even approach the trees Furthermoreas in the palace of Alcinous but more emphatically in this case human labourconnected with the cultivation of these trees is absentsup2⁵

The catalogue of Alcinousrsquo orchard after its reappearance in the Netherworldappears again- although in a variant form- in Book 24 of the Odyssey

ὦ γέρον οὐκ ἀδαημονίη σ᾽ ἔχει ἀμφιπολεύεινὄρχατον ἀλλ᾽ εὖ τοι κομιδὴ ἔχει οὐδέ τι πάμπανοὐ φυτόν οὐ συκῆ οὐκ ἄμπελος οὐ μὲν ἐλαίηοὐκ ὄγχνη οὐ πρασιή τοι ἄνευ κομιδῆς κατὰ κῆπονἄλλο δέ τοι ἐρέω σὺ δὲ μὴ χόλον ἔνθεο θυμῷmiddotαὐτόν σ᾽ οὐκ ἀγαθὴ κομιδὴ ἔχει ἀλλ᾽ ἅμα γῆραςλυγρὸν ἔχεις αὐχμεῖς τε κακῶς καὶ ἀεικέα ἕσσαι(Od 24244ndash50)

Old man no lack of skill in tending a garden besets youBut your care is good and there is nothing whatsoevereither plant or fig tree or vine or oliveor pear or garden-plot in all the field that lacks careBut something else I shall tell you and do not take offenceYou yourself do not enjoy good care but you bear woeful old ageand you are sadly squalid and wear wretched clothes

See also Edwards who uses the term with some reservations (passage quotedabove n ) See Combellac on the similarity between this passage and the description of Alci-nousrsquo orchard


It is the moment Odysseus pretends that he does not recognize his father Laertes(a pretence that he will abandon a little later) In sharp contrast however withthe previous occurrences of the catalogue the human effort Odysseusrsquo father hasexerted in cultivating his garden is stressed This detail is important as it differ-entiates this use of the catalogue from its previous uses There is a further pointthough which is particularly stressed here It is the value each kind of tree hasOdysseus names them all one by one in order to stress that not a single one ofthem is deprived of his fatherrsquos special attention (οὐδέ οὐ οὐ οὐκ οὐ οὐκοὐ) The element of bestowing separate value to every single item of the cata-logue is particularly enhanced in the last appearance of the same list furtherdown It is when Odysseus speaking to Laertes uses the contents of the cataloguetogether with a reference to the wound (24331 οὐλή) as a sign to the father torecognize his son after a lapse of long years (340ndash41)

σὺ δέ με προΐεις καὶ πότνια μήτηρἐς πατέρ᾽ Αὐτόλυκον μητρὸς φίλον ὄφρ᾽ ἂν ἑλοίμηνδῶρα τὰ δεῦρο μολών μοι ὑπέσχετο καὶ κατένευσενεἰ δ᾽ ἄγε τοι καὶ δένδρε᾽ ἐϋκτιμένην κατ᾽ ἀλῳὴν 336εἴπω ἅ μοί ποτ᾽ ἔδωκας ἐγὼ δ᾽ ᾔτευν σε ἕκασταπαιδνὸς ἐών κατὰ κῆπον ἐπισπόμενοςmiddot διὰ δ᾽ αὐτῶνἱκνεύμεσθα σὺ δ᾽ ὠνόμασας καὶ ἔειπες ἕκασταὄγχνας μοι δῶκας τρεισκαίδεκα καὶ δέκα μηλέας 340συκέας τεσσαράκοντ᾽middot ὄρχους δέ μοι ὧδ᾽ ὀνόμηναςδώσειν πεντήκοντα διατρύγιος δὲ ἕκαστοςἤην ἔνθα δ᾽ ἀνὰ σταφυλαὶ παντοῖαι ἔασινὁππότε δὴ Διὸς ὧραι ἐπιβρίσειαν ὕπερθεν(Od 24333ndash44)

It was you who sent me you and my honoured motherto Autolycus my motherrsquos father that I could getthe gifts which when he came here he promised and agreed to give meAnd come I shall tell you also the trees in the well-ordered gardenwhich you once gave me and I who was only a childwas following you through the garden and asking you for this and thatIt was through these trees that we passed and you named them and told me ofeach one You gave me thirteen pear-trees and ten apple-treesand forty fig-trees And you also promised to give me rows of vineseven as I say fifty of them which ripened one by one at different timesmdash and upon them are clusters of all sortsmdashwhenever the seasons of Zeus weighed them down from above


In the frame of this catalogue (337ndash39)sup2⁶ the poet gives special attention to thevalue of each tree separately The word ἕκαστος used twice (337 339) and thephrase διὰ δ᾽ αὐτῶν (338) contribute to it Laertes did not give to Odysseus anyold piece of land but a well-ordered space (336 ἐϋκτιμένην κατ᾽ ἀλῳήν)sup2⁷ witha specific number of trees of each kind which he names separately It is thesevery trees which Odysseus had learnt one by one and which became the secondtoken for his recognition hence these trees constitute a proof for his identity asort of referent or even a symbol of his youth

The above catalogue repeated in various versions in different parts of theepic as well as the other short catalogues of plants and trees in the Homerictext show that(i) Most of the above descriptions function outside the sphere of human la-

bour(ii) The items in the above catalogues are added one by one in a paratactic and

linear way (things will change to a great extent in Theocritus and Virgil)(iii) Not only the last catalogue but the others as well except for the (four=)

three lsquoepicrsquo catalogues of the Iliad that we examined at the beginning ofthis paper contain some details from the imagery of a locus amoenusSuch a description according to scholars contains some lsquotypicalrsquo compo-nents which evidently contribute to its potentials of repetitiveness facilitat-ing the cataloguersquos accommodation in different environments within theepic (or in different genres)

(iv) Considering the last catalogues of the Odyssey especially in Book 24 we sawthat the separate value of every single item seems to be stressed eventhough each one is pertinent to collectivity Each one represents eitherhuman labour (at 24244ndash50) or particulars of the herorsquos identity as at24333ndash44 It is precisely this power of representation of each plant ortree which has the dynamism to develop into a symbol and which in turnndashcenturies later and together with the other characteristics of the cata-loguendash found the proper conditions for development in the pastoral

In Virgilrsquos Eclogues there are short catalogues of two to three lines similar to theHomeric ones as regards both form and content It is clear that Homeric epicshave been significantly employed as a source text There are however major dif-ferences First of all the plants included in Virgilrsquos short catalogues differ to a

Kyriakidis shows the importance of the frame for the reception of a catalogue Part IIlsquoCatalogues in Contextrsquo Cf Od ndash (Alcinousrsquo garden for which see above)


great extent from their Homeric counterparts in this instance the Roman poetseems to have received Theocritus rather than Homer Another major differenceis that a considerable number of these plants are related in tradition in one wayor another to a certain god especially to gods of poetry culture and civilizationSuch cases are already attested in Theocritus The reader can therefore easilyconceive the symbolic powersup2⁸ of such plants An obvious example is the vi-gnette-catalogue of Idyll 2

ἦνθον γάρ κεν ἐγώ ναὶ τὸν γλυκὺν ἦνθον Ἔρωταἢ τρίτος ἠὲ τέταρτος ἐὼν φίλος αὐτίκα νυκτόςμᾶλα μὲν ἐν κόλποισι Διωνύσοιο φυλάσσωνκρατὶ δ᾽ ἔχων λεύκαν Ἡρακλέος ἱερὸν ἔρνοςπάντοθι πορφυρέαισι περὶ ζώστραισιν ἑλικτάνsup2⁹(Id 2118ndash22)sup3⁰

For I would have come by sweet LoveI would at early nightfall with two or three friendsbearing in my bosom apples of Dionysusand on my brows the white poplar the holy plant of Heraclestwined all about with crimson bandssup3sup1

Given that the Eclogues as a whole lend themselves to a metapoetic readingmany of the plants mentioned in such catalogues such as for instance the lau-rel the ivy or the vine function very much as cultural or metaliterary symbolssup3sup2

I would like to start with a cataloguesup3sup3 where things are made very clear bythe poet himself As in TheocritusVirgil in a direct way relates a plant or a treeto a specific godsup3⁴ who in tradition has a well-recognized cultural and metalit-

ldquoThe symbol as divine accoutrement occupies a mediating position between the divine andhuman realms It is a thing from this world that is affiliated with a being from beyondrdquo (Struck ) Cf below (Id ) Cf Epigr ndash The translation of Theocritusrsquo Idylls is based on Gow

with minor adjustments Eg Saunders and n Comparing the length of the Homeric text with that of the Eclogues the frequency of this sortof catalogue in the pastoral poetry of Virgil is very high some one-line catalogues are equallyinteresting eg Ecl Later Phaedrus () will form a similar catalogue of plants and trees in relation to certaingods

olim quas uellent esse in tutela suadiui legerunt arbores Quercus Ioviet myrtus Veneri placuit Phoebo laureapinus Cybebae populus celsa Herculi


erary significance at Ecl 7 we have the competition between Corydon and Thyr-sis Through a short catalogue of plants and trees each of them declares theirlove for and faith in their beloved At lines 761ndash64 Corydon the eventual win-ner associates certain plants and trees with specific deities and concludes thathis beloved Phyllis who loves hazels (corylos) will in the end defeat the myrtleof Venussup3⁵ and the laurel of Apollo

Populus Alcidae gratissima uitis Iacchoformosae myrtus Veneri sua laurea PhoeboPhyllis amat corylos illas dum Phyllis amabitnec myrtus uincet corylos nec laurea Phoebi(Ecl 761ndash64)

Dearest is poplar to Alcides vines to BacchusMyrtle to lovely Venus to Phoebus his own bayPhyllis loves hazels and while Phyllis loves thoseHazels will never lose to myrtle or Phoebusrsquo bay(trans Lee 1980 with minor adjustments)

All four plants of the two-line catalogue represent gods who in one way or an-other were associated with poetry and culture in myth and literature Furtherto each godrsquos individual contribution however the relation between Dionysusand Apollosup3⁶ as well as that between Venus and Dionysus is well known alsowell-known is Herculesrsquo contribution to culture and civilization and his relationto the Musessup3⁷ This is not the time to discuss the number of instances wherethese deities were worshipped together or had overlapping interests What isof importance to us is that Phyllis who loves hazelssup3⁸ does not have to competeonly with one god and his or her symbolic plant but with what the four of themtogether represent Corydon through Phyllisrsquo corylos (a word which can be re-garded as an etymology of his own name)sup3⁹ seems to contend that his poetry

Once the gods chose the trees they wantedto have under their protection Jupiter liked the oakVenus liked the myrtle Apollo the laureland Cybele liked the pine Hercules liked the tall poplar

On the relation between Venus and the myrtle see Ov Fast also Plin NH ndashServ on Ecl Geor Aen See Vollgraff ndash (esp ) On this relation in Virgil see the seminal article by Mac Goacuteraacutein ndash See below n In Geor the poet advises the farmer neue inter uitis corylum sere (nor plant the hazelamong the vines) Egan on her name ibid on Corydonrsquos name Lipka ff Peraki-Kyriakidou f Cucchiarelli on


is better than that which is considered the quintessence of poetic productioncharacterized by Apollonian along with Dionysiac elements⁴⁰ cum uenustate⁴sup1in the Musesrsquo realm The relation of populus to Hercules in the first position ofthe catalogue is not without significance The Muses and Hercules had establish-ed their connection long ago Highly important for this connection was the erec-tion of the Aedes Herculis Musarum by M Fulvius Nobilior⁴sup2 However only inCorydonrsquos song is this tree related to Hercules⁴sup3 not in Thyrsisrsquo song

In his response Thyrsis employs another catalogue of trees⁴⁴ which closesby claiming that if his beloved Lycidas visits him more often nature will rewardhim In this short catalogue any connection of the trees with corresponding dei-ties is absent

fraxinus in siluis pulcherrima pinus in hortispopulus in fluviis abies in montibus altissaepius at si me Lycida formose reuisasfraxinus in siluis cedat tibi pinus in hortis(Ecl 765ndash68)

Fairest the ash in forest in pleasure-gardens pinepoplars by streams and on high mountains silver firBut lovely Lycidas visit me more oftenand forest ash and garden pine will honour you(trans Lee 1980 with minor adjustments)

Here I would like to add some further thoughts to what I have already discussedin an earlier paper with regard to this certamen⁴⁵ Lycidas himself unlike Phyllisdoes not have some favourite plant which would stand as representative of himFurthermore Corydon includes in his catalogue plants and trees which were di-rectly related to certain gods and were also acknowledged as symbols of essen-tial constituents of poetry and civilization Only the poplar appears in both qua-

On the co-existence of Apollonian and Dionysiac features in the song see Mac Goacuteraacuteinndash lsquoApollo and Dionysus are both gods of poetic inspiration and as such oftenpaired and it is hardly to be imagined that an ancient poet would subordinate one to theother in a poetic contextrsquo Cf Peraki-Kyriakidou ndash Fowler on Hardie Theocritus was obviously the model (see Id ndash cited above) Cucchiarelli ( on) stresses the fact that in the aforementioned verses of Theocritus λεύκα is clearly associatedalso with Dionysus At Geor ndash the catalogue has much in common with the two aforementioned cata-logues For populus at l (Herculeaeque arbos umbrosa coronae) see Thomas ad loc Peraki-Kyriakidou


trains In Thyrsisrsquo catalogue however it is dissociated from Hercules undersuch circumstances it will not be in a position to give enough drive to hissong to compete with that of Corydonrsquos⁴⁶

In this contest Corydon is the winner one of the reasons being that his po-etics as represented by his beloved Phyllis and her corylos has the ambition togo beyond the standards of the day based on the synthesis of what the abovetrees symbolize In this Eclogue Corydonrsquos catalogue does not function in thesense of accommodating different items one next to the other in order to forma general picture Each plant or tree carries an indisputable and widely-knownsymbolic value related to poetry and culture Even if the above plants or treesare accommodated in a linear fashion it is obvious to the reader that they rep-resent qualities and values of poetry and civilization in a synthetic way Virgilrsquospoetry receives Homeric poetry only to a degree there the corresponding cata-logues were linear catalogues but without any obvious symbolic power ofeach plant separately

According to Macrobius (Sat 6227) Thyrsisrsquo catalogue has its model in theAnnales of Ennius⁴⁷ where the poet describes the felling of the same kind of treein catalogue-form and with the significant exception of the poplar

Percellunt magnas quercus exciditur ilexfraxinus frangitur atque abies consternitur altapinus proceras pervortunt (Ann 177ndash79 Sk)

They throw down great oaks down falls the holmthe ash is subdued the high fir tree is levelledand the tall pines are overthrown

The Ennian catalogue is related to the preparations for the funeral of the victimsof the battle at Heraclea where Pyrrhus suffered heavy losses in 280 BC It isquite obvious that the content of this catalogue is inappropriate for the bucolicenvironment Besides as Lipka points out abies is an ldquounbucolic tree occurringnowhere in any Greek bucolic poetrdquo Thyrsis may well stress the positive relationof each kind of tree to a certain environment but this in no way means that thereader does not recollect the unbucolic features of its ancient model In Enniusthe prevailing imagery is that of felling and death Accordingly in Thyrsisrsquo re-sponse the bucolic pattern seems to collapse If as I think we should we accept

As Egan observes lsquoThe trees which Thyrsis names have no apparent associations withdivinity nor with love or song In general while Thyrsis formally and superficially responds tomost of the elements in Corydonrsquos quatrain his words and phrases are unidimensionalrsquo Lipka f


Ennius as the immediate Roman model then we should perhaps take it as alsquowindow referencersquo to the earlier Iliadic⁴⁸ lsquoepicrsquo catalogues which we mentionedbriefly above since they similarly could not offer any incentive for a pastoralreading I am referring to the two catalogues of purely epic flavour from Book16 at 482ndash86 and 765ndash70 Their aim in the Greek epic was to highlight the ten-sion and the violence of the battle The first one was also a word for word rep-etition of Il 13389ndash93

ἤριπεν δrsquo ὡς ὅτε τις δρῦς ἢ ἀχερωῒςἠὲ πίτυς βλωθρή τήν τ᾽ οὔρεσι τέκτονες ἄνδρεςἐξέταμον πελέκεσσι νεήκεσι νήϊον εἶναιmiddotὣς ὃ πρόσθ᾽ ἵππων καὶ δίφρου κεῖτο τανυσθεὶςβεβρυχὼς κόνιος δεδραγμένος αἱματοέσσης(Il 13389ndash93 = Il 16482ndash486)

And he fell as an oak falls or a poplaror a high pine that among the mountains shipwrights fellwith whetted axes to be a shiprsquos timberso he lay outstretched in front of his horses and chariotmoaning aloud and clutching at the bloody dust

The above description has obviously much in common with the description ofbattle in Book 16765ndash70 although in this case the names of the trees are accom-modated in only one line⁴⁹

ὡς δ᾽ Εὖρός τε Νότος τ᾽ ἐριδαίνετον ἀλλήλοιινοὔρεος ἐν βήσσῃς βαθέην πελεμιζέμεν ὕληνφηγόν τε μελίην τε τανύφλοιόν τε κράνειαναἵ τε πρὸς ἀλλήλας ἔβαλον τανυήκεας ὄζουςἠχῇ θεσπεσίῃ πάταγος δέ τε ἀγνυμενάωνὣς Τρῶες καὶ Aχαιοὶ ἐπ᾽ ἀλλήλοισι θορόντεςδῄουν οὐδ᾽ ἕτεροι μνώοντ᾽ ὀλοοῖο φόβοιο(Il 16765ndash70)

And as the East and the South Wind strive with each otherin shaking a deep wood in the glades of a mountainndash a wood of beech and ash and smooth-barked corneland these dash one against the other their long boughs with a wondrous dinand there is a crack of broken branchesndash so the Trojans and the Achaeans leapt one on anotherand slaughtered nor did either side think of destructive flight

Cf above n See above n and


Since δρῦς and φηγός seem to be the same tree then of the (6 =) 5 trees of theabove-cited Homeric catalogues three also appear in the catalogue of Thyrsis ina bucolic song such catalogues have no place The imagery of the felled treeslike the victims of war in the archaic text and the imagery of manic destructiondo not suit pastoral diction Some of these trees may have their own independentpresence⁵⁰ in the pastoral but their grouping together creates different associa-tions In Corydonrsquos piece each plant because of its symbolic possibility had toadd its own contribution to poetry and song In that of Thyrsis the grouping to-gether of these trees functions only as an lsquounpastoralrsquo reminiscence Thyrsis hasjustly yielded to Corydon since the Iliadic imagery is ill-suited to being generi-cally transplanted

Theocritus could be a better model for Thyrsis In Dioscuri (Id 22) there is asimilar catalogue as some of the trees coincide with those employed by Thyrsis

εὗρον δ᾽ ἀέναον κρήνην ὑπὸ λισσάδι πέτρῃὕδατι πεπληθυῖαν ἀκηράτῳmiddot αἱ δ᾽ ὑπένερθελάλλαι κρυστάλλῳ ἠδ᾽ ἀργύρῳ ἰνδάλλοντοἐκ βυθοῦmiddot ὑψηλαὶ δὲ πεφύκεσαν ἀγχόθι πεῦκαιλεῦκαί τε πλάτανοί τε καὶ ἀκρόκομοι κυπάρισσοιἄνθεά τ᾽ εὐώδη λασίαις φίλα ἔργα μελίσσαιςὅσσ᾽ ἔαρος λήγοντος ἐπιβρύει ἂν λειμῶνας(Id 2237ndash43)

Under a smooth rock they found a perennial springbrimming with pure water the pebbles in its depthsshowing like crystal or silverHigh pines were growing nearbypoplars and planes and tufted cypressesand fragrant flowers farmed gladly by the shaggy beesndashall flowers that teem in the meadows as spring fades away

What the reader notices however is that the overall imagery in Thyrsisrsquo song is amuch lowered pastoral description denuded one might say of its bucolic ele-ments Thyrsis was unsuccessful in constructing a truly bucolic catalogue Hiscatalogue was generically ill-suited a rather lsquounidimensionalrsquo presentation oftrees as Egan rightly says⁵sup1 and deprived of any obvious symbolic value

Pinus also appears in other passages of the Eclogues either as a metonymy for a boat or as ametonymy for the Pan-pipe () However its listing along with fraxinus and abies (trees withno other presence in the Bucolics) is a rather direct allusion to the catalogues of tall trees of theHomeric past thus creating a rift in the bucolic discourse See above n


which could contribute to the formation of an overall idea⁵sup2 Synthesis of sym-bols created by the symbolic dynamics of different trees or plants was not a rec-ognized feature in the short catalogues of plants and trees in the Homeric epics

This feature does not appear only at 761ndash64 It seems to be an establishedcharacteristic in this Virgilian work in Eclogue 2 Corydon tries to attract Alexis

huc ades o formose puer tibi lilia plenis 45ecce ferunt Nymphae calathis tibi candida Naispallentis uiolas et summa papauera carpensnarcissum et florem iungit bene olentis anethitum casia atque aliis intexens suauibus herbismollia luteola pingit uaccinia calta 50ipse ego cana legam tenera lanugine malacastaneasque nuces mea quas Amaryllis amabataddam cerea pruna (honos erit huic quoque pomo)et uos o lauri carpam et te proxima myrtesic positae quoniam suauis miscetis odores 55(Ecl 245ndash55)

Come here O lovely boy for you the Nymphs bring lilieslook in baskets full for you the Naiad fairplucking pale violets and poppy heads combines themwith narcissus and flower of fragrant dillthen weaving marjoram in and other pleasant herbscolours soft bilberries with yellow marigoldMyself I shall pick the grey-white apples with tender downand chestnuts which my Amaryllis lovedI shall pluck you O laurels and you neighbour myrtlefor so arranged you mingle attractive fragrances(trans Lee 1980 with minor adjustments)

His words to Alexis form a double catalogue the list of plants and flowers the Naiadand the Nymphs offer in baskets (45ndash50) and the list of what Corydon himself isoffering (51ndash55) Although this double catalogue is beyond the group of short cata-logues we are discussing in this paper because of its length (even in its separateparts) I believe that it deserves to be taken into consideration in order to see thepoetrsquos inclinations in his Eclogues the flowers and plants of the first part (45ndash50) are put together in baskets (46 calathis) The second (51ndash55) is a selection

Mac Goacuteraacutein (ndash ) who reads these verses from their political aspect comes verynear to what we understand here as lsquounidimensionalrsquo to use Eganrsquos term lsquoThyrsis responds al-most as if to seal his loss referring to plants and trees only with no sensitivity to their religiousdimension seemingly unaware that if we are to sing of woods then these woods should be wor-thy of a consul and thus unaware of his own inferior political sophisticationrsquo


(45 legam) of Corydonrsquos himselfWhat we have here is not the mere presentation ofplants in a linear way but rather an arrangement of them in verse as well as in thebasket or even in Corydonrsquos arms Similarndash but still differentndash was the notion of ar-rangement of plants and trees in well-ordered areas in Homer as in Odyssey 24336(see above) Here in Virgil it is not only the separate beauty (or even the [separate]symbolism) of each one plant that matters but the synthesis of all the flowers to-gether in the first part the Nymphs offer the flowers in baskets calathis (46)This word is Greekndash though rarely used in Greek poetryndash and usually denotes a bas-ket used in rituals This is the first word in the Callimachean Hymn to Demeter⁵sup3 Byusing this wordndash instead of the Latin synonym fiscella (which at the end of the Ec-logues seems to represent the whole of the work⁵⁴)ndash Virgil at this point shows hisHellenistic inclinations⁵⁵ There is agreement that Meleager (AP 5147) is themodel for these lines In that epigram the main verb is πλέκω (lsquoto plaitrsquo) a verb re-lated to the making of a wreath or of a basket In Eclogue 2 the Naiad combines (48jungit) the flowers she gathers weaving (49 intexens) them in an array⁵⁶ Theocritushas shown the way in Id 321ndash23 the poet talks about the wreath he has preparedto Amaryllis

τὸν στέφανον τῖλαί με κατ᾽ αὐτίκα λεπτὰ ποησεῖςτόν τοι ἐγών Aμαρυλλὶ φίλα κισσοῖο φυλάσσωἀμπλέξας καλύκεσσι καὶ εὐόδμοισι σελίνοις

You will make me shred my wreath to piecesthe wreath of ivy which I twined with rosebudsand fragrant celery and wear for you my dear Amaryllis

Plants and flowers are mixed and interwoven arranged in this way in a synthe-sis each plant is one part of the synthesis one factor of an imagery pertaining tothe formation of a whole This same idea is adopted by Virgil in his description ofthe cup in Ecl 3 Πλοκή and synthesis is the centre of the idea The notion ofἀμπλέξας also appears in the description of Alcimedonrsquos cups

Hopkinson ndash and his comment on l The word was used by Virgil also atEcl Geor and at Aen Cucchiarelli on ndash Saunders ndash Clausen on l Berg


Et nobis idem Alcimedon duo pocula fecitet molli circum est ansas amplexus acantho (Ecl 345)The same Alcimedon also created two cups for usand twining soft acanthus leaves around the handles(trans Lee 1980 with minor adjustments)

The Theocritean origins of the description of the κισσύβιον are more than obvious

καὶ βαθὺ κισσύβιον κεκλυσμένον ἁδέι κηρῷἀμφῶες νεοτευχές ἔτι γλυφάνοιο ποτόσδοντῶ ποτὶ μὲν χείλη μαρύεται ὑψόθι κισσόςκισσὸς ἑλιχρύσῳ κεκονιμένοςmiddot ἁ δὲ κατ᾽ αὐτόνκαρπῷ ἕλιξ εἱλεῖται ἀγαλλομένα κροκόεντι(Id 127ndash31)

And I shall give you a deep cup washed over with sweet waxtwo-handled and newly fashioned still fragrant from the knifeAlong the lips above trails ivyivy dotted with golden clustersand along it winds the tendril exalting in its yellow fruit

In the second part of the double catalogue of Eclogue 2 Corydon makes his ownchoices (51 legam) closing his list with the two symbolic plants of poetry andlove par excellence the laurel and the myrtle the sacred plants of Apollo andAphrodite respectively These were precisely the plants with which Corydonagain the winner of the song-contest closed his list at Ecl 7 (62)⁵⁷ Here thesetwo plants are mixed (55 miscetis) to become parts of a synthesis with theirbeautiful odours The metapoetic significance strengthened by the vocabularyndashnot only in this specific passage but in the whole poem⁵⁸ndash is obvious to all Itis further enhanced by the fact that this synthesis has nothing to do with the de-scriptions of nature at the beginning and the end of the Eclogue⁵⁹ What is im-portant for the poet at this stage is to talk metapoetically in order to discloseand promote his stance regarding poetry In this Eclogue through Corydon ldquoVirgildirects attention to a theoretical consideration of pastoral poetryrdquo⁶⁰ Our poetrsquosstance seems to be that his poetry should not be considered to be a product

Leach with reference to Pfeiffer Leach (on fontibus and n ) See also Papanghelis Saunders ndash Leach lsquoAs the singer pursues his evangelical discourse he transforms the pas-toral life into something more fantastic than realrsquo Leach


of a uniform tradition but rather the eclectic product and mixture of various anddifferent literary experiences

From Eclogue 2 we turn our attention to Ecl 4 the poet extols the birth of thepuer who will bring the New Golden Era in the world At his coming Earth cel-ebrates and offers abundantly her gifts nullo cultu (18)

At tibi prima puer nullo munuscula cultuerrantis hederas passim cum baccare tellusmixtaque ridenti colocasia fundet acantho⁶sup1 20[hellip]ipsa tibi blandos fundent cunabula flores⁶sup2

But first child as small gifts for you Earth untilledwill pour the straying ivy rife and baccarisand colocasia mingling them with acanthusrsquo smile[hellip]your very cradle will pour forth caressing flowers(trans Lee 1980 with minor adjustments)

I have dealt with this really interesting catalogue elsewhere⁶sup3 But let us confineourselves to the recognition of the symbolism of the plants included and the waythey are presented the Bacchic element with the ivy and the baccar⁶⁴ has astrong presence while the Apollonian is represented by the acanthus⁶⁵ Thesetwo elements however are not presented next to one another but are inter-wined are mixed Miscere (20) is used again as in Eclogue 255 which we sawabove bringing forth the importance of the synthesis which depicts the first ex-periences of the child The Bacchic element is mixed with the Apollonian Thefirst experiences are not lsquounidimensionalrsquo⁶⁶ they are a synthesis of major ele-

Acanthus is present also at Geor Aen cf Stat Theb medioLinus intertextus acantho See Arnold ndash Saunders ndash with notes Cuc-chiarelli on and on (ridenti acantho) Mynorsrsquo text Harrison ( ) prefers to read line as Peraki-Kyriakidou (forthcoming) Coleman on Hardie a Peraki-Kyriakidou Peraki-Kyriakidou(forthcoming) Elderkin has the evidence Mac Goacuteraacutein ndash Acanthus may also be a Bacchicsymbol I am most grateful to Fiachra Mac Goacuteraacutein for sending me his paper before publicationHis analysis on how Apollonian and Dionysiac elements were blended in the Eclogues is of highinterest and very insightful see also Peraki-Kyriakidou (forthcoming) cf above This is different from what happens in Thyrsisrsquo song (see above n )


ments of culture and poetry Although everything is under Apollorsquos sway (10tuus iam regnat Apollo)⁶⁷ no element can stand alone

With such a cultural background the boy will bring in the New Golden Erawhich will be realized when according to the poet he will have read (legere) thepraise (26 laudes) of the heroic past along with the achievements of his ancestor(s) (26 facta parentis) and have recognised their virtues (27) Then in the worldof nature new phenomena will take place which will indicate the coming of anew period

at simul heroum laudes et facta parentisiam legere et quae sit poteris cognoscere uirtusmolli paulatimflauescet campus aristaincultisque rubens pendebit sentibus uuaet durae quercus sudabunt roscida mella (426ndash30)

But as soon as you can read of the praise of the heroesand of your fatherrsquos deeds and know what virtue meansthen tender spikes of grain will turn the field yellowand reddening grapes will hang from a wild thornbushand hard oak-trees will sweat out dewy honey(trans Lee 1980 with minor adjustments)

What is important in this passage is that the gifts of Nature are produced with thenotion of novelty to predominate uua will come out from uncultivated thornbushbeing something different and new like honey which will be produced from toughoak-trees The new is not any more the same as the old In the first proem to theGeorgics there is a corresponding description where arista⁶⁸ again and uva obvi-ously represent the new phase of the development of civilization

Liber et alma Ceres vestro si munere tellusChaoniam pingui glandem mutavit aristaPoculaque inventis Acheloia miscuit uuis (Geor 17ndash9)

Liber and nourishing Ceres if by your grace the earthchanged the Chaonian acorn for ripe ears of cornand mingled Acheloan water with new-found winehellip⁶⁹

Virgil shows his intention of relating these two passages by putting arista anduva at the same metrical position and in a more or less similar context Both

Peraki-Kyriakidou On arista as a cultural symbol Zissos on l Peraki-Kyriakidou with notes


in the Eclogues and the Georgics civilization does not develop with the mere suc-cession of one period after another nor does one age simply substitute for anoth-er but it is the result of synthesis the new comes from the old It is like the de-velopment of the puer in the Eclogues who will bring in the New Era after delvinginto the deeds and virtues of Man in the past Nature in a similar manner willbring the new era out of the old The manifestation of nature will show that itfinally is the mirror of human spirit and civilizationThe aspirations of theRoman poet are rather different from what is highlighted in the Homeric text

ὄγχνη ἐπ᾽ ὄγχνῃ γηράσκει μῆλον δ᾽ ἐπὶ μήλῳαὐτὰρ ἐπὶ σταφυλῇ σταφυλή σῦκον δ᾽ ἐπὶ σύκῳ(Od 7120ndash21 translated above)

In Homer the new does not seem to promise anything novel⁷⁰ In Virgil from theuncultivated (incultis hellip sentibus)⁷sup1 something new will come about In Homerthe quality of the past experiences seems to be repeated in the future Man inthe age of Virgil through his more complex experiences looks forward to anew ndashpossibly betterndash life but this in itself is an adynaton

See the catalogues above Cf Aen with Serv ad loc As Papanghelis ( ndash) notes the word incultus inthe Eclogues oscillates between the lsquouncultivatedrsquo in agriculture and the intellectually lsquounculti-vatedrsquo


Sophia Papaioannou

Embracing Homeric Orality in the AeneidRevisiting the Composition Politicsof Virgilrsquos First Descriptio

An important dimension of the antagonistic attitude that marks Virgilrsquos receptionof Homer and has escaped in-depth critical study is the lsquooralrsquo character of theAeneid and the poetics of antagonism behind it specifically Virgilrsquos realizationthat Homeric orality was a literary technique as much as a means of literary ex-pression and his systematic effort to appropriate it by embracing tropes andmechanisms of orality fundamental and conspicuous in the composition ofthe Homeric narrative It is the goal of the present study to assess Virgilrsquos sophis-ticated engagement with the Homeric methodology of text composition I shallexplain how the complexity in the texture of the Homeric poems which relieson the recollection and interfusion of different traditional accounts is mirroredin the composition of the Aeneid As case study for Virgilrsquos simulation of Homericorality I have chosen the first ekphrasis of the Aeneid the narrative of the Trojanbattle on the Carthaginian murals in Aen 1430 ff

A seminal passage that governs the reading of the Aeneid in many respectsthe Carthaginian descriptio has received scholarly interest since the dawn ofNew Criticism Scholars however have focused almost exclusively on the interac-tion between the scenes on the mural and the plot of the Aeneid My discussionon the contrary will focus on the method of introducing the descriptio to an audi-ence that does not have visual access to it my reading aspires to serve as meth-odological introduction to the assessment of a literary (epic) ekphrasis and the pol-itics that govern the composition made available to the audience A final goal is toillustrate the deep involvement of the technology of orality in the complexity andsophistication of a narrative that originates in a literacy-governed culture

Seemingly antithetical orality and literacy as ways of human interaction inreality are complementary Orality serves to enhance refine and systematize lit-eracy firstly as an expression of human communication secondly as a way ofmemory enhancement thirdly as a form of literary expression and fourthly as ameans of fashioning the past in the broadest sense (from inventing to discover-ing to editing and revising) and recording the presentsup1 Similar interdependence

Cf the words of Susan Niditch a leading critic of oral traditions and the ways these arereflected in the Hebrew Bible and the ancient Israelite written texts lsquoScholars are now [contrary

marks the concepts of orality and literacy with relation to literary expressionThis calls for redefining onersquos research priorities for the field of orality studiesoralists are strongly encouraged to move beyond the task of determining whichtraditions are genuinely oral which are anterior or posterior more or less widelyknown and influential and onto an investigation of how oral tradition and writ-ing substitute one another across a spectrum of stories originally articulated or-ally and in different versions but were later prescribed and formalized in writingThe phenomenon of the literary ekphrasis as articulated in the Aeneid projectsideally a comparable cognitive process of lsquoopen textrsquo narrative composition-in-performance in a literacy-determined environment

lsquoOral performancersquo in terms of Homeric poetry communication is a system asmuch as a theoretical concept at once a mechanism of poetic production and atechnical term of literary criticism defined within the field of Homeric interpreta-tion studies as the major rival to neoanalysissup2 and situated at the core of the Ho-meric Questionsup3 Though neither Virgil nor any other Roman poet prior to him ac-knowledge the Homeric Question explicitlyVirgilrsquos antagonistic embrace of Homeramong other things fused creatively the poetics surrounding the thematic typologyof oral tradition and the systematic sharing of motif dissemination espoused byneoanalysis For Virgil Homer is a model for the AeneidVirgilrsquos narrative not un-like the Homeric epics is flexible and fluid enough to sustain variant readings ofan interactive subtext of ever evolving character within a long tradition of epiccomposition⁴ This composition to a considerable extent has developed orallyand as such has subconsciously maintained aspects of orality The narrative con-text of a pictorial description which is widely acknowledged as a self-reflection ofthe entire epic in many respects is further determined by the focalization of thenarrator at the time as such it constitutes a narrative-in-performance and so en-capsulates how the technology of orality manifests itself in the context of literacy

to earlier claims among Biblical scholars that in ancient Israelite literary tradition ldquosimple oralworks gave way to sophisticated written works produced by a literate eliterdquo] beginning to seethat orality and literacy exist on a continuum and that there is an interplay between the twomodalities a feedback loop of sortsrsquo (Niditch ) The same interplay manifests itself inGreco-Roman literature and is the ongoing preoccupation of criticism in recent decades For definitions of neoanalysis see Rutherford ndash Willcock ndash The foundational work on the Homeric Question is that of Milman Parry (= Parry ) de-veloped by Albert Lord (Lord ) succinct overviews are offered also in Rutherford and more recently Fowler ndash A recent concise discussion on the parameters that determined the character of Virgilrsquos receptionof Homer as part of the long and complex process of Homeric reception in Greek and Roman antiq-uity (Homer being the source of inspiration for most major ancient literature) is Graziosi

250 Sophia Papaioannou

(on Homeric orality and its subsequent transformations see also Efstathiou I Pet-rovic and P Michelakis in this volume)

Etymologically deriving from scribere lsquoto write note record in writing drawmark (within a pictorial representation)rsquo the term descriptio literally means a lsquode-tailed recording transcriptrsquo it implies a process that involves writing⁵ literal ormetaphorical or both but more importantly it firmly communicates an ideologyof literacy The employment of a term that signifies writing to translate a termthat means oral articulation (ie the Greek term lsquoekphrasisrsquo) suggests furtherthat the Latin term was fashioned inside a literacy-determined environment inthe sense that one produced a detailed complete description when one could re-cord it in writing lsquotranscribedrsquo it set certain limitations for the audience whowould receive (audibly or visually) the written description and would try to repro-duce the described object (in the broader sense be it a single item of a synthesis ofitems) in their imagination The Carthaginian descriptio relayed in Aeneid 1 it willbe argued presently is a composition that toys with the technology of orality for itis presented by someone who has been personally and intimately affected by theevents reproduced on the depiction Aeneasrsquo intimacy with the theme on the mu-rals shapes the way of his reproducing the descriptio for the verbal reconstructionof the artifact is directed (i) by Aeneasrsquo personal Trojan-War memories and (ii) byhis subjective interpretation of the various details on pictorial material captured inthe actual descriptio on the murals In short Aeneas narrates as much as describesmdashinterprets the descriptio for the audience rather than reproducing it faithfully forthe audience to interpret

Indeed during the action described in most of these panels Aeneas was notpresent to witness the events This deliberate distancing of the narrator from theaction in the narrative comments is significant in view of accessing Aeneasrsquo ek-phrastic reading as an oral epic-in-performance because it tampers with the no-tion of poetic memory both with its literal meaning formed within the context oforal poetics as the memory of the epic bard who composes from memory and inits metapoetic Contean meaning that is defined within the context of literacyand denotes a demiurgersquos acknowledgment and embrace of the preexisting liter-ary tradition For like an epic performer (even any oral storyteller) Aeneas doesnot compose from memory as much as he composes with memory⁶ He does notrecall events that he actually sees on the murals and tries to report them as ac-curately as possible but he has in mind the various traditional accounts of each

See also Webb lsquoAlthough it is the nearest equivalent to ancient ekphrasis (descriptio inLatin)hellip its connotations are very different as is only to be expected of a term that has been definedand discussed with reference to the written word rather than live oral performancersquo Eg Rubin Minchin

Embracing Homeric Orality in the Aeneid 251

of the epic events narrated on the panels which may include the Homeric epicsthe other epics of the Epic Cycle and not least the treatments of the Trojan leg-end throughout the post-archaic largely literate literary tradition including theearly Roman tradition

The politics of introducing a pictorial description outlined above draws di-rectly on the methodology of artificial memory and the construction of the lsquopal-ace of memoryrsquo for the most detailed and accurate memorization This lsquopalace ofmemoryrsquo system was a Roman memory-training technique particularly favouredamong the orators in the ancient and medieval worlds⁷ In all likeness it waswidely employed by the technology of memorization available to the archaicbards as well I propose that Virgil is aware of the implementation of mnemo-technics by archaic oral poets and aspires to emulate the methodology in his Ae-neid The simulation of Homeric mnemotechnics is particularly evident in thecomposition of the Virgilian descriptiones with that of the Carthaginian muralsin Aeneid 1 standing out given that thematically it reproduces yet another focal-ized account of the Trojan War

The actual text of the Carthaginian descriptio reproduces a series of epi-sodes mostly battle-scenes from the Trojan War with an emphasis on Greek pri-marily Achillesrsquo victories or Trojan defeats⁸ The proper assessment of the narra-tive composition of the panels constitutes a challenge for the interpreter becausethe lsquoreadingrsquo of the murals produced is guided by Aeneasrsquo marveling gaze whichmeans that the selection of panels and their serial arrangement is directed byAeneasrsquo perspective (Aen 1456ndash57)

videt Iliacas ex ordine pugnas bellaque iam fama totum vulgata per orbem

He sees the battles of Troy in order and wars already spread by fama through the entireworld

This epigraph operates as the introduction to the pictorial synthesis and it notesthat all panels represent depictions of Trojan-War episodes the intriguing detailhowever is their specified arrangement lsquoin orderrsquo (ex ordine) As the content ofthe artwork unfolds however it becomes increasingly difficult to understandwhat sort of lsquoorderrsquo is meant In all probability the episodes recorded do not fol-

Carruthers Carruthers and Ziolkowski Yates Smith ndash


low chronological order because Aeneasrsquo reading arranges the panels in a waythat violates the chronology of the Trojan legend⁹

Indeed the descriptio opens with two scenes of war (1466ndash68) one featur-ing the Trojans on the attack and the Greeks fleeing the other reversely Achillesrsquopursuing the fleeing Trojan army The two scenes are generic Trojan battles im-possible to locate specifically in the chronological course of the Trojan War Thenext scene the first referring to a specific episode of the Trojan War records thedeath of Rhesus by Diomedes (469ndash73) This event constitutes the culminatingmoment of the Doloneia episode and is recorded in Iliad 10sup1⁰ Nonethelessthe panel introduced immediately afterwards regresses to the early years ofthe war as it depicts the death and mutilation of Troilus (474ndash78) which accord-ing to the sources had been related in the Cypria Next the pictorial narrative re-turns to Iliadic time the episode from the Cypria is followed by a well-knownscene from Iliad 6 the peplos-offering to Minerva by a procession of Trojanwomen (479ndash82) and immediately afterwards comes the mutilation and ransomof Hectorrsquos corpse (483ndash87) the leading theme of the last three books of theIliad The sixth panel to be introduced merits the most economic as well asthe most vague description it centers on Aeneas whom he portrays lsquoamongthe Achaeansrsquo (488)mdashan epic moment impossible to place with specificity in Tro-jan-War time and as we shall see deliberately so The two panels Aeneas ad-mires last before Didorsquos arrival interrupts his study depict scenes from the Ae-thiopis the epic detailing the events of the Trojan War following the death ofHector and the end of the Iliad The former of the two panels according to Ae-neasrsquo reading order features the Ethiopian king Memnon (489) while the lattercaptures the Amazon queen Penthesilea (490ndash93) both warriors are set amidsttheir troops in a similar fashion as to allude to their similar roles as championsof the Trojan cause in the place of Hector but also to their similar tragic deathsat the hand of Achilles Notably Aeneasrsquo narrative order once again clashesagainst the chronology of the Epic Cycle for Penthesilearsquos arrival and death pre-ceded those of Memnon in the Aethiopis

On the chronologically inconsistent seriality of the murals see Clay ndash otherreadings of the anachronous sequence of the murals include Lowenstam ndash andLa Penna The lsquooralrsquo character of the descriptive synthesis of the Carthaginian murals is evidenced inthe placement of the Rhesus episode from the allegedly spurious Iliad at the head of the spe-cific stories of the Trojan War accounted on the murals and more prominently in the integrationof elements in the Virgilian account of Rhesus that do not come from the Iliad see now Dueacute andEbbott ndash


It becomes clear from the above that Aeneasrsquo violation of the Epic Cyclechronology obvious even to a less experienced reader of archaic epic signifiesa different type of lsquoorderrsquo and so does the employment of the term ordo whichon occasion may refer equally to both time and spacesup1sup1 Putnam and others haveargued that the phrase ex ordine (Aen 1456) more likely represents spatial order(the way the panels are arranged on the walls)sup1sup2 but the text does not justify thisargument either The descriptio conspicuously lacks modifiers of distinct loca-tion and the vagueness of the local adverbs that do exist and allegedly markthis ordo argues against such a spatially determined arrangement Only two ofthe panels are introduced with some information regarding a spatial placementthe Rhesus panel (469 nec procul hinchellip) and the Troilus panel (474 partealiahellip) the information however is hardly specific while the employment ofmodifiers of space does not continue The panel of the Trojan suppliants comingnext is introduced with a modifier of time intereahellip (479) and so is the paneldepicting Priamrsquos supplication of Achilles tumhellip (485)sup1sup3

It is logical then to accept that ordo is used to denote some other perceptionof order determined by Aeneasrsquo point of viewsup1⁴ This more complex type of ordois endorsed by the testimony of Servius (ad Aen 1456)

EX ORDINE hoc loco ostendit omnem pugnam esse depictam sed haec tantum dicit quae autDiomedes gessit aut Achilles per quod excusatur Aeneas si est a fortioribus victus

According to the OLD sv e ex ordine can refer to chronological sequence (lsquoin [chronolog-ical] orderrsquo) but also to spatial arrangement (lsquoin a rowrsquo) On the ambiguity of the phrase see Clay and Barchiesi ndash In his classic treatment of Didorsquos murals Putnam ( ) endorses the spatial meaningAeneas sees lsquothe scenes of battle in a rowhellip the smaller spacings of Carthaginian art (ordo) tak-ing their restricted place in the grander sphere (orbis) [Aeneid ] of what humankind as awhole knowsrsquo Such constrictions lead Putnam to rather enforced compromises as eg in his discussion ofinterea the temporal adverb that introduces the middle panel of the frieze the supplication ofthe Trojan women before Minerva cf Putnam Thomas n influenced bythe spatial modifiers at the beginning of the descriptio nec procul hinc and especially parte aliaembraces the spatial argument and assumes that the pictures are arranged simply in a line Aeneas is the so-defined (by Fowler ) lsquowatching characterrsquo who serves the narrateesVirgilrsquos audience with a first alike presentation and assessment of the descriptio I agree withBoyd that the chronological reversal of the Memnon and Penthesilea episodes inthe end of the ekphrasis narrative can alert the reader to suspect of bias Aeneasrsquo selectivegaze yet I do not understand why the flag of suspicion over a compromised reading is notraised much earlier in the course of the reading


EX ORDINE in this passage [Virgil] shows that every battle has been depicted but he men-tions only the deeds of either Diomedes or Achilles so that Aeneas is excused for being de-feated by stronger men

Servius states that lsquoevery battle has been depictedrsquo but he implicitly takes thephrase omnem pugnam to include only the episodes identified by Aeneas Sinceall these episodes revolve around either Achilles or Diomedes it is implied thatthese battles represent the essence of the entire war for Aeneassup1⁵ Servius inother words here realizes that Aeneas is initiating a selective reading of themural a reading that includes primarily panels which revolve around Achillesand Diomedes that the so-called lsquoorderrsquo is subjective is thematically set and is de-termined by the personal criteria of the viewer at the timemdashin the given instanceAeneas (on Servius as a commentator on Virgil see Maltby in this volume)

The interests of the viewerreader then determine the character and opera-tion of multitextuality it is the organizing principle behind the composition ofthe Carthaginian ekphrasis whose reading is a cognitive process Virgil inviteshis audience to produce a critical assessment of the set-piece depictionrsquos contentintroduced by Aeneas This invitation raises expectations of two different sortsFirst the Virgilian audience is called to embrace Aeneasrsquo point of view and de-code the criteria by which the Trojan hero chooses to identify the specific panelsfrom the Carthaginian murals and not others Subsequently this vicarious criti-cal reading on the audiencersquos part is expected to stimulate their own literarymemories and cause them to produce and visualize new material from the TrojanWar story not visibly present on the descriptio but implicitly present in the alter-native versions of the episodes identified already by Aeneas This new materialcould include aspects of the depicted story that are not explicitly articulated thebroader myth the depicted story belongs to alternative versions of the story sig-nificant omissions or changes to the version of the story depicted it may alsoinclude real images that is various other monumental depictions of the samestory and even parallel stories namely other stories of kindred theme orabout the same protagonists etcsup1⁶ Upon lsquocollectingrsquo this material newly disclosedto them from the depths of their memories Virgilrsquos lsquoreadersrsquo across time could

The suggestion of Petrain ( ndash) that Servius lsquotakes ex ordine as a reference tochronological sequence and he treats this sequence as a comprehensive faithful transcript ofthe epic traditionrsquo where lsquothe pictures on the temple display ldquoevery battlerdquo of the Trojan Warin order (omnem pugnam esse depictam) and thus require no further justificationrsquo seems tome unjustified on the basis of the textual evidence provided in the Aeneid My understanding of an ekphrasis as a subjective and elliptic verbal reproduction of a de-scriptio is inspired by the distinction between description and narrative (or focalization) intro-duced in Fowler


build their own version (or narrative or ekphrastic expression) of the depictionwhich means that they were becoming actively and personally involved in theprocess not only of the interpretation but of the actual composition their person-al visualization is projected on Aeneasrsquo own and competes against it To recallreadily this rich material however Virgilrsquos audience should have developed atechnique to facilitate their memorization and ready recollection of stored mem-ories Pointing them to such a technique of memorization Virgil organizes thetheme-based narrative sequence on the murals by drawing on the compositionmethodology of an oral epic performersup1⁷ This epic performer in the descriptioat hand is the character of Aeneas

With Serviusrsquo suggestion to look for thematic narrative lines in order to ra-tionalize Aeneasrsquo particular ordering of the panels and assess his interpretationof the Trojan War Aeneasrsquo initial reaction to the sight of the murals calls for care-ful consideration anew (Aen 1453ndash57)

Namque sub ingenti lustrat dum singula temploreginam opperiens dum quae fortuna sit urbiartificumque manus inter se operumque laboremmiratur videt Iliacas ex ordine pugnasbellaque iam fama totum vulgata per orbem

For while waiting for the queen and studying everything there was to seeunder the roof of this huge temple as he admired the good fortune of the citythe skill of the workmen and all the work of their handshe suddenly saw laid out in order depictions of the battles fought at TroyThe Trojan War was already famous throughout the world(trans West 1990 with minor adjustments)

The panels Aeneas chooses to identify put together part of the pictorial synthe-sis a fact that it is clearly revealed to the careful reader of Aen 1453ff Upon en-tering the temple Virgil reports Aeneas is immediately confronted with a seriesof independently standing works of art (singula) and he immediately sets out tostudy them carefully (lustrat) Lustrat along with videt and miratur are the finiteverbs in the passage it is hardly a coincidence that all three signify the sameactivity of lsquoseeing viewingrsquo As the description of the ekphrastic unit put together

I agree with Petrain that Serviusrsquo commentary on the content of the temple panelsallegedly balances his omission to take clear stance on the meaning of ordo regarding the se-quence of the scenes narrated in the ekphrasis Petrainrsquos Servius interprets Virgilrsquos particular se-lection process as an effort lsquoto preserve Aeneasrsquo reputationrsquo while the criterion that underwritesthe thematically determined narrative of Aeneas is the presence in the selected panels of eitherDiomedes or Achilles


by Aeneas proceeds in the following lines more verbs of lsquoviewingrsquo and lsquoseeingrsquoappear videbat (466) agnoscit (470) conspexit (487) sehellip agnovit (488) Thestrong emphasis on vision and visual activity splits the readersrsquo focus betweenthe panels on the one hand and the act of viewing them on the other

The repetition of vocabularymdashviewing-related terminology in the case at handmdashat the opening of the Virgilian descriptio introduces an unmistakable mark ofepic orality and as such emulates a typical practice of epic descriptions of arti-facts The latter are presented compartmentalized and the description of each seg-ment begins with some verbal expression that recurs henceforth systematicallyThe classic case study is of course the Homeric Shield of Achilles which consti-tutes the model for all epic pictorial narratives following the Iliad In the Shieldekphrasis the key verb is ποιεῖν lsquoto fashionrsquo The description of the Shield itselfis introduced with ποίει (478)mdashwhich happens to be a leading metapoetic termas wellsup1⁸ The Homeric narrator uses ποιεῖν in a variety of (usually past) tensesand forms and the synonyms to ποιεῖν to introduce each new panelepisode onthe surface of the Shieldsup1⁹ The reader thus receives the impression that the Shieldis just being crafted panel by panel and that heshe is watching the process un-raveling before hisher own eyes This is crucial from the perspective of the oralepic poet who wishes to maintain undiminished the impression of a processthat involves the description of a material object and at the same time to combineeach panel with a non-describable narrative To accomplish such a continuoussensation of visual observation Virgilrsquos collective employment of signposts ofpseudo-viewing in the opening of the description is enforced through the introduc-tion of the individual panels with adverbial expressions of place and time continu-ity (469 nec procul hinchellip 474 parte aliahellip 479 intereahellip 485 tumhellip) in this wayhe creates for his readers the illusion that they watch along with Aeneas the pic-torial series on the murals unraveling before their eyes

The instructive process of constructing selectively a mentally visualized picto-rial narrative and reproducing it verbally in a way that would enable the evalua-tors of the ekphrasis to visualize it themselves too might well be inspired by themethodology of a mnemonic system that is based on the architecture or geographyof space This method of spatially determined memorization was famously credit-ed to Simonides of Ceos by Cicero in De oratore 274 where he tells the story ofhow Simonides uses his ability to memorize by using specific topographicallytied signifiers in a particular scene to locate the bodies of his dinner companions

On the Shield of Achilles as mise en abyme of the Iliad see Hardie Hardie ndash Taplin See Il


when the building they were dining had collapsed during the poetrsquos absenceRoman orators and those among the Roman elite trained in oratory like Virgilhad studied how to enhance the faculties of their memories to remember visualimpressions As a result of methodical training that observed key rules memoriescould be visually imprinted and impressions could be held in the mind with vivid-ness resistant to the passage of time Depending on the oratorrsquos experience to re-sist the distorting influence of emotions second thoughts and current eventsthese memories could be recalled more or less unaltered The Roman process ofartificial memory structured around the premise that remembering retrieved infor-mation stored in the mind involved identifying certain places where the memoriesdesired from preservation could be securely stored The places where these mem-ories would be stored were arranged in the mind in a way as to be readily travers-able once the need for the recollection of a series of memories arose these placeswould famously comprise what Matteo Ricci would later call lsquopalace of memoryrsquoan imaginary architecture of orderly synthesized physical spaces and mentalimagerysup2⁰ According to Ricci memory was to be thought of as a palace which ex-isted in the mind In the different rooms and corridors which comprised the pal-ace one would place a series of imagessignifiers of the different conceptssigni-fieds that needed to be rememberedsup2sup1

The construction and the operational management of these lsquomemory pala-cesrsquo is already conceived and ideally described prior to Cicero in the anonymousrhetorical treatise known as Rhetorica ad Herennium dating from the middle 80sBCsup2sup2 the first systematic effort in Rome to describe and assess artificial memorytraining According to the author of the ad Herennium this lsquopalacersquo was the com-prehensive background against which all memories were to be situated in ar-ranged fashionsup2sup3 The arrangement had to follow specific well-defined serial

On artificial memory in antiquity with special emphasis on the pioneering contribution ofRoman oratory to the cultivation and professionalization of the architectonics of memory seeSmall id ch ldquoThe Roman Contributionrdquo very useful also is Vasaly On Riccirsquos lsquopalace of memoryrsquo theory see Spence mdasha book notably listed among theNew York Times Best Books of the Yearmdashalong with Brook The great popularity of memoryenhancement techniques is best illustrated in the most recent (February ) article by JoshuaFoer in the New York Times Sunday Magazine (=Foer ) essentially a personal diary of thejournalistrsquos own one-year-long memory training that resulted to his winning the USA MemoryChampionship Ad Herennium ndash is the section devoted to the description and training of artificialmemory the text is taken from Caplan the reference commentary to date is Calboli (Calboli attributes the text to Cornificus) For the Roman art of artificial memory on the basis of a comparative discussion of the sys-tematization and methodology of the technology of memorization as detailed in the anonymous


order Seriality would be determined on the basis of criteria subjectively devisedto facilitate individual recollection For the author of the ad Herennium seriality(though not identified as such) is best visualized mentally as a physical familiarspace like a housing complex with multiple compartments in terms of architec-tural features inside such as an intercolumniation a corner an arch etc mem-ories would be located in orderly (serial) fashion on each of these spaces

Constat igitur artificiosa memoria ex locis et imaginibus Locos appellamus eos qui breviterperfecte insignite aut natura aut manu sunt absoluti ut eos facile naturali memoria conpre-hendere et amplecti queamus ut aedes intercolumnium angulum fornicem et alia quae hissimilia sunt (ad Herennium 316)

Artificial memory consists of physical places and mental images We call places those thingswhich by nature or by artifice are for a short distance totally and strikingly complete so thatwe can understand and embrace them easily with natural memorymdashsuch as a house an in-tercolumniation a corner an arch and other things which are similar to these(trans Small 1997 with minor adjustments)

The memories would be captured as images (imagines) and impressed on thesespecific locations (loci) according to some order sensible to and readily recalledby the individual interested in recalling them in the future in the exact same con-dition as when they had been originally stored and in the particular order thatfacilitated their personal recollection process imagines eorum locis certis conlo-care oportebit lsquoit will be necessary to set the mental images of them [the differ-ent information which needs remembering] in specific placesrsquo By traversingmentally through this orderly arrangement the orator would be able to recallthe desired imagesmemories

The philosophy of artificial memory-training is particularly applicable to the de-scription of the operation of the epic poetrsquos memory For an epic poet either a Ho-meric bard who composes exclusively from memory or Virgil the epitome of so-phisticated epic literacy lsquoimaginesrsquo are the various available traditions (literary ororal) these traditions were constantly subjected to manipulated recollection de-pending on the narrative context embracing them at the time Accordingly anepic lsquomemoryrsquo is defined ideally as the recording of all available traditions eventhough authorial predilection may opt for the memorization of a singlemdashthe prefer-redmdashtradition and excluding the rest from preservation inside the palace of mem-ory effectively resulting to their marginalization even gradual disappearance Eachpanel of the Carthaginian mural composition is trailed after by several different ver-

Rhetorica ad Herrenium in Cicerorsquos De Oratore and in Quintilianrsquos Institutiones see Scarth ndash


sions of the visualized Trojan War story Aeneasrsquo perspective of the lsquoepic composerrsquohowever has stored in his memory only one versionwhich may be memorized morereadily than the rest because it touches Aeneasrsquo personal interests and feelingsmore than the others Upon recognizing the unifying subject of the depicted narra-tives on the murals he proceeds to identify and provide details for those amongthem (we are never specifically told that Aeneasrsquo description covers all the panelsdepicted on the mural of Junorsquos temple) that seem the most appropriately address-ing the trail of thoughts (sorrow desperation and pain for Trojan suffering and fateattachment to the Trojan heroic past) and concerns (fear of the unknown and of pos-sible treacherousness) running through Aeneasrsquo mind at the moment he enters thetemple of Juno He also proceeds to determine (i) his selection of the specific panelsand not others and (ii) his descriptionlsquoreadingrsquo of them by stressing the particulardetails instead of others Further in accordance with the directions of the Auctor adHerennium Aeneas has stored in his memory carefully selected details of the actionunraveling in the episodesimagines he readily recallsmdashdetails that makes these nar-rative episodes striking and as such easy to recall even though some of them donot appear anywhere in the surviving literary tradition Politesrsquo mutilated bodyon the ground trailing behind his chariot leaving his trace on the ground (and inAeneasrsquo memory path) which is there in order to duplicate (and anticipate laterin the descriptio) Hectorrsquos similar mutilation behind Achillesrsquo chariot given thatTroilusrsquo mutilation as reported in the murals has no precedent in the pre-Virgiliantradition Greek and Roman alike the impressive mixing of red and white in thefierce (lit lsquofieryrsquo ardentis) horses of Rhesus next to the snow white (nivea) tentsof the Thracian army and to the blood-drenched (cruentus) Diomedes by the riversof Troy the Iliades with their hair down the eyes of Minervarsquos statue fixed on theground immovable the shiny gold in the middle of the encounter between Achillesand Priam the supplication of the Trojan women that leads naturally Aeneasrsquomem-ory to recall (and gaze to look next to) the supplication gesture of Priam to Achillesthe niger Memnon Penthesilea with the golden breast band Unusual postures andgestures impressive and impressionable colours weapons gold in other wordsspecific subject matter or items (res) which contribute to making a panel easierto remember and more permanently retained which leads one back to the Rhetoricaad Herennium warmly encouraging the aspiring orator to lsquoset up images that are notmany or vague but are doing somethingrsquo (non multas nec vagas sed aliquid agentesimagines ponemus) because

si egregiam pulcritudinem aut unicam turpitudinem eis adtribuemus si aliquas exornabimusut si coronis aut veste purpurea quo nobis notatior sit simulitudo aut si qua re deformabi-mus ut si cruentam aut caeno oblitam aut rubrica delibutam inducamus quo magis insignitasit forma hellip nam ea res quoque faciet ut facilius meminisse valeamus (ad Herennium 322)


If we bestow extraordinary beauty or singular ugliness on them if we dress others as if incrowns or purple cloaks so that the similarity may be more distinct to us or if we disfigurethem somehow as if we presented one stained with blood covered with mud or smeared withred ochre so that its appearance is more distinct hellip these things will ensure that we will beable to remember them more easily(trans Small 1997 with minor adjustments)

And these recollections importantly are reproduced by Aeneas ex ordine be-cause this is how he has memorized them the advice offered by the professorialauthor of the ad Herennium is once again crucial The loci (or background framesin terms of the ekphrasis) must be kept in order ex ordine to avoid any confusionwhen following the sequence of the images (the narratives depicted on thesebackgrounds) An order is especially important so that an individual might beable to recall the stored information from start to finish backwards or fromthe middle of any of the loci Item putamus oportere ltex ordine hos locos haberegtne quando perturbatione ordinis inpediamur lsquoI likewise think it obligatory to havethese backgrounds in a series so that we never by confusion in their order beprevented from following the imagesrsquo (Ad Her 317 trans Small 1997) In thislight the order in which Aeneas reproduces his Trojan memories has alreadybeen predetermined in his mind emerging instinctively in accordance with therecollections he will identify in the pictures of the murals and hence reproduceand depending on which of these recollections he will first identifymdashsince eachrecollection is part of a different concatenation of imaginesepisodes

The readers of the descriptio then are made aware that it is their visual per-ception the way themselves in their individual exclusiveness envision mentallythe set-piece descriptive composition on the murals that gives shape and mean-ing to the descriptio that there are as many visual representations as manygazes just as in oral epic composition there are as many verbal renderings ofa typical scene (a description of a recurrent action sequence) as many timesthis is rendered either in a single epic synthesis or in different epic performan-ces and by multiple performers and the mental re-composition of a visually de-scribed picture is no less a hypertext as complex and elusive as the compositionof an epic poem that exists and circulates only orally Thus the study of the Car-thaginian description discloses the two linking threads one thematic one struc-tural both fundamental in the composition mechanism of archaic epic behindAeneasrsquo narrative compositioninterpretation of the descriptio


Charilaos N Michalopoulos

lsquotollite me Teucrirsquo (Verg Aen 3601)Saving Achaemenides Saving Homer

In the third book of the Aeneid wandering Aeneas and his crew land on Sicilythe island of the Cyclops Polyphemus where they come across a totally unex-pected spectacle They are approached by a Robinson Crusoe-like figure rushingtowards them with hands stretched out in supplication This emaciated and dish-eveled figure is identified with Achaemenides a member of Ulyssesrsquo crew whohas been inadvertently abandoned by his fellow shipmates After being assuredhis safety the left-behind Greek gives his account of the disastrous meeting ofUlysses with the ferocious Cyclops The Trojans listen to his story and Aeneas of-fers him the much desired salvation by taking him on board (see also the rele-vant discussion by Kayachev in this volume)

The intertextual nature of this so-called lsquoAchaemenides episodersquo (3588ndash691) has long now been discussed (on its reception in Latin scholarship seeMaltbyrsquos chapter in the next section of this volume)sup1 Much ink has alreadybeen spilt in an attempt to map out Virgilrsquos probable minusand less probableminus liter-ary models for what Stephen Hinds has aptly called lsquoa remake-with-sequelrsquosup2 ofthe Homeric Cyclops episode (Od 9177ndash566)sup3 Virgilrsquos intertextual arsenal com-prises a rich and dense network of multiple allusions intersections and transfor-mations of prior literature ranging from the Homeric epics⁴ and Greek tragedy⁵ toRoman tragedy⁶ via the decisive influence of Hellenistic poetry⁷ (Apollonius Rho-dius in particular)⁸ Τhe metaliterary nature of this episode has also beenacknowledged⁹ So far however emphasis has been put primarily (if not entire-ly) on the temporal and spatial intersection of the Aeneid with the Homeric Odys-

For a concise overview of the critical work on the episode see Horsfall on VergAen ndash Hinds For Aeneasrsquo legend prior to Virgilrsquos Aeneid and its many ramifications see Lloyd See Williams b Knauer ndash Harrison Ramminger ndashBarchiesi See Ramminger See Wigodsky Flores EV IV sv Polifemo ndash So Glenn Flores EV IV sv lsquoPolifemorsquo Geymonat Barchiesi Nelis So Quinn Heinze ndash Ramminger ndash Nelis ndash For various aspects of the episodersquos metaliterariness see Papanghelis

sey In addition there seems to be a long standing debate regarding the structur-al and thematic relevance of the Achaemenides episode with the rest of thepoem more specifically its correspondence with Sinonrsquos episode in book 2sup1⁰It is not my intention to get involved into this discussion even though ‒for rea-sons which I hope to prove below‒ I believe that the episode was meant to sur-vive the poetrsquos ultima manussup1sup1 The aim of this paper instead is to investigatethe episodersquos metaliterary self-consciousness and to contextualize its impacton Virgilrsquos wider poetological program of Homeric reception In particular Iwant to examine how Virgil manipulates Homer not only as a text but also asa cultural and ideological reservoir for his own epic

The importance of Homer (and for that matter of all that was consideredlsquoHomericrsquo)sup1sup2 for the Roman elite from the early Republic to the late Empire hardlyneeds any justification The active engagement of the Roman poets with the Ho-meric epics as early as the first lsquotranslationrsquo of the Odyssey into Latin by LiviusAndronicus is yet another clicheacute in the study of Homeric reception in Romesup1sup3

Moreover the fact that both the Iliad and the Odyssey constituted for centuriesan indispensable part of the curriculum of the children of the Roman elite issymptomatic of the Romansrsquo unfailing concern for the relevance of the Homericvalues to their own culturesup1⁴ Still despite the importance of literary exchangeHomerrsquos impact at Rome needs not be confined solely to literature it should beassessed also on grounds of material culture and social practicesup1⁵ The role of thevisual arts (ie sculpture wall-painting painting artifacts) must be taken intoconsideration at all times Hence my investigation even though primarily con-cerned with intertextual correspondences and linguistic exchanges proves to

For more details on this see Lloyd n Williams on Verg Aen ffwith bibliography Quinn Wigodsky ndash Kinsey n with bib-liography ad loc Cova EV I sv lsquoAchemenidersquo Moskalew ndash Hershkowitz ndash n with bibliography ad loc Ramminger ndash Heinze Papanghe-lis n Papaioannou n with bibliography pace Williams on Verg Aen ff Graziosi a ndash offers an informative discussion of the different meanings acquiredby lsquoHomerrsquo and the lsquoHomeric epic traditionrsquo in antiquity (both Greek and Roman) Homer was of vital importance for the Roman poets of early Rome (Livius Andronicus Nae-vius Ennius) and their claim of lsquoHellenizing innovationrsquo For more on this see Hinds ndash and Graziosi a See also the useful bibliography on the relationship between Homerand the Roman epic poets compiled by Farrell See Farrell n with bibliography ad loc Both Farrell and Graziosi a argue against any linear (mostly literary) models ofHomeric reception and stress the need to discuss Homerrsquos presence throughout Roman culturefrom the viewpoint of a wider engagement with the Homeric epics in their entity

264 Charilaos N Michalopoulos

be equally aware of the wider intellectual processes involved in Virgilrsquos variedstrategies of refiguring the Homeric epics For practical reasons my paper is or-ganized in the following sections (i) Achaemenidesrsquo physical appearance andsupplication (ii) Achaemenidesrsquo (self‐)presentation (iii) the Sicilian shore and(iv) the Cyclops and his brothers

a Achaemenidesrsquo physical appearance andsupplication

Achaemenides presents a pitiful sight (Verg Aen 3590ndash99) he is disgustinglyfilthy (593 dira inluuies) he has an overgrown beard (593 inmissa barba) andhe is frail from starvation and suffering (590 macie confecta suprema) His pa-thetic appearance is complemented by a reference to the rags he is wearingwhich are sewn together with thorns (594 consertum tegumen spinis) A closereading of Achaemenidesrsquo description reveals how well chosen Virgilrsquos vocabu-lary is as it abounds with terms of metaliterary output The emphatic accumu-lation in one line of terms like ignoti (591) noua forma (591) cultu (591) aimsat underscoring further its metaliterary implications It is true that Achaeme-nidesrsquo appearance owes much to a long standing tradition of similar descrip-tions whose archetype seems to have been Ulyssesrsquo appearance before Nausicaa(Od 6128ndash29)sup1⁶ also let us not forget that Ulysses upon arrival on Ithaca wasdressed in beggarrsquos rags (miraculously transformed as such by goddess Athenacf Od 13397ndash403 430ndash38) Nevertheless Virgilrsquos detailed reference to Achae-menidesrsquo spin-sewed rags seems to be looking towards a completely different di-rection given that clothes in Roman poetry are often employed as poetologicalmarkerssup1⁷ A reader well equipped to seize on such hints must have appreciatedthe metaliterary implications behind the poetrsquos reference to AchaemenidesrsquoGreek attire (596 Dardanios habitus) as opposed to the Trojansrsquo armour (595ndash96 Troia hellip arma) which in turn works as a subtle allusion to the openingof the Aeneid (11 Arma uirumque canohellip) The overgrown beard underscoresboth Achaemenidesrsquo Greekness (by attributing to him a rather unpopular andold-fashioned ‒at least for Roman standards‒ appearance)sup1⁸ and his wretched-ness The emaciated Greek is very close to death as a result of exhaustion andsuffering (590 macie confecta suprema)

So Ramminger Cf eg Keith Miller Wyke ndash Gibson ndash Papanghelis with n Horsfall on Verg Aen

lsquotollite me Teucrirsquo (Verg Aen 3601) Saving Achaemenides Saving Homer 265

But what are we supposed to make out of all these It is my contention thatVirgil through his use of this carefully chosen vocabulary manages to refigureAchaemenides from a miserable shipwrecked Greek sailor into a living incarna-tion of the pitiful state of the post-Homeric epic production Achaemenides is notmerely lsquothe relic of an archaic pastrsquosup1⁹ but more importantly he is a metaphor forthe literary remains of the so-called ὁμηρίζοντες whose poor literary output wasa barren and unimaginative imitation of Homerrsquos work The herorsquos almost termi-nal condition in life (590 macie confecta suprema) is suggestive of the almostterminal condition of that literary production In this light the remark by Nich-olas Horsfall that Achaemenidesrsquo beard could perhaps lsquosuggest the age and au-thority of Homerrsquosup2⁰ becomes all the more meaningful Virgilrsquos noua forma (591)sounds doubly programmatic firstly it underscores the fact that Achaemenidesis (in all probability) a Virgilian inventionsup2sup1 and secondly it puts forward theclaim for something new for something fresh which will help him overcomehis own (nearly) terminal conditionsup2sup2

Granting this thread of thought Achaemenidesrsquo desperate cry for rescue atline 601 lsquotollite me Teucri quascumque abducite terrasrsquo receives further metal-iterary significance by essentially becoming a desperate cry for the rescue of theHomeric epic tradition by Virgilrsquos Roman epic Achaemenides the living imper-sonation of a decadent and dying tradition begs for deliverance He urges therecently arrived Trojans to remove him from the Odyssean island of the Cyclopsand take him to another literary land whichever that may be (601 quascumqueabducite terras) Achaemenidesrsquo imminent death is twofold both corporeal andliterary The hero fears both his biological death and the potential absence of histextual body from the long line of epic production (both Greek and Roman) Inthis light his wish to lsquohappily die at the hands of a humanrsquo (606 si pereo hom-inum manibus periisse iuuabit) receives an intriguing metaliterary resonancesince manus apart from lsquohandrsquosup2sup3 can additionally be taken here lsquoas the instru-ment with which writing is donersquosup2⁴ The metaliterary impact of manibus periisseis further enhanced by the fact that manus also appears in phrases referring to

So Papanghelis Horsfall on Verg Aen So Lloyd Williams on Verg Aen ff Cova EV I sv lsquoAchemenidersquo Heinze with n Papanghelis with n Nelis Papaioannou acutely remarks that Achaemenidesrsquo nouahellipforma in Virgilrsquos Aeneidfacilitates the herorsquos assimilation in Ovidrsquos Metamorphoses where shapes change into new bod-ies ( in nouahellipmutatashellipformas corpora) OLD sv lsquomanusrsquo ibid


the use and handling of books (eg in manibus esse in manibus uersari in man-ibus habere)sup2⁵ or the transmission of texts (eg per manus tradere)sup2⁶

b Achaemenidesrsquo (self‐)presentation

Achaemenidesrsquo self-definition as a lsquocomrade of unfortunate Ulyssesrsquo at the veryfirst line of his speech (613 sum patria ex Ithaca comes infelicis Ulixi) should beread as yet another Virgilian attempt to establish continuity within the epictraditionsup2⁷ It is surely not haphazard that the whole episode is rounded offwith the repetition of the same formula the second time however the formulacomes from the mouth of Aeneas (691 comes infelicis Ulixi)sup2⁸ Achaemenidesright from the very beginning also defines himself as one of the Danaan fleet(602 Danais e classibus unum) I am inclined to read here more than a referenceto ethnic descent Classis which means lsquofleetrsquosup2⁹ also carries implications oforder and class which lsquoare essential to the notion of canon and literarysuccessionrsquosup3⁰ In this light Achaemenidesrsquo ethnic self-definition becomes a mat-ter of generic appropriation as the hero effectively subscribes himself to the longliterary tradition of the Homeric epics The metaliterary suggestiveness of classishas already been detected behind Virgilrsquos use of the noun to describe Achaeme-nidesrsquo unspeakable joy at his first sight of the approaching Trojan fleet (651ndash52hanc primum ad litora classem conspexi venientem) In this case lsquothe Aeneid isthe first modern epic to revisit the Cyclops episode after the Odyssey just as Ae-neasrsquo ships are the first to approach the land of the Cyclops after Odysseusrsquosup3sup1

Ibid OLD sv lsquomanusrsquo The exact meaning of infelix (ranging from lsquocursedrsquoor lsquohatefulrsquo to implying [authorial] sym-pathy) has caused considerable confusion to commentators ever since Servius (see Williams and Horfall on Verg Aen ) Infelix should preferably be associated withκάμμορος and δύστηνος two Homeric adjectives exclusively attributed to Ulysses So Papaioan-nou ndash discussing Virgilrsquos emphasis on the herorsquos suffering For the repetition of comes infelicis Ulixi by Aeneas (a rarity in Virgil) as a sign of the Trojanherorsquos recognition of common humanity with his former hated enemy see Kinsey Icannot agree with Williams ndash who finds the repetition lsquoironicalrsquo and lsquototallyalien to his tone [hellip] an authorial sympathy that is inappropriate in the mouth of Aeneasrsquo OLD sv lsquoclassisrsquo Papanghelis loc cit


Achaemenidesrsquo reference to his father which follows immediately his asso-ciation with Ulysses also calls for attentionsup3sup2 The herorsquos reference to his humbledescent from poor Adamastus (614ndash15 Adamasto paupere) is much more than alsquosuperfluousrsquo account lsquore-used hellip in a less suitable contextrsquo compared with thesimilar details used by Sinon in Book 2sup3sup3 As I shall try to showVirgilrsquos referenceto the father and his poverty is intrinsically related with Achaemenidesrsquo metal-iterary status To begin with Adamastus as a proper name appears nowhereelse in classical literature (either Greek or Roman) thus highlighting the factthat Achaemenides is a Virgilian coinagesup3⁴ Horsfall finds the name lsquoextremelyappropriate for a warrior from rugged Ithaca (hellip) but equally true of the Trojanswho prove just as indomiti in defeatrsquosup3⁵ True this may be I contend that given theepisodersquos highly metaliterary texture Adamastus in the sense of lsquounsubduedunconqueredrsquosup3⁶ could well be read as an allusion to the poetic material of theHomeric heritage which the decadent and technically flawed post-Homeric pro-duction of the ὁμηρίζοντες (to which Achaemenides belongs) failed to conquerThe particular reference to Adamastusrsquo poverty (615 pauper) which belongs tothe lsquopoor fatherrsquo topossup3⁷ offers further support to my claim with its implicationsof lsquopoor qualityrsquo and lsquolack of technical resourcesrsquosup3⁸ Through this manipulation oflanguage Virgil manages to portray Achaemenides as the genuine offspring of atechnically poor and artistically deficient poetry

c The Sicilian shore

Despite Virgilrsquos laborious efforts to avoid the encounter of his Aeneid with Hom-errsquos Odyssey it is the temporal and spatial proximity of the two epics which oftenbrings the footsteps of Aeneas really close to the footsteps of Ulyssessup3⁹ As hasalready been argued during this intertextual seafaring lsquothe voyage [becomes]

Verg Aen ndash sum patria ex Ithaca comes infelicis Vlixi nomine AchaemenidesTroiam genitore Adamasto paupere (mansissetque utinam fortuna) profectus So Ramminger Cf also Williams on Verg Aen ndash Nelis ndash argues for the influence of four different rescue stories from ApolloniusRhodiusrsquo Argonautica on the story of Achaemenides One of these stories is Jasonrsquos rescue of thesons of Phrixus (ndash) Nelis suspects behind the use of Adamastus an allu-sion to Athamas whose wealth the sons of Phrixus are urged to take possession of Horsfall on Verg Aen LSJ sv lsquoἀδάμαστοςrsquo Horsfall on Verg Aen ndash Cf OLD sv lsquopauperrsquo For more on the spatio-temporal intersection of the two epics see Barchiesi ndash


a trope for intensive self-reflexivityrsquo with lsquosailing pastclosersquo a shore or arriving toa certain Odyssean shore regulating the degree of Aeneidrsquos avoidance proximityor coincidence with the Odyssean intertext⁴⁰ The very fact that the encounter be-tween the left-behind Homeric hero and the Trojan crew takes place on the shoreof Sicily ultimately transforms this shore from a borderline between land and seainto a metaliterary borderline between the Greek epic tradition (represented bythe pitiful and decadent sight of Achaemenides) and the new still undefinedand unmapped Roman epic tradition (represented by Aeneasrsquo equally unmap-ped sea route) Right from the very beginning Achaemenides desperatelyurges the Trojans to remove him from the Cyclopean shore to any other land(600ndash01)mdasha claim which he repeats near the end of his speech when heurges the Trojans to violently cut off the ropes of their ships⁴sup1 The repeated im-perative (639 fugitehellipfugite) is indicative of the urgency of his appeal It seemsthat the danger involved is not so much the death at the hands of the Cyclopsbut rather the entrapment of Aeneasrsquo boat ie of the new epic in the safetyof the harbour of a badly written epic poetry By cutting off the ropes the Trojansare practically urged to cut off the umbilical cord with the sad remains of a dec-adent literary tradition At the far opposite of the harbourrsquos failed safety standsthe challenge of the open sea where the ship of the new Roman epic sails withits canvas open to favourable winds (683 uentis intendere uela secundis)⁴sup2

d The Cyclops and his brothers

The reworking of the adventure of Odysseus in Aeneid 3 provide Virgil withample opportunity to enrich his narrative with three episodes (namely Charyb-dis mount Aetna and Polyphemus) of hyperbolic narratives which as PhilipHardie has shown are artfully contextualized in Aeneidrsquos wider poetologicalprogram⁴sup3 As I shall try to prove Virgilrsquos depiction of Polyphemus adds furtherto the metaliterary texture of the whole episode Achaemenidesrsquo story is intro-duced by a description of mount Aetna and its volcanic eruptions both fine ex-

Papanghelis Verg Aen ndash sed fugite o miseri fugite atque ab litore funem rumpite Cf also taciti incidere funem The open sea and the ship traveling with sails open to the wind constitute stock poetic met-aphors for literary pursuits in both Greek and Latin poetry Hardie ndash


amples of hyperbolic writing⁴⁴ At first sight both descriptions seem to facilitatethe geographical localization of the episode Mount Aetna as we already hearfrom Lucretius⁴⁵ is traditionally considered to be a place of wonders which an-ticipates the wondrous story to follow The localization of the Cyclopes on theisland of Sicily is conventional ever since Thucydides⁴⁶ I would like to draw at-tention to Virgilrsquos divergence from the ‒more or less‒ conventional Pindaric ver-sion of the myth⁴⁷ according to which it was Typhoeus and not Enceladus whowas crashed under mount Aetna⁴⁸ Virgilrsquos use of Enceladus is much more than achoice of mythological variation in that it reinforces the metaliterary texture ofAchaemenidesrsquo episode as it offers a subtle allusion to a text of huge poetolog-ical impact namely the prologue of Callimachusrsquo Aetia⁴⁹ The geographical lo-calization of Aetna and Virgilrsquos intentional substitution of Enceladus for Ty-phoeus provides an interesting link with Callimachusrsquo renowned wish toshake off old age from his shoulder in the manner of Enceladus under the bur-den of Sicily in the prologue of his Aetia⁵⁰ The Virgilian reception of Callima-chusrsquo reference is further sustained by the description of Polyphemusrsquo eye asan Argive shield⁵sup1 which is echoing a similar reference to the eye of the Cyclopsin Callimachusrsquo Hymn to Artemis 52ndash53⁵sup2

Horsfall on Verg Aen ndash offers a useful tabular summary of Virgilrsquos multipleintertextual influences on his account of Aetnarsquos volcanic eruption Lucr ff Horsfall For the conventional association of the Cyclopes with the island of Si-cily see Eitrem RE XI sv lsquoKyklopenrsquo ndash Barchiesi EV I sv lsquoCiclopirsquo withbibliography with Aetna in particular see Eitrem RE XI sv lsquoKyklopenrsquo ndash For details on the myth and its many variations see Williams on Verg Aen ffand Horsfall on Verg Aen Verg Aen ndash fama est Enceladi semustum fulmine corpus urgeri mole hac ingentem-que insuper Aetnam impositam ruptis flammam exspirare caminis So Hollis ndash Apart from Callimachus Nelis ndash further suggests thepossibility of an influence by Apollonius Rhodiusrsquo Argonautica (description of Typhaon andPhaethon) Paschalis explains the association of Aetna with Enceladus throughtheir etymological combination of fire (Aetna ltαἴθω) with sound (Enceladusltκέλαδος κελάδω) Cf Call Aet fr ndash Pf αὖθι τὸ δrsquo ἐκδύοιμι τό μοι βάρος ὅσσον ἔπεστι τριγλώχιν ὀλοῷνῆσος ἐπrsquo Ἐγκελάδῳ Cf Verg Aen ndash fundimur et telo lumen terebramus acuto ingens quod torua solumsub fronte latebatArgolici clipei aut Phoebae lampadis instar with Williams and Horsfall ad loc The Callimachean influence on Virgilrsquos representation of the Cyclopes (Aen ndash ndash ) is also noted by Barchiesi EV I sv lsquoCiclopirsquo ndash Call Dian ndash πᾶσι δrsquo ὑπrsquo ὀφρύν φάεα μουνόγληνα σάκει ἴσα τετραβοείῳ Callimachusis also present behind ruptishellipcaminis () and mutet latus () in the description of Encela-dus crushed by mount Aetna (see Horsfall ad loc)


Philip Hardie has demonstrated how Virgil manages to portray Polyphemusas a duplicate of Enceladus through an ingenious transference of the qualities ofthe anthropomorphized mountain to the monstrous Cyclops⁵sup3 This rather unex-pected equation of (the Virgilian) Polyphemus with (the Callimachean) Encela-dus brings the Virgilian Cyclops right at the heart of the prologue of CallimachusrsquoAetia In addition the description of the Cyclopes (and their land) resounds witha plethora of metaliterary markers which ultimately transfigure them into meta-poetic analogues of the Callimachean Telchines⁵⁴ Polyphemus is huge (632 im-mensus) and inhabits an enormous cave (617 uasto in antro) he is qualis quan-tusque (641) he is so tall that he knocks his head on the stars (619ndash20 arduusaltaque pulsat sidera) like his brothers (678 Aetneos fratres caelo capita altaferentis) who are likened with oak trees and cypresses towering up into theair (679ndash81) Polyphemus is struggling to hold his pace firm because of hishuge bodily mass (656 uasta se mole mouentem) Virgilrsquos description of the stag-gering blind Polyphemus through the use of the emphatic homoeoptoton mon-strum horrendum informe ingens (658) becomes essentially an acute critique ofa literary tradition that has gone way out of proportion and is now sufferingfrom its massive size and artistic shortcomings Polyphemusrsquo gigantic sizeseems to be echoing the volume of the bountiful Demeter⁵⁵ or the Persiankilometer⁵⁶ or the fat sacrifice victim⁵⁷ of the Callimachean prologue The enor-mity of Polyphemus is also evident in the roar he raises to the sky when realizingthat Aeneasrsquo fleet is leaving his island unharmed⁵⁸ The immensity of his bellowcould perhaps be taken as an analogue for the noise of the asses as opposed to

Hardie ndash Cf also Flores EV IV sv lsquoPolifemorsquo Verg Aen portushellipingens () uasto in antro () domushellip hellip ingens (ndash) arduusaltaque pulsat sidera (ndash) manu magna () immensus () lumenhellip ingens (ndash) qualis quantusque () Aetneos fratres caelo capita alta ferentis () uasta se mole() monstrum hellip ingens () quales cum uertice celso aeriae quercus aut coniferae cyparissiconstiterunt (ndash) Call Aet fr ndash Pf ἀλλὰ καθέλκει πολὺ τὴν μακρὴν ὄμπνια Θεσμοφόρο[ς Call Aet fr ndash Pf αὖθι δὲ τέχνῃ κρίνετε] μὴ σχοίνῳ Περσίδι τὴν σοφίην An implicitreference to the Persian kilometer becomes all the more intriguing in view of the Persian impli-cations behind Achaemenidesrsquo name (for the etymological association of Achaemenides withAchaemenes the founder of the Persian royal house see Kinsey Cova EV Isv lsquoAchemenidersquo OrsquoHara with bibliography Paschalis n with bibliography Hinds n Papaioannou n with bibliography) Call Aet fr Pf hellip τὸ μὲν θύος ὅττι πάχιστον Verg Aen ndash clamorem immensum tollit quo Pontus et omnes contremuere undaepenitusque exterrita tellus For the Homeric background of Polyphemusrsquo great howl see Williams and Horsfall ad loc


the singing voice of the cicadas in the Callimachean prologue (29ndash30)⁵⁹ A finallink between Polyphemus and the Telchines is offered by the fact that the Tel-chines like the Cyclops were closely associated with the sea since god Poseidonwas considered to be their father⁶⁰

Polyphemusrsquo killing of two of Ulyssesrsquo comrades⁶sup1 is also packed with metal-iterary ambiguity His huge hand (624 manu magna) a vivid metaphor for a po-etry of Telchinian pedigree is threatening the very existence of the epic tradi-tion as represented by Odysseus and his crew I am tempted to read thecomradesrsquo corpora (623) both as body⁶sup2 and as text⁶sup3 all the more so since nu-ances of taxonomy⁶⁴ and metrical rhythm⁶⁵ are latent in the use of numerus atline 623⁶⁶ Running the risk of over-interpretation I would further suggest thatVirgilrsquos preference for number two (623 duohellipnumero) instead of number sixwhich appears in the Homeric text constitutes an implicit allusion to the twoHomeric epics The killing of Odysseusrsquo two comrades translates mutatis muta-ndis into the destruction of the Iliad and the Odyssey by the monstrous handsof the disproportionate offspring of a decadent post-Homeric production

The metaliterary impact of Polyphemus becomes even more obvious in Vir-gilrsquos connection of the Cyclopes with three composites of the verb fateor a verbassociated with lsquodeclarationrsquo and lsquoopen acknowledgementrsquo Polyphemus is firstlyportrayed by Achaemenides as dictu affabilis a creature not easy to approach ortalk to⁶⁷ He also calls the Cyclopes unspeakable (644 infandi Cyclopes) and atthe sight of the Trojan fleet he expresses the wish to escape the abominable clan(653 gentemhellipnefandam) The Cyclops is mentioned by name only near the end

Call Aet frndash Pf hellip ἐνὶ τοῖς γὰρ ἀείδομεν οἳ λιγὺν ἦχον τέττιγος θ]όρυβον δrsquo οὐκἐφίλησαν ὄνων For more details on the association of the Telchines with Poseidon and the sea in generalsee Herter RE A sv lsquoTelchinenrsquo ndash and ndash Verg Aen ndash uidi egomet duo de numero cum corpora nostro prensa manu magnamedio resupinus in antro frangeret ad saxum sanieque aspersa natarent OLD sv lsquocorpusrsquo OLD sv lsquocorpusrsquo OLD sv lsquonumerusrsquo OLD sv lsquonumerusrsquo A similar case of ambiguity can be traced behind Achaemenidesrsquo reference to the Cyclopeanfootsteps at line (prospicio sonitumque pedum uocemque tremesco) In this case pes can betaken either as bodily or as metrical foot Verg Aen nec uisu facilis nec dictum adfabilis ulli with Williams ad loc for prob-lems of interpretation The line ultimately looks back to Acciusrsquo Philocteta fr (Macr )quem neque tueri contra neque adfari nequeas (so Wigodsky ndash) Paschalis notes lsquoThe cluster uisuhellipdictu adfabilis combines the component ndashωψ of Κύκλωψ and the com-ponent ndashφημος of Πολύφημοςrsquo


of Achaemenidesrsquo speech (641) which is framed between fatur (612) and fatuserat (655)⁶⁸ The recollection of the etymological association of Polyphemuswith φήμη is unavoidable However Polyphemus hindered by his massive vol-ume fails to communicate with Achaemenides as his head strikes the sky⁶⁹Hence the Cyclops becomes the incarnation of a lsquomuch spoken of rsquo poetrywhich unfortunately fails to communicate its art becomes incomprehensibleand ultimately causes revulsion

Achaemenidesrsquo episode reaches its conclusion on the shore as Polyphemusleaves his cave on the mountain and moves towards the sea (657 et litora notapetentem)⁷⁰ Whereas the Odyssean narrative focuses more on the blinding ofPolyphemus and less on Odysseusrsquo escape in Virgil it is the other wayround⁷sup1 In the pursuit of the Trojan fleet by the Cyclops (3655ndash74) Virgil diverg-es from his Homeric prototype in that his Cyclops does not stay on shore hurlinghuge rocks against the ships (Od 9480ndash83 537ndash40) The Virgilian Cyclops in-stead wades far into the sea until he realizes the futility of his attempt to catchup with the fleeing ships The accumulation of terms referring to the sea (662altos tetigit fluctus 662 ad aequora uenit 664 graditur per aequor 665 fluctus668 aequora 671 Ionios fluctus 672 pontus) underlines the metaliterary sugges-tiveness of the sea as metaphor for literary endeavour Moreover the presence ofpontus (672) combined with the triple repetition of fluctus (662 665 671) a termoften applied to river streams⁷sup2 implicitly alludes to another Callimachean pas-sage of immense poetological importance namely the end of the CallimacheanHymn to Apollo where a combination of the sea with river streams also occurs⁷sup3If so the streams that hit Polyphemusrsquo ribs recall the muddy and filthy streamsof the Assyrian river that threaten to contaminate the clear and untroubled opensea (of the Virgilian text) Polyphemusrsquo steps in the sea then could be read as the

Paschalis See also Papaioannou Moskalew draws an interesting parallel between the description of Polyphemusand the appearance of Fama (Φήμη) in book ndash For the metaliterariness of litora nota see Papanghelis So Williams on Verg Aen ndash OLD sv lsquofluctusrsquo a Call Apol ndash ὁ Φθόνος Aπόλλωνος ἐπrsquo οὔατα λάθριος εἶπενmiddot lsquoοὐκ ἄγαμαι τὸν ἀοιδὸν ὃςοὐδrsquo ὅσα πόντος ἀείδειrsquo τὸν Φθόνον ὡπόλλων ποδί τrsquo ἤλασεν ὧδέ τrsquo ἔειπενmiddot lsquoAσσυρίου ποταμοῖομέγας ῥόος ἀλλὰ τὰ πολλά λύματα γῆς καὶ πολλὸν ἐφrsquo ὕδατι συρφετὸν ἕλκει Δηοῖ δrsquo οὐκ ἀπὸπαντὸς ὕδωρ φορέουσι μέλισσαι ἀλλrsquo ἥτις καθαρή τε καὶ ἀχράαντος ἀνέρπει πίδακος ἐξ ἱερῆςὀλίγη λιβὰς ἄκρον ἄωτονrsquo In Book of the Aeneid Virgil alludes to the Callimachean Hymn toApollo again in Apollorsquos oracle to Aeneas on the island of Delos (see Barchiesi ndash

) For Calli-

machusrsquo presence at the end of Book see Geymonat


agonizing attempts of the Telchinian⁷⁴ post-Homeric epic to persecute to rivaland emulate (a sense latent in fluctus aequare sequendo at line 671⁷⁵) the newRoman epic The emphatic negation of nullahellippotestas (670) and nec potis (671)ultimately reveals the Cyclopsrsquo incompetence and the consequent failure in hispursuit The image of the Cyclops and his horrible brothers on the shore staringat Aeneasrsquo ship sailing away with propitious wind marks the end of the episodePolyphemusrsquo failed hospitium of Achaemenides gives way to a much more fa-vourable hospitium by the Trojans (666ndash67 recepto supplice) which in turn sig-nifies the reception of what seems to be an agonizing post-Homeric tradition bythe Roman epic⁷⁶

All these literary and metaliterary exchanges asideVirgilrsquos description of theCyclops can also be seen as operating within the wider context of the Romansrsquovisual engagement with Greek epic in this case through wall-painting It wasduring the reign of Augustus that the so-called lsquoSecond Pompeian Stylersquo evolvedand offered (among others) exceptional depictions of atmospheric landscapesand scenes from the Odyssey Judging from Vitruviusrsquo comments on mural deco-rations of Roman houses Homeric themes must have been a popular choice⁷⁷Fairly recently Joseph Farrell has acutely drawn our attention to the importanceof these visual lsquoIliadsrsquo and lsquoOdysseysrsquo in Homerrsquos cultural and ideological assim-ilation in Rome⁷⁸What is particularly relevant to my discussion is the impressivepopularity of the Cyclops theme in these decorationswhich makes it a most suit-able complement of the Homeric text in Virgilrsquos refiguration of the story⁷⁹

I would like to conclude this paper with an Ovidian coda In OvidrsquosMetamor-phoses (14158ndash440) when the Trojans finally arrive at Italy they meet a charac-ter named Macareus Macareus a shipmate of Ulysses who has also stayed be-hind recognizes almost immediately among the Trojan crew Achaemenides hisGreek comrade This time however nothing reminds of Achaemenidesrsquo previous

The volume of the Cyclops is once again implied by the fact that even though he has gonehalfway through in the open sea still it is only his ribs that receive the blow of the waves OLD sv lsquoaequorsquo Verg Aen ndash nos procul inde fugam trepidi celerare receptor supplice sic merito tac-iti incidere funem For Achaemenidesrsquo episode as a story of failed hospitality see Kinsey ndash Moskalew ndash (as a model for Didorsquos hospitality to Aeneas) Gibson ndash Vitr ndash Farrell ndash offers an excellent discussion of the evidence provided by the so-called tabulae Iliacae the cycle of Odyssean landscapes from the Esquiline frescoes from Pom-peii the sculpture garden of Spelonga For a detailed examination of the Odyssean landscapes and monsters in Roman wall-paint-ing see Balensiefen


appearance in the Virgilian text Achaemenides has been fully restored to his for-mer archaic glory (Ov Met 14165ndash67) and this means that someone somehowmust have taken good care of him on board Aeneasrsquo ship⁸⁰ More importantlyAchaemenides has made his choice as he proudly declares that he prefers Ae-neasrsquo ship to Ithaca and that he reveres Aeneas equally with his father (OvMet 169ndash71) This undeniably constitutes a bold metaliterary acknowledgmentof the deliverance of Homerrsquos legacy by the Virgilian epic

For a detailed discussion of Ovidrsquos highly sophisticated and inherently metapoetic treatmentof the encounter between Macareus and Achaemenides in his Metamorphoses see Papaioannou ndash


Boris Kayachev

Scylla the Beauty and Scylla the BeastA Homeric Allusion in the Ciris

lsquoOnce we have accepted that the Ciris stems from neither Virgil nor Gallus butwas written by a post-Virgilian poetasterhelliprsquo ndash with these words ROAM Lynewho was later to produce the nowadays standard commentary on the poemsup1 be-gins his first substantial contribution to the Cirisfragesup2 The quoted passage con-tains two fundamental statements one made explicitly and the other only im-plied The former is that the Ciris postdates Virgil Although since then it hasbeen argued again that the Ciris does stem from Gallussup3 it need not concernus at present The latter asserts that the Ciris is mediocre poetry And indeedthroughout the article Lyne is never tired of pointing out the Ciris instances oflsquoheavy-handedrsquo and lsquounskillfulrsquo plagiarism⁴ Lyne was understandably notalone in this condescending attitude to his object of study an attitude madefashionable by Housmanrsquos passing remark that the Ciris lsquowas indited by atwaddlerrsquo⁵ But it was Lynersquos commentary which is indeed as a reviewer putsit lsquoan excellent book on a poem which is less than excellentrsquo⁶ that virtuallycanonized the view of the Ciris as a derivative piece of poetry

Since the publication of Lynersquos commentary a number of minor studies onthe Ciris have appeared which often make considerable progress in solving in-dividual problems or establishing separate allusions but still do not attempt asystematic re-evaluation of the poem Characteristic is the ingenious demonstra-tion by Catherine Connors that the puzzling reference to lsquosimultaneous huntingand herdingrsquo at Ciris 299 f (Cnosia nec Partho contendens spicula cornu Dictaeasageres ad gramina nota capellas)⁷ does not in fact imply actual herding at all butalludes to the belief lsquothat goats that had been wounded by a hunter were able tosave themselves by seeking out and ingesting dictamnusrsquo (ie gramina nota)⁸(Indeed as has been observed by Annette Bartels approaching the poem froma narratological perspective lsquoeine Analyse die den Text mit seinen Eigentuumlm-

Lyne Lyne Gall Lyne Housman Williams a Cf Lyne ndash Connors

lichkeiten ernst nimmt zeigt daszlig die Ciris zumindest besser ist als ihr Ruf rsquo⁹)Still Connors cautiously admits that the lsquodisplay of etymological and scientificdoctrina associated with dictamnusrsquo may be derived from lsquowhat was presumablythe Ciris poetrsquos source for the digressionValerius Catorsquos Dictynnarsquo rather than beoriginal to the poem itselfsup1⁰

Let us briefly adduce some more examples Heather White has recently pro-duced a plausible explanation for the perplexing comparison of the bird ciriswith lsquoLedarsquos Amyclean goosersquo (489 ciris Amyclaeo formosior ansere Ledae) as re-ferring not to Zeusrsquo transformation into a swansup1sup1 but to that of Leda herself into agoose as reported by some sourcessup1sup2 Jackie Pigeaud has clarified a number ofdifficult details in the description of Scyllarsquos metamorphosis (490ndash507) in par-ticular the simile comparing it with the development of the embryo within anegg by pointing out striking parallels in ancient medical writingssup1sup3 RiemerFaber has firmly situated the peplos ekphrasis (21ndash35) within the earlier poetictradition of embroidered garments as cosmic imagessup1⁴ thus vindicating it fromLynersquos charge of being a borrowing ill-suited to the new contextsup1⁵ Luigi Lehnusand Donato De Gianni have demonstrated the Ciris poetrsquos acquaintance with Cal-limachusrsquo Hecale and Euripidesrsquo Hippolytus respectively though both were partlyanticipated by Atillio Dal Zotto of whose research they seem to be unawaresup1⁶Armando Salvatore and Erich Woytek have shed a more favourable light onthe Cirisrsquo engagement though not unknown before with the poetry of Cicero(the former) and Catullus (the latter)sup1⁷ Jeffrey Wills has pointed out a suggestiveallusion to Apolloniusrsquo Argonautica and Adrian Hollis to Nicanderrsquos Theriaca (instudies not primarily concerned with the Ciris)sup1⁸ both of which we shall have theoccasion to consider more closely

Bartels Connors Cf Lyne Lyne also mentions lsquoa version in which Ledarsquos Jupiter ap-peared as a goosersquo but that still leaves Amyclaeo unexplained since it was Leda and notZeus who had connections with Amyclae White Pigeaud To cite just one example Pigeaudrsquos interpretation () of (medium cap-itis discrimen) as the sagittal suture seems more convincing than Lynersquos f as the hairparting Faber Cf Lyne ndash Lehnus though earlier than Lyne but apparently still too late to be taken intoaccount De Gianni Dal Zotto ignored by Lyne Salvatore Woytek Wills Hollis f

278 Boris Kayachev

Some (but far from all) of these advances in understanding the Ciris are nowbrought together in a new commentary by Pierluigi Gatti who also makes furtheruseful observations of his own such as for example noting an allusion to afragment of Euphorionrsquos Thrax at Ciris 129ndash32sup1⁹ But Gattirsquos commentary isstill too limited in scale and ambition to effect a thorough reappraisal of thepoem This is of course not the place to offer such a reappraisal for the obviousreason of space limits there is however enough room to take at least one morestep towards it In what follows I shall discuss a case of Homeric reception in theCiris which will both shed light on some ambiguities of the text and demonstratethe poemrsquos sophistication in engagement with the literary past

As pointed out by Craig Kallendorf in a study of allusion as a form of recep-tion lsquothere are two readers operating in allusion the critic who notices an allu-sion and the author who wrote itrsquosup2⁰ This underlying isomorphism of the twomodes of reception ndash reading by the critic and reading by the author ndash oftenleads to the formerrsquos role being assimilated to that of the latter modern scholar-ship tends to value the criticrsquos creativity in producing a textrsquos meaning I wouldsuggest that the reverse perspective is also valid the author can in a sense bethought of as being as passive in interpreting a predecessorrsquos text as the idealcritic of an earlier generation had to be This ambivalence of the authorrsquos rolein appropriating a model it will be shown is not merely exemplified in theCiris but deliberately thematized by the poet

I propose to begin by reading and discussing a passage of the Ciris that em-beds ndash as we shall come to see ndash a Homeric context albeit in an implicit way Asa punishment for the betrayal of her father and city the Megarian princess Scyl-la daughter of Nisus is being dragged through the sea behind Minosrsquo ship whenat last she is pitied by Amphitrite and turned into the ciris (478ndash89)

fertur et incertis iactatur ad omnia uentiscumba uelut magnas sequitur cum paruula classisAfer et hiberno bacchatur in aequore turbodonec tale decus formae uexarier undisnon tulit ac miseros mutauit uirginis artuscaeruleo pollens coniunx Neptunia regnosed tamen aeternum squamis uestire puellam

Gatti though here too he is anticipated by Latte n and Spanou-dakis This allusion may be of some interest for the argument that the Ciris is a work ofGallus as in antiquity Gallus was closely associated with Euphorion Kallendorf On the latterrsquos role as a reader cf further lsquoThe alluding author beginsthe process by reading an earlier text then working out an interpretation of that text As he orshe begins writing the new text unfolds in dialogue with the old onersquo

Scylla the Beauty and Scylla the Beast 279

infidosque inter teneram committere piscesnon statuit (nimium est auidum pecus Amphitrites)aeriis potius sublimem sustulit alisesset ut in terris facti de nomine cirisciris Amyclaeo formosior ansere Ledae

Onward she moves tossed to and fro by uncertain winds(like a tiny skiff when it follows a great fleetand an African hurricane riots upon the wintry sea)until Neptunersquos spouse queen of the azure realmsuffered it not that such a beauteous form should be harassed by the wavesand transformed the maidenrsquos sorry limbsBut even so she decided not to clothe the gentle maid with scales foreveror place her amid treacherous fishes(all too greedy is Amphitritersquos flock)rather she raised her aloft on airy wingsthat she might live on earth as Ciris named from the deed wroughtndashCiris more beautiful than Ledarsquos Amyclaean swan(trans Fairclough Goold 2000 with minor adjustments)

It is the figure of Amphitrite and her role in this context that require most atten-tion As Lyne acknowledges there seems to be lsquono parallel for Amphitrite as theagent of Scyllarsquos transformation indeed for her playing any prominent part inthe Scylla Nisi (as opposed to Scylla monstrum) storyrsquo though he concedesthat her entry is lsquofairly natural given that it is in her province that Scylla issufferingrsquosup2sup1 Shortly we shall see that the main reason for introducing Amphitriteis indeed to create a link with the story of the other Scylla

Within the quoted passage Amphitrite is named twice first by antonomasiaas coniunx Neptunia at 483 then directly at 486 The latter context is peculiar asLyne rightly points out lsquoIs Amphitrites here metonymy or proper name Neitheris particularly easy given that Amphitrite is the subject of the main sentence Iam inclined to think that it is not a metonymy [hellip] pecus A[mphitrites] is amuch livelier phrase at any rate if Amphitrites is not a metonymyrsquosup2sup2 We shallsee that Lyne is probably right in taking Amphitrites literally but the problemis deeper than Lyne realizedsup2sup3 If Amphitrites is a metonymy it reduces the ex-pression pecus Amphitrites to a metaphorical periphrasis meaning no morethan lsquoinhabitants of the searsquo which suits the context perfectly If however Am-phitrites is an actual proper name it seems natural to take pecus literally as well

Lyne Lyne Other commentators ndash Neacutemethy Lenchantin de Gubernatis Hielkema Sal-vatore Haury Knecht Dolccedil Gatti ndash are no more helpful than Lyne

280 Boris Kayachev

but then one cannot help wondering why Amphitritersquos sheep which (one as-sumes) peacefully graze in pastures of seaweed should pose a threat even toa small fish such as Scylla would be likely to become

The passage we are dealing with evokes a context from earlier in the Ciristhe section of the proem that announces the poemrsquos plot and also recounts var-iant stories told about (the other) Scylla (46ndash91)sup2⁴ In a pointed manner Amphi-tritersquos decision to turn Scylla into a bird rather than fish mirrors the narratorrsquoschoice of that particular version of Scyllarsquos metamorphosis (note potius)

aeriis potius sublimem sustulit alisesset ut in terris facti de nomine ciris (487ndash88)

Rather she raised her aloft on airy wingsthat she might live on earth as Ciris named from the deed wroughtScylla nouos auium sublimis in aere coetusuiderit et tenui conscendens aethera pennacaeruleis sua tecta super uolitauerit alis (49ndash51)Scylla saw in the sky aloft strange gatherings of birdsand mounting the heavens on slender pinionshovered on azure wings above her homehellippotius liceat notescere cirinatque unam ex multis Scyllam non esse puellis (90ndash91)Rather let Ciris become knownand not a Scylla who was but one of many maidens(trans FaircloughGoold 2000 with minor adjustments)

Likewise the preceding lines (481ndash86) telling of Amphitritersquos general intentionto transform Scylla bring to mind the account of alternative versions given inthe proem (54ndash89) That section of the Ciris is badly preserved and the textrsquosmeaning is not always clear but overall features are discernible The narratorstarts by rejecting the variant claiming that it was Scylla the daughter of Nisuswho turned into the Homeric Scylla (54ndash63)sup2⁵ Then he considers different alter-native versions of the origin of Scylla the monster (64ndash88) Firstly she may bethe daughter of either Crataeis (so Homer) or some other monster (66 f) Second-ly she may be a mere fiction an allegorical image of lust (68 f) Thirdly and thisis the most relevant version Scylla may be a beautiful girl with whom Neptunecommitted adultery and who in revenge was transformed by Amphitrite into a

On the different ancient accounts of Scylla(s) see Hopman Peirano ndash argues that Callimachus may have been an exponent of this conflat-ed version On the distinction between and conflation of the two Scyllas in Hellenistic andRoman poetry see Hopman ndash


monster (70ndash76) Finally she may be a prostitute who was thus punished for of-fending Venus (77ndash88)

The reference to Amphitrite as coniunx Neptunia at 483 is not therefore amere figure of speech but performs the function of a pointer to that earlier con-text unlike the other Scylla who slept with Neptune Scylla the daughter of Nisushas done nothing wrong to Amphitrite and consequently she is turned (482 mu-tauit uirginis artus cf 70 speciem mutata) into a beautiful bird rather than a hid-eous sea monster But the two contexts have also another deeper connection Inthe idiosyncratic account given by the Ciris the attack on Odysseus and his com-panions is viewed as Scyllarsquos revenge for what Amphitrite did to her (74ndash76)sup2⁶According to the logic of this variant of the story Odysseus must be a proteacutegeacuteof Amphitritersquos ndash and so is Scylla the daughter of Nisus Both suffer at seathe former is violently attacked (60 uexasse) by Scylla the monster the latteris tossed (481 uexarier) by the violent wavessup2⁷ and it is only through Amphi-tritersquos intervention that Nisusrsquo daughter is rescued from the menacing sea beasts(note 451ndash453 speaking of aequoreae pristes)

The most obvious source for the treatment of Scylla the monster in theproem is Homer the only poetic authority referred to by name (65 Colophoniacohellip Homero cf 62 Maeoniae hellip chartae) The mention of Crataeis as Scyllarsquos moth-er (66 ipse Crataein ait matrem) is perhaps the most precise and explicit piece ofinformation that is derived from the Odyssey (12124ndash25 Κράταιιν μητέρα τῆςΣκύλλης) but far from the only one The following passage seems particularly rel-evant (1295ndash 100)

αὐτοῦ δrsquo ἰχθυάᾳ σκόπελον περιμαιμώωσαδελφῖνάς τε κύνας τε καὶ εἴ ποθι μεῖζον ἕλῃσικῆτος ἃ μυρία βόσκει ἀγάστονος Aμφιτρίτητῇ δrsquo οὔ πώ ποτε ναῦται ἀκήριοι εὐχετόωνταιπαρφυγέειν σὺν νηίmiddot φέρει δέ τε κρατὶ ἑκάστῳφῶτrsquo ἐξαρπάξασα νεὸς κυανοπρῴροιο

She fishes there eagerly searching around the rockfor dolphins and sea-dogs and whatever greater beast she may happen to catchsuch creatures as deep-wailing Amphitrite rears in multitudes past countingBy her no sailors yet may boast that they have fled

The idiosyncrasy lies in the fact that the idea of the attack on Odysseus as a means of re-venge comes from an analogous story in which Scylla is transformed for a similar reason byCirce as Lyne points out lsquothere is no tradition that Odysseus was ever a favouriteof Amphitritersquos as he was of Circersquos ndash so Scyllarsquos actions could hardly have piqued herrsquo The connection is noted by Skutsch

282 Boris Kayachev

unharmed in their ship for with each head she carries off a mansnatching him from the dark-prowed ship(trans Murray Dimock 1995 with minor adjustments)

This is of course the subtext that underlies the description of Scyllarsquos attack onOdysseus at 59ndash61 whether it is borrowed from Virgilrsquos Eclogues (675ndash77) or isoriginal to the Ciris

candida succinctam latrantibus inguina monstrisDulichias uexasse rates et gurgite in altodeprensos nautas canibus lacerasse marinis

With howling monsters girt about her white waistshe often harried the Ithacan ships and in the swirling depthstore asunder with her sea dogs the sailors she had clutched(trans FaircloughGoold 2000 with minor adjustments)

Scyllarsquos barking (latrantibus hellip monstris) was mentioned in Homer only a fewlines before (1285 δεινὸν λελακυῖα) nautas renders ναῦται (one may also spec-ulate that timidos which in Virgil stands instead of deprensos is a learned trans-lation of ἀκήριοι as lsquospiritlessrsquo rather than lsquounharmedrsquo) and the ambiguous lsquoseadogsrsquo (canibus hellip marinis) can be linked not only to 1286 (σκύλακος νεογιλλῆς)but also ndash as we shall see more correctly ndash to 1296 (κύνας)

Now finally turning to my main point I would suggest that the phrase pecusAmphitrites at 486 picks up this Homeric allusion lsquoAmphitritersquos sheeprsquo are pre-cisely those lsquodolphins dogs and other sea beastsrsquo (infidi pisces indeed) ἃ μυρίαβόσκει ἀγάστονος Aμφιτρίτη and that is why this auidum pecus poses a threat toScylla the daughter of Nisus To start with a formal argument the spondaic end-ing Amphitrites is a lsquofigure of allusionrsquo pointing to Aμφιτρίτη at Od 1297 posi-tioned likewise at the end of the versesup2⁸ Furthermore much as the Ciris contextleaves in doubt whether pecus Amphitrites is to be taken literally or figurativelyso the Homeric one can be and in fact was interpreted in both ways The ambi-guity of the Latin phrase is arguably a response to the treatment of this Homericcontext in Hellenistic exegesisOn the one hand βόσκειν is a vox propria for tend-ing livestocksup2⁹ and at Od 4413 ndash a point made by Eustathius (215 referring to

As is observed by Wills lsquoa Latin spondeiazon can reflect an imitation of a partic-ular Greek spondeiazonrsquo So Eustathius interprets it as referring to grazing on seaweed () δῆλον δὲ καὶ ὅτι ἡ τῶνμνίων καὶ φυκίων καὶ βρύων τῶν κατὰ θάλασσαν νομὴ βόσκει τὰ νεμόμενα ἴσως δὲ καὶ ἑτέρωντινῶν φυτῶν ὡς εἰκὸς θαλαττίων θύννοι γὰρ ἱστοροῦνται ἐπέκεινα Σικελίας βαλανηφαγεῖν ἀπὸ


1173) ndash Proteus another sea deity is compared to a herdsman On the other as isstressed by Porphyry (on Il 8186) the epithet ἀγάστονος (lsquomuch groaningrsquo)points to the elemental rather than anthropomorphic embodiment of the sea(in contrast to Od 5422 οἷά [sc sea beasts] τε πολλὰ τρέφει κλυτὸς Aμφιτρίτηwhere the next line also speaks of κλυτὸς ἐννοσίγαιος)sup3⁰ Finally there is also aperfect reason why these infidi pisces are a particular threat to Scylla the daugh-ter of Nisus being constantly preyed on by Scylla the monster they will be onlytoo glad to take revenge on her fenceless namesake

Still a slightly different interpretation is possible and perhaps even prefera-ble One lesser-known rationalizing explanation of the Homeric monster frag-mentarily preserved in the scholia to Apolloniusrsquo Argonauticasup3sup1 treats lsquodolphinsdogs and other sea beastsrsquo as an integral part of the dangerous natural phenom-enon underlying Homerrsquos depiction of Scyllasup3sup2 according to these scholia Scyllais a promontory with underwater reefs at its feet full of fish of prey that attacksailors shipwrecked there This interpretation is apparently alluded to in the Ae-neid (3425 nauis in saxa trahentem there are no reefs in Homer) and it may wellbe behind the description of the Homeric Scylla in the Ciris proem at 60f uex-asse rates et gurgite in alto deprensos nautas canibus lacerasse marinis As Lyneobserves although at first sight deprensos seems to imply being snatched byScylla ldquosuch a very literal sense is in fact hard to parallelrdquo whilst ldquodeprendois in fact almost a uox propria of people being caught unaware at a disadvant-age for one reason or another (usually obviously weather) at seardquosup3sup3 If so thepassage easily allows of a rationalizing interpretation along the lines suggestedby the scholia to Apollonius (note especially ad 4825ndash831b εἶτα ἐξιόντες θαλάσ-σιοι κύνες καὶ ἕτερα διάφορα θηρία ἐσθίουσι τοὺς ἐν ταῖς ναυσὶν ἄνδρας) depre-nsos can be taken to mean lsquosuffering shipwreckrsquo and canibus lacerasse marinisto refer to attack of lsquosea dogsrsquo (θαλάσσιοι κύνες going back to Od 1296κύνας) that is either sharks or some other dangerous fish rather than lsquorealrsquo

δρυαρίων φυομένων κατὰ θάλασσαν ndash despite the fact that Homer is evidently speaking of fish ofprey Though the last argument can be turned on its head since at Od Amphitrite is clearlya deity rather than element so it should be at Od as well For texts see Ressel n who also conveniently adduces relevant fragmentsfrom Sallust and the scholia to Lycophronrsquos Alexandra Virgilrsquos description of Scyllarsquos lower half as immani corpore pistrix delphinum caudas uterocommissa luporum (Aen f) seems likewise to be interpreting δελφῖνάς τε κύνας τε καὶ εἴποθι μεῖζον ἕλῃσι κῆτος as part of the monster Lyne

284 Boris Kayachev

dogssup3⁴ Ironically enough it thus turns out that Scylla the princess is rescued inthe end on some implicit level of meaning from none other than Scylla themonster This rescue of one Scylla from the other has apparently also a poetolog-ical dimension for Scylla the daughter of Nisus is indeed saved by the authorthrough his choice of a particular variant of the myth from transforming intothe Homeric monster

However although the version that makes both Scyllas one and the same fig-ure is explicitly rejected already in the proem and after that Scylla the monstercompletely disappears from the narrative on the level of subtexts the danger isnever over As has been suggested by Wills the passage denouncing Scylla as theruin of both her father and fatherland (130 f Scylla nouo correpta furore Scyllapatris miseri patriaeque inuenta sepulcrum) contains an allusion signalled by thereduplication of Scylla to a context in the Argonautica speaking of the other Scyl-larsquos parents (4827ndash29)sup3⁵

ἠὲ παρὰ Σκύλλης στυγερὸν κευθμῶνα νέεσθαι(Σκύλλης Αὐσονίης ὀλοόφρονος ἣν τέκε Φόρκῳνυκτιπόλος Ἑκάτη τήν τε κλείουσι Κράταιιν)hellip

Nor to sail by the hideous den of Scylla(the deadly Ausonian Scylla whom night-wandering Hecatethe one called Crataeis bore to Phorcys)(trans Race 2009 with minor adjustments)

And as has been observed by Hollis the striking comparison of Scylla beingdragged behind Minosrsquo ship (478ndash80 quoted above) to ldquoa dinghy when towedbehind a cargo-boatrdquo seems to originate in an analogous simile from NicanderrsquosTheriaca that illustrates ldquothe crooked motion of a cerastesrdquosup3⁶ (268ndash70)

Furthermore succinctam latrantibus inguina monstris finds a parallel in Sallust(Hist a fragment going back to the same common source as the scholia) caninis succinc-tam capitibus quia collisi ibi fluctus latratus uidentur exprimere Wills lsquoThe recombination of the two Scyllas was a poetic favourite so the refer-ence is not impeded by the fact that Apolloniusrsquo Σκύλλη is the sea peril rather than the daughterof Nisus In fact the Scylla of the Ciris turns out to be just as ruinous (patris hellip sepulcrum) as thefabled monster (ὀλοόφρονος) The passage from Apollonius may have had further appeal as arare mention of the monstrous Scyllarsquos father since the relationship of father and daughter isat heart of the Latin poemrsquo Hollis ndash Lyne explained this simile in the Ciris lsquoas being due to theunskillful plagiarism of our poetrsquo from Stat Silv ndash


τράμπιος ὁλκαίης ἀκάτῳ ἴσος ἥ τε διrsquo ἅλμηςπλευρὸν ὅλον βάπτουσα κακοσταθέοντος ἀήτεωεἰς ἄνεμον βεβίηται ἀπόκρουστος λιβὸς οὔρῳ

Like the dinghy of a merchantman dipping its whole sidein the brine when the wind is contraryas it forces its way to windward(trans Gow Scholfield 1953)

Though hiding under the surface of the textrsquos literal meaning this sinister snakecannot but indicate to the attentive reader a far different course of metamorphoz-ing Scylla than that chosen by Amphitrite and the narrator In this way I wouldsuggest the Ciris poet acknowledges that once evoked a source text can neverbe completely obliterated once begun the process of reception will go on withinthe new text sometimes even against the authorrsquos will

As a conclusion I would like to offer tentatively some further thoughts onthe poetological implications of the Scylla myth as treated in the Ciris In a recentdiscussion of the figure of Scylla in classical Roman and Renaissance Englishpoetry Philip Hardie has pointed out that the duality of Scyllarsquos nature whichis particularly characteristic of Ovidrsquos version where she is turned into half-maid-en and half-monster reflects the readerrsquos ldquomore sophisticated response to poeticfictionsrdquo that ldquois divided between disbelief and the willing suspension of disbe-liefrdquo for ldquoin Ovidrsquos narrative of the actual transformation of Scylla the issue ofbelievability credulitas is transferred from the poetrsquos readers to the subject ofmetamorphosis herselfrdquosup3⁷ (Met 1459ndash63)

Scylla uenit mediaque tenus descenderat aluocum sua foedari latrantibus inguina monstrisadspicit ac primo credens non corporis illasesse sui partes refugitque abigitque timetqueora proterua canum sed quos fugit attrahit una

Then Scylla comes and wades waist-deep into the waterWhen all at once she sees her loins disfigured with barking monster-shapesAnd at first not believing that these are parts of her own bodyshe flees in fear and tries to drive awaythe boisterous barking things But what she flees she takes along with her(trans MillerGoold 1984 with minor adjustments)

Hardie also makes a relevant observation (this time from a slightly different per-spective) on what is the dividing plane of Scyllarsquos hybridity lsquoit is those parts of

Hardie b

286 Boris Kayachev

her body that lie beneath the surface of the water poisoned by Circersquos drugs thatundergo metamorphosisrsquosup3⁸ I would suggest that thus interpreted the quotedOvidian passage provides an excellent commentary on the way the Ciris poetdeals with variant images of Scylla(s) whether or not the Metamorphoses actual-ly postdate the Cirissup3⁹ Above the water surface that is on the literal level Scyllais a beautiful princess who is turned into a graceful bird beneath it that is onthe level of subtexts and hidden meanings she can be as monstrous and hid-eous as the Homeric beast Not only however does Ovid explicate this tensionbetween the explicit and the implicit in static terms he also depicts the dynam-ics of the reading process at first the reader can only see what is on the surfacebut gradually often against his own will and to his own disappointment he alsobecomes aware of various undertones potentially sinister and subversive ndash pro-vided of course that he looks beneath the surface at all

As noted above both the critic and the author can be thought of as readersand accordingly this pattern of progressing from the explicit to the implicit ischaracteristic of both the criticrsquos and the authorrsquos engagement with an earliertext At some point both the critic and the author lose control over the textthey are lsquoreadingrsquo which then takes over the initiative in creating ndashor sometimesdestroyingndash the meaning How to deal with this Scylla of uncontrollable intertex-tual associations is a question of great importance and moreover one that is acentral issue for the poetological agenda of the Ciris But to face it and escapethe fate of Odysseusrsquo companions we need be better equipped than we are at themoment In this paper I have tried to produce by focusing on a single case ofHomeric reception just one more piece of evidence that further demonstratesthe importance of taking into account the intertextual dimension of the CirisFor if we ignore it the Ciris as indeed any poem will turn into a lifeless ndashto re-turn to the Ovidian image (1473)ndash scopulum qui nunc quoque saxeus exstat

Hardie b Note that the collocation latrantibus inguina monstris is only attested at Ciris VergEcl and Ov Met


Andreas N Michalopoulos

Homer in LoveHomeric Reception in Propertius and Ovid

Macr Sat 631 quod quidem summus Homericae laudis cumulus est quod cum ita a pluri-mis adversus eum vigilatum sit coactaeque omnium vires manum contra fecerint ldquoIlle velutpelagi rupes inmota resistitrdquo

It is the peak of Homerrsquos glory that although he has been the target of a crowd of writers andhe has gathered against him this broad coalition however ldquolike a rock in the sea he remainsunshakenrdquo

According to Macrobius this would be the view of Servius the famous Virgiliancommentator about Homer and the timeless power of his poetry The Homericepics have been widely refigured and appropriated in the works of numerousGreek and Roman writers throughout the ages In Rome a great number of au-thors working on different literary genres have enriched their works with theuse of Homer Especially interesting is the Homeric reception in Latin loveelegy a genre of which the Romans were particularly proud considering it tobe a national creation surpassing its Greek counterpart (Quint Inst 10193)As regards its themes and poetics Latin love elegy is generically opposed toepic and claims for itself a clearly defined and independent space amongother literary genres Hence the treatment of the Homeric reception in such adissimilar genre is a fascinating challenge

In this paper I shall attempt to evaluate the reception of Homer in the elegiesof Propertius and in Ovidrsquos Amoressup1 This is certainly not a new field of researchhowever it offers a good opportunity for some useful observations I shall exam-ine which Homeric episodes and characters are more appealing to Propertiusand Ovid and why I shall also explore the type of elegiac context into which Ho-meric material is assimilated and the way in which this appropriationsup2 is ach-ieved I shall look into the objectives and the (meta)literary goals of theRoman elegists for appropriating Homeric material in their poems whether itbe characters scenes episodes or mere allusions Finally I shall seek to illus-trate the similarities and differences between Propertius and Ovid in their refigu-ration and reception of the Homeric epics

Tibullus the other great Roman elegist is more reserved in his use of Homeric material with thenotable exception of elegy which alludes to Odysseusrsquo stay at Alcinousrsquo palace on Phaeacia For the terms lsquoappropriationrsquo and lsquorefigurationrsquo see Hardwick ndash

Although Ovid was particularly fond of Tibullussup3 he also believed that he had alot in common with Propertius (Ov Tr 41045f) saepe suos solitus recitare Proper-tius ignes iure sodalicii quo mihi iunctus erat (lsquoOften Propertius would declaim hisflaming verse by right of the comradeship that joined him to mersquo transWheeler andGoold 19882) In their books of elegies ndashin fact at key positions usually at the begin-ning and at the end of a bookndash Propertius and Ovid voice their views about poetryIn these poems there are frequent references to Homer and his poetic value whichoffer a clear image as to what the Roman elegists really think of him

At 171ndash6 Propertius acknowledges Homerrsquos supremacy in epic poetry⁴ anddeclares ndashsomewhat humorously no doubt⁵ndash that his friend Ponticus who iswriting a new epic is competing with the grand master of epic poetry Neverthe-less Propertius as a praeceptor amoris⁶ clearly states his preference for elegy(cf also 1713ndash19)⁷ In a similar manner at 1911 f Propertius declares Mimner-musrsquo superiority to Homer in love matters⁸ and at 23445 f he asserts that theepic poetry of Antimachus and Homer is useless in love⁹ In 21 a typical elegiacrecusatiosup1⁰ Propertius mentions the Trojan War as a classic epic theme whichhowever he does not have the power to treat therefore he prefers elegy By thesame token at 3125ndash34 Propertius ndashadopting a well-known motif of Greek andLatin literaturesup1sup1ndash claims that the glory of Troy and of the heroes who foughtthere is due to Homer who won immortality through his poetry although evenHomer himself would not have become known had the war just endedsup1sup2

Ovid in turn at Am 1159 f defending his choice to write poetry and not topursue a military or legal career mentions Homer first in a long list of poets who

See Ov Am Tr ndash See Richardson ad loc Fedeli ad loc See Baker on Prop For Propertiusrsquo stance as a praeceptor amoris see Fedeli and Maltby ndash For the opposition between epic and elegy duritia and mollitia in Prop see Fedeli f and Kennedy ndash HeyworthMorwood f For the Gallan under-tones of the polemic between epic and elegy see Cairns a Mimnermus was considered to be the possible inventor of the elegiac distich and of elegy seeFedeli on Prop ndash On Mimnermusrsquo erotic poetry see Szaacutedeczky-Kardoss Onthe relation of Mimnermusrsquo poetry to the origins of Latin love elegy see Cairns b ndashFor the Callimachean colouring of Propertiusrsquo advice to Ponticus see Syndikus On the helplessness of the epic or tragic poet when he falls in love see Hollis andSyndikus n Other recusationes in Augustan poetry include Verg Ecl Hor Sat ndash Carm Prop ndash Ov Am For the recusationes in Ovidrsquos Amores in particularsee Deremetz ndash See Syndikus See HeyworthMorwood on Prop ndash

290 Andreas N Michalopoulos

will remain immortal thanks to their workssup1sup3 while in his dirge for Tibullusrsquodeath he states that although all poets eventually die even the great Homer him-self their works remain in eternity (Am 3925ndash30)

It is clear that both Propertius and Ovid in their lsquoseriousrsquo poems about poetryand poetics fully agree that Homer is the greatest epic poet beyond any doubtstill this does not alter their steadfast and irrevocable decision to write love el-egies They both have a very good reason for that this is the only kind of poetrythat will enable them to win the love of the puellae (the well-establishedNuumltzlichkeit motif)sup1⁴ despite the undeniable fact of course that love is presentin the Homeric epics too There are love triangles (Achilles-Briseis-Agamemnon)illicit extra-marital affairs (Paris-Helen Odysseus-Circe Odysseus-Calypso) andconjugal love (Hector-Andromache Odysseus-Penelope) This had been noted al-ready in antiquitysup1⁵ while Ovid highlighted the erotic content of the Homericpoems in order to support his case and defend his own love poetry against Au-gustusrsquo decision to banish him (Tr 21371ndash80) With remarkable outspokennesshe interpreted the Homeric epics in erotic termssup1⁶ he summarized the Iliad as thedispute between a husband and a lover over an adulterous wife and as the dis-pute between two leaders over Briseissup1⁷ he also summarized the Odyssey as thestory of Penelopersquos erotic siege by the suitors in the absence of her husbandMoreover he pointed out that the respectable Homer wrote about the love scan-

For Homer as the poet par excellence in Ovidrsquos poetry see Skiadas ff and McKeown on Am ndash who cites Am ff Ars f fTr Pont f Both Propertius and Ovid ndashTibullus too (ndash)ndash stress the unsuitability of epic poetryof Homer in particular for love matters whereas they emphasize the suitability of elegy for win-ning their beloved puellae For a comparison of elegy with other forms of poetry and for its prev-alence in matters of love see Stroh See also Stahl ndash on Propertiusrsquo use of theusefulness motif James ndash ndash notes that elegy is a poetry full of flatteries aim-ing at winning over the beloved and that the puellae prefer it to epic See also Reinhardt Syndikus n For the usefulness motif in Ovid and in particular its use inelegy which is inspired by Prop and Tib see Booth McKeown ndash James f See Ingleheart on Ov Tr ndash who cites Priapea AP ndash Other eroticreadings of the Iliad include Hor Carm ndash Prop ndash ndash Prop andash See Buchheit n with bibliography ad loc and n with examples Call-ebat on CP with bibiography See also Ingleheart on Ov Tr ndash According to Ingleheart on Tr ndash Ovid does not parody earlier literature toridicule Augustusrsquo interpretation of the Ars but reworks previous literature to emphasize ele-ments in it which anticipate Latin love elegy Cf Hor Epist f ff f Carm f Prop cited by Luck on OvTr ndash

Homer in Love Homeric Reception in Propertius and Ovid 291

dal of Aphrodite and Ares and about the love of two goddesses Calypso andCirce for the mortal Odysseus (Od 513 ff and 10133 ff)sup1⁸

Comparison of the poetic personawith Homeric heroes

For reasons of space I shall discuss a particular type of Homeric reception inPropertius and Ovid namely cases in which the poetic persona is comparedwith a certain Homeric herosup1⁹ In elegy 28 Propertius is mourning because Cyn-thia is now with somebody else The poet is so despaired that he declares hisdecision to die after killing her first He then narrates Achillesrsquo conduct after Aga-memnon took Briseis away from him (29ndash40)

ille etiam abrepta desertus coniuge Achillescessare in Teucris pertulit arma suaviderat ille fuga stratos in litore Achivosfervere et Hectorea Dorica castra faceviderat informem multa Patroclon harenaporrectum et sparsas caede iacere comasomnia formosam propter Briseida passustantus in erepto saevit amore dolorat postquam sera captivast reddita poenafortem illum Haemoniis Hectora traxit equisinferior multo cum sim vel matre vel armismirum si de me iure triumphat Amor

After his sweetheart was abducted lonely Achillesallowed his weapons to lie idle in his hutHe saw the Achaeans cut down in flight along the shorethe Greek camp ablaze with Hectorrsquos torchHe saw Patroclusrsquo mutilated body sprawledin the dust his locks matted with bloodhe endured all this for the sake of beautiful Breseisso cruel the grief when love is wrenched awayBut after late amends restored the captive to him

Ingleheart on Tr ndash juxtaposes Ovidrsquos summaries of the Iliad and the Odysseyto Horacersquos corresponding summaries (Epist ndash [the Iliad] and ndash [the Odyssey])and notes that Horacersquos focus ldquois narrowly ethicalrdquo Nevertheless at Sat ndash Horacenames Helenrsquos cunnus as the cause of the Trojan war On a wide variety of possible engagements with Homeric epic in antiquity see Graziosia ndash


he dragged the valiant Hector behind his Thessalian horsesSince I am far inferior to him in birth and battleno wonder love can triumph over me(trans Lee 1994 with adjustments)

Propertius portrays Achilles as a lover-fighter who in the name of love left hisfellow Greeks defenceless and even suffered to lose his closest friendPatroclussup2⁰ In only ten lines (42ndash50) Propertius summarizes a very big part ofthe Iliadsup2sup1 On a metapoetic level this compression is very indicative of the trans-formation and adaptation of the lengthy and grandiose epic into the narrow andhumble generic framework of elegy On the level of the story itself Propertiusrsquo ar-gument is based on the arbitrary and clearly elegiac interpretation that Achillesrsquoactions were dictated by his great love for the formosa Briseissup2sup2 and not by Aga-memnonrsquos huge insult to his personal honoursup2sup3 It is also worth noting that inorder to strengthen his argument Propertius calls Briseis the coniunx ldquowiferdquo ofAchilles (2829)sup2⁴ whereas she only was his slave a spoil of war (Il 9343δουρικτητή)sup2⁵ Nowhere in the Iliad is Briseis called the lsquowifersquo of Achilles exceptin lines 19297ndash99 where Briseis herself ndash but not the poet ndash recalls Patroclusrsquopromise that Achilles would take her back to Greece as his wife ἀλλά μrsquo ἔφασκεςAχιλλῆος θείοιο κουριδίην ἄλοχον θήσειν ἄξειν τrsquo ἐνὶ νηυσὶν ἐς Φθίην δαίσειν δὲγάμον μετὰ Μυρμιδόνεσσιsup2⁶

According to Knoche ndash there are three motifs as points of comparison betweenPropertius and Achilles the abduction of the beloved the pain suffered thereupon and the turnto extreme actions See also Fedeli on ndash For this summary of the Iliad and the one at Prop ndash which focuses on Briseisrsquo ab-duction by Agamemnon and its effect on Achilles and the Achaeans see Berthet In the Iliad Achilles declares his love for Briseis only once (ndash) however this serveshis goal to show that losing her is equal to Menelausrsquo loss of Helen See Hainsworth on Achillesrsquo relationship with Briseis was eroticized after Homer Ingleheart on OvTr ndash offers several parallels (Bacch ndash Prop ndash Ov Tr ndash Am ndash Her Ars ndash Rem ndash) and cites NisbetHubbard on Hor Carm ndash Noted in passing by Syndikus And this is not the only inaccuracy As Papanghe-lis f rightly notes lines f presuppose a version of the story with lsquoun-HomericemphasishellipΙn the Iliad the return of Briseis is not enough to bring Achilles back on the battlefieldnor is her return a condition for the latterrsquos reconciliation with Agamemnonrsquo Cf also Richardson on Prop ndash who attributes Propertiusrsquo distortion of the Iliadic account to theldquohalf-deliberate falsification of his fevered imaginationrdquo Cf Prop where Briseis is listed along with Penelope among the loyal and devoted wives See Richardson on Likewise at Il Achilles calls her his ἄλοχον θυμαρέα however this is a formulaic expres-sion and the term ἄλοχος of Briseis is surprising lsquosince the term normally denotes a wife (κουρίδιος


Propertius re-reads and reinterprets the heroic epic through his personal el-egiac viewpoint and transfigures it through the elegiac-erotic system of valuesThe epic system of values is pushed to the margin or rather is reshaped in elegiacmanner Achillesrsquo personal honour which suffered badly by Agamemnon andbecame the main theme of the greatest Greek epic has no place in the elegiacworld Propertius adjusts the epic system of values to his own case in orderto serve his goal which is clearly stated at lines 39 f in the form of an ex minoriargument since such an important hero and fighter (armis) of divine origin(matre Thetis) behaved in this way because of love ndashor at least this is what Prop-ertius believes and wants us to believendash why is it strange for him to become avictim in the triumph of the god Amorsup2⁷

Propertius returns to Achilles in elegy 222a where he explains to his friendDemophoon that his passion for women neither weakens him nor wears himdown on the contrary he is ready to take up any kind of erotic challenge Tostrengthen his point he once again draws an exemplum from the Iliad thistime adding Hector to the picture Propertius portrays Achilles and Hector as her-oes who distinguished themselves in war despite the fact that they enjoyed thelove of Briseis and Andromache respectively before going to battle (222a29ndash34)

quid cum e complexu Briseidos iret Achillesnum fugere minus Thessala tela Phrygesquid ferus Andromachae lecto cum surgeret Hectorbella Mycenaeae non timuere ratesilli vel classes poterant vel perdere muroshic ego Pelides hic ferus Hector ego

Think of Achilles when he left Briseisrsquo embrace ndashdid the Trojans stop running from his spearOr when fierce Hector rose from Andromachersquos beddidnrsquot Mycenaean ships fear battleThose heroes could destroy barriers and fleetsin my field Irsquom fierce Hector and Achilles(trans Lee 1994 with adjustments)

Once again Propertiusrsquo appropriation of Homer is clearly elegiac and erotic Onthe one hand he acknowledges the military prowess of the two top fighters ofthe Greeks and the Trojans who wreak havoc on their opponents In this respect

is its regular epithet) and is contrasted with δούλη ldquoconcubinerdquo at rsquo see Hainsworth onIl Ovid picks up this relationship in Briseisrsquo letter to Achilles (Her f ) Whitaker notes that Achillesrsquo success serves to demonstrate the hopelessness ofPropertiusrsquo case


he is consistent with the epic tradition On the other hand Propertius associatestheir bravery and effectiveness in war with their erotic activity and this is ofcourse unprecedented and subversive Achillesrsquo and Hectorrsquos sexual activitydoes not affect their military activity in the least in fact their military successmatches their success in bed To put it a bit more boldly their sexual activity ac-tually enhances their military prowess

To take it even further one may also detect a sexual innuendo in Propertiusrsquoreference to Achillesrsquo military valour The use of the noun telum (30) is perfectlynormal for Achillesrsquo arms at the same time however this is a well-establishedsexual euphemism for lsquopenisrsquosup2⁸ Since in the previous line Propertius refers toAchillesrsquo intercourse with Briseis it is not hard for the Roman readers whoare well-versed in such matters to make the proper associations and recognizethe allusion

This is a very symptomatic case of the elegiac ldquodeflationrdquo of heroic epic es-pecially as regards the top two heroes of the Iliad Nowhere in the Iliad is there areference to the sexual union of Achilles and Briseissup2⁹ or of Hector andAndromachesup3⁰ Far from it Hector the protector of Troy reprimands his brotherParis for indulging in lovesup3sup1 or for spending his time fondling his armour (6321 f)and neglecting his military dutiessup3sup2 The conversion of Achilles and Hector intolovers-fighters is their passport into the world of elegy and is achieved throughthe militia amoris motifsup3sup3 the lover is compared with a soldier in the service ei-

See Adams According to A Arding to ndash demonstrate Propertiusrsquoamong omerlove of the puellaeOtto the scene of Achilles going to battle from the arms of Briseis may be posthomericor Hellenistic whereas Whitaker assumes that it may have been invented by Proper-tiusrsquo ldquohumorous ingenuityrdquo At Il ndash Agamemnon swears that he did not sleep with Bri-seis Cf Andromachersquos words to Hector at their last meeting (Il ndash in particular f)Ἕκτορ ἀτὰρ σύ μοί ἐσσι πατὴρ καὶ πότνια μήτηρ ἠδὲ κασίγνητος σὺ δέ μοι θαλερὸς παρακοίτηςldquoΠαρακοίτηςrdquomeans lsquohusbandrsquo not lsquoloverrsquo (LSJ sv) For this passage see also Georgopoulou inthis volume Cf also Prop ndash for Parisrsquo erotic battles with Helen as a detailed development of thetheme of militia amoris with Maltby f Hector often blames Paris for starting the war and reprimands him for his passiveness andhis unwillingness to take part in the battle (Il ndash ndash ndash) For these pas-sages see also Karamanou in this volume Ovid treats the motif of the militia amoris extensively in Am For the motif see Brandt on Οv Am Spies La Penna ndash Thomas Baker Murga-troyd and on Tib ndash Lier f Fedeli on Prop Lyne ndash ndash Cairns Cahoon Bellido Maltby on Tib f


ther of the god Amor or of his beloved Thanks to this motif epic and elegy twoapparently disparate genres unexpectedly display common features within thecultural and literary landscape of Augustan Rome

Apart from highlighting Achillesrsquo and Hectorrsquos love life which is bold andinnovative as such Propertius moves a step furtherWhereas in the case just dis-cussed (2829ndash40) he had set up an ex minori argument stating that he was in-ferior to Achilles now (222a34) he does not hesitate to equate himself with Ili-adrsquos top heroes His approach is cheeky and irreverentsup3⁴ he calls himself ferusHector and adopts the epic and grandiose patronymic Pelides

I shall soon get back to Propertius but for the moment I am going to discussHomerrsquos reception in Ovidrsquos AmoresWriting after Propertius and Tibullus Ovidhad the opportunity ndashand also felt the needndash to renovate the genre of loveelegy His novel approach is evident in the way he appropriates and refigures Ho-meric epic material a very suggestive example is provided in Amores 17 Ovid isfurious and blames himself for beating his belovedsup3⁵ After noting that even withher disheveled hair his mistress is most beautiful (he likens her with AtalantaAriadne and Cassandra at 1711ndash 18) he denounces his hands as sacrilegious(1727ndash28) and makes a very interesting comparison (1731ndash34)

pessima Tydides scelerum monimenta reliquitille deam primus perculit alter egoet minus ille nocens mihi quam profitebar amarelaesa est Tydides saevus in hoste fuitDiomedesrsquo crime set the worst examplehe first to strike a goddess second meHis guilt was less I harmed the girl I professed to loveDiomedes raged against his enemy(trans Melville 1990 with minor adjustments)

Ovid compares his crimesup3⁶ with Aphroditersquos injury by Diomedes while she wastrying to save her son Aeneas from certain death (Il 5297ndash351) This is probablythe most typical case of sacrilege in literary tradition In order to imbue his versewith epic colour Ovid calls Diomedes by the grandiose patronymic Tydidessup3⁷First he equates himself with the great epic hero (31 f) yet another cheeky appli-

For Propertiusrsquo humour at f see Papanghelis Heyworth picksup Propertiusrsquo humorous intention when he calls himself Achilles and Hector in love See also Michalopoulos For the peccatorum comparatio see McKeownrsquos detailed discussion on Ov Am ndash Cf Propertiusrsquo use of the patronymic Pelides for Achilles at a discussed above


cation of the militia amoris motif Necessary for this equation is the equally boldequation of his beloved puella with Aphrodite within the framework of anotherwell-established elegiac motif the puella divina motifsup3⁸

Ovid however does not stop here In the following couplet he claims that heis more sacrilegious than Diomedes His argument is that whereas the son of Ty-deus (Tydides again) attacked an enemy ndashAphrodite fighting on the Trojan sidendashhe attacked the woman he claimed to love Through this sophistic exaggeration(hyperbole) Ovid portrays himself as historyrsquos worst criminal Humour is effort-lessly producedsup3⁹

Nevertheless this is not just another appropriation of Homeric materialwithin a mythological exemplum The comparison between Diomedes and Ovidis also a comparison (and conflict) between two genres epic and elegy Ovid(the elegist) is shown to be bolder than Homer (the epic poet) the elegiac writingand way of life (ἐρωτικῶς ζῆν καὶ ἐλεγειακῶς γράφειν) is shown to be more ad-vanced than epic writing and the military world of epic Elegy surpasses epicand moves into an area where epic had not dared to go Love and love poetryappear to be more dangerous than epic which had been the military and violentgenre par excellence so far Ovid brings elegy to a higher level

Before Ovid Propertius too had shown the will to outdo epic by refiguring itin fact he does that in a particularly erotic elegy 214 The poet is excited andcelebrates a night of love with Cynthia The beginning of the poem is really im-pressive in four successive couplets each beginning in a similar or identical way(non ita and nec sic x3)⁴⁰ Propertius proudly states that his joy surpasses the joyof famous literary persons at the peak of their success (2141ndash8)⁴sup1

See Lieberg passim Kost on Musaeus Sabot ff Lyne n Cf also Prop (vel in sanctos verbera ferre deos) and Ov Am f (quid mihi vo-biscum caedis scelerumque ministraedebita sacrilegae vincla subite manus) where Ovid pre-pares the way for the portrayal of his beloved as a goddess See Barsby

See McKeown and Whitaker on Ovidrsquos flippant irreverent wit For Proper-tiusrsquo influence on Ovidrsquos Amores see Berman and Du Quesnay Morgan McKeown ndash Boyd OrsquoNeill Heyworth See Syndikus Whitaker points out that the mythological exempla at the beginning of the poemare closely associated with Propertiusrsquo case since they illustrate not only his excessive happi-ness at his erotic success but also his joy won after ldquolong hard toilrdquo Many scholars have rightlynoted that these exempla are somewhat ambivalent since the careers of these mythological fig-ures were marred by unpleasant events See Lyne Ruhl ndash Syndikus and Heyworth


Non ita Dardanio gavisus Atrida triumphorsquoscum caderent magnae Laomedontis opesnec sic errore exacto laetatus Ulixescum tetigit carae litora Dulichiaenec sic Electra salvum cum aspexit Orestencuius falsa tenens fleverat ossa sorornec sic cum incolumem Minois Thesea viditDaedalium lino cui duce rexit iterquanta ego praeterita collegi gaudia nocteimmortalis ero si altera talis erit

ldquoAtridesrsquo pride in his triumph over Troywhen Laomedonrsquos great power collapsedUlyssesrsquo delight at the end of his wanderingswhen he touched the beloved shore of DulichiaElectrarsquos when she saw her brother Orestes safewhile she was weeping over his false bonesAriadnersquos when she saw Theseus unharmed led backby flaxen thread from his Daedalian quest-these joys were less keen than my rapture last nightanother such will make me immortal(trans Lee 1994 with adjustments)

In lines 5ndash8 Propertius treats non-Homeric exempla he states that his joy isgreater than Electrarsquos when she saw her brother Orestes alive and greaterthan Ariadnersquos when she saw Theseus emerging from the labyrinth I shallfocus on the first two ldquoHomericrdquo couplets which are in any case more importantbecause of their prominent position Strikingly enough Propertius measureshimself against Agamemnon and Odysseus and claims that his own joy for hisintercourse with Cynthia surpasses their joy when they finally managed to ach-ieve their goals Agamemnon to capture Troy after ten years of war and Odysseusto return to Ithaca after twenty years of absence

This is one of the most characteristic cases of Homeric reception in elegiaccontext Once again the reception follows the rules of the lsquohumblerrsquo genre Aga-memnon and Odysseus ie the Iliad and the Odyssey are considered inferior toPropertius ie inferior to elegy itself Subjectivity a defining feature of elegyprevails over epic objectivity Triumphantly irreverently and cheekily elegy andPropertiusrsquo love life are placed above Homer his great epics (the Iliad and theOdyssey) and his great heroes (Agamemnon and Odysseus)

On the whole the following conclusions may be drawn about the Homericreception in the elegists Propertius and Ovid


(i) Although the two genres epic and elegy are directly opposed to each otheras regards their themes and poetics Propertius and Ovid frequently appro-priate Homeric material in their elegies

(ii) In their poetological elegies both poets pay their respects to Homer and ac-knowledge him as an unsurpassable epic poet avoiding direct comparisonwith him Nevertheless they defend resolutely their choice to write love ele-gies

(iii) Despite their respect for Homer and his poetry Propertius and Ovid do notrefrain from adopting and refiguring Homeric characters and episodes withhumour liberty and irreverence The elegists do not feel inferior to epic onthe contrary they feel confident to measure themselves against it⁴sup2

(iv) The elegists compare themselves with emblematic Homeric heroes andprove to be better superior or sometimes inferior to them By comparingthemselves with the great and famous epic heroes the elegists automatical-ly acquire a higher status

(v) The confrontation between epic and elegy takes place at the highest levelsince the elegists mostly prefer top Homeric heroes such as Achilles Aga-memnon and Hector

(vi) Propertius is more reserved towards Homer in his first book of elegiesThen in his second and third book when he has gained confidence afterentering the circle of Maecenas he feels able to emulate with epic andto highlight both his own poetic power and the power of elegy On theother hand Ovid does not display ldquoself-restraintrdquo because when he startswriting the Amores elegy he is already well-established in the literaryscene and has acquired his own means of expression and his own partic-ular voice As a result Ovid is cheekier and more irreverent than Proper-tius towards Homeric epics

(vii) The elegists strive to create their own system of values and ideas within anantagonistic context They define themselves and their genre through com-parison with other genres and writers The comparison with epic consti-tutes a means of conquering new literary ground

(viii) The elegists interpret Homer from the firmly subjective and erotic stand-point of elegy They accommodate Homeric heroes into their elegies bymeans of emphasizing their love life rather than their military statusRoman elegy challenges epic conventions and deflates epic values Theepic poem epic heroes and epic episodes are all being ldquoelegizedrdquo The ac-

On Virgilrsquos similar confidence in his aemulatio with Homer see Armstrong


tions of Homeric heroes become an example that elegiac lovers and theirmistresses should either imitate or avoid

(ix) The fact that Homeric epics can be appropriated and assimilated into di-verse genres and contexts illustrates their superior merit and their classicquality Through an elegiac and metaliterary reading and by means of lit-erary creativity and innovation Homeric texts can constantly generate newinterpretations and meanings

(x) It is manifest that the elegists enjoy playing with epic transforming it re-reading it and reinterpreting it from an elegiac perspective This is a con-frontation of poets genres themes and poetics The elegists are well awareof the fact that they deal with something ldquosacredrdquo ldquoloftyrdquo and ever-present⁴sup3 yet they enjoy using it with liberty and irreverence This is liter-ary emancipation artistic creativity and ingenuity at its best

Hardwick rightly claims that reception is proof that classical texts images andideas are culturally active presences


Part VI Homeric Scholarship at the Intersectionof Traditions

Robert Maltby

Homer in Servius A Judgement on Serviusas a Commentator on Virgil

When the late lamented Professor Harry Jocelyn was asked by a keen researchstudent which was the best commentary on Virgil he is said to have replied with-out hesitation lsquoServiusrsquo The purpose of the present paper on Serviusrsquo intertex-tual references to Homer is to show that this magisterial judgement cannot per-haps be accepted without some qualification

When individual passages of Homer and Virgil are compared in Servius orin the later scholar known as Servius auctus or Servius Danielis who augmentedhis Servius with material found in earlier commentaries such as that now lostof Donatus the modern reader especially one well versed in the sophisticatedgames of contemporary literary criticism may at first be shocked by the apparentnaivety and literal-mindedness of the comments he finds The reason for this is Ithink two-fold Firstly the ancient commentators looked upon the epic narra-tives of Homer and Virgil as in some real sense historical rather than mytholog-icalWhat was important above all in such a context was that the author shouldget his facts right The narrative should give a plausible account of events withthe correct characters carrying out the right actions in the right order for the rightreasonsWhen passages are compared an important criterion of literary worth isthe historical credibility of the narrative The second concern of these commen-tators was one of generic appropriateness Each genre as Servius tells us in hisprefaces to the Aeneid and the Eclogues of Virgil has an appropriate style andcontent humilis for pastoral medius for the didactic and grandiloquus forepicsup1 Failure to make the style and content of a particular passage appropriateto the lofty requirements of epic either on the part of Homer or on the part ofVirgil will entail the commentatorrsquos censure The four concrete examples that fol-low will serve to illustrate these points

Serv Aen praef p (Thilo-Hagen) scimus enim tria esse genera dicendi humile mediumgrandiloquum Serv Ecl praef p ndash tres enim sunt characteres humilis medius gran-diloquus quos omnes in hoc inuenimus poeta nam in Aeneide grandiloquum habet in geor-gicis medium in bucolicis humilem See further Maltby

a A Storm at Sea

Verg Aen 192ndash96

extemplo Aeneae soluuntur frigore membraingemit et duplicis tendens ad sidera palmastalia uoce refert lsquoO terque quaterque beatiquis ante ora patrum Troiae sub moenibus altiscontigit oppetere

Straightaway Aeneasrsquo limbs weaken with chilling dreadhe groans and stretching his two upturned hands to heaventhus cries aloud lsquoO three and four times blessedwhose lot it was to meet death before their fathersrsquo eyesbeneath the lofty walls of Troyrsquo(trans Fairclough Goold 1999 with minor adjustments)

Hom Od 5406ndash07

καὶ τότrsquo ᾿Οδυσσῆος λύτο γούνατα καὶ φίλον ἧτορὀχθήσας δrsquoἄρα εἶπε πρὸς ὃν μεγαλήτορα θυμόν

Then the knees of Odysseus were loosened and his heart meltedand deeply moved he spoke to his own mighty spirit(trans Murray Dimock 1995 with minor adjustments)

Serv auct Aen 192 reprehenditur sane hoc loco Vergilius quod improprie hos versus Homeritranstulerit (Od 5406ndash7) καὶ τότrsquo ᾿Οδυσσῆος λύτο γούνατα καὶ φίλον ἧτορ ὀχθήσας δrsquoἄραεἶπε πρὸς ὃν μεγαλήτορα θυμόν nam lsquosoluuntur frigore membrarsquo longe aliud est quam λύτογούνατα et lsquoduplices tendens ad sidera palmas talia uoce refertrsquo molle cum illud magisaltum et heroicae personae πρὸς ὃν μεγαλήτορα θυμόν praetera quis interdiu manus ad side-ra tollit aut quis ad caelum manum tendens non aliud precatur potius quam dicit lsquoo terquequaterque beatirsquo et ille intra se ne exaudiant socii et timidiores despondeant animo hic verovociferatur

In his comment on Aen 192 comparing Virgilrsquos account of the storm at sea stirredup for Aeneas and his comrades by Aeolus at the bidding of Juno in Aen 180 ffwith the storm sent against Odysseus by Poseidon in Od 5291 ff Servius auctussup2

draws a detailed comparison with Od 5406ndash07 to the disadvantage of VirgilVirgil he says has not translated his original properly (improprie) Soluuntur fri-gore membra lsquohis limbs dissolved with chill (dread)rsquo is in his view quite different

Following the convention of Thilo-Hagen edition comments from Servius auctus are printedin italics to distinguish them from those of Servius himself printed in roman type

304 Robert Maltby

from λύτο γούνατα lsquohis knees were loosenedrsquo His first criticism of Virgil then isone of loose translation Next duplices tendens ad sidera palmas talia uoce refertlsquostretching his two palms to the stars he cries out thusrsquo is according to Serviusauctus lsquosoftrsquo (molle) in comparison with Homerrsquos πρὸς ὃν μεγαλήτορα θυμόνwhich he sees as higher style (altum) and more fitting for a heroic characterHis second criticism of Virgil then is that he uses of the wrong stylistic levelVirgil fails to achieve the lofty tone of his original Finally the commentator ac-cuses Virgil of lacking narrative credibility Who in the daytime (interdiu) heasks would lift their hands to the stars And if you were lifting your hands tothe stars who would say lsquoThree and four times lucky were they to diersquo insteadof uttering the expected supplication Lastly Homer makes Odysseus speak tohimself so his comrades do not hear and become despondent whereas Aeneasblurts out his pain in front of them Overall the comment on Aen 192 provides agood illustration of Servius auctusrsquo dual concern for narrative credibility and sty-listic appropriateness Macrobius at a later date compares the same two passagesin his Saturnalia but has little to add apart from the fact that Virgil takes thefreezing with fear metaphor from elsewhere in Homersup3

Keeping with the storm scene and the question of narrative credibility weturn now to Serviusrsquo comment on Aen 185 concerning the winds that were blow-ing Looking first at Verg Aen 184ndash86

incubuere mari totumque a sedibus imisuna Eurusque Notusque runt creberque procellisAfricus et vastos volvunt ad litora fluctus

They swoop down upon the sea and from its lowest depthsupheave it all East wind and Southand the African gale thick with tempests and shoreward roll vast billows(trans FaircloughGoold 1999 with adjustments)

and comparing it with Hom Od 5295ndash96

σὺν δrsquo Εὖρός τε Νότος τrsquo ἔπεσον Ζέφυρός τε δυσαὴςκαὶ Βορέης αἰθρηγενέτης μέγα κῦμα κυλίνδων

The East Wind and the South Wind clashed together and the fierce-blowing West Windand the North Wind born in the bright heaven rolling before him a mighty wave(trans Murray Dimock 1995 with minor adjustments)

Macrob Sat καὶ τότrsquo ᾿Οδυσσῆος λύτο γούνατα καὶ φίλον ἧτορ (Od ) et alibi Αἴαςδrsquoἐρρίγησε κασιγνήτοιο πεσόντος (Il + Il ) hic de duobus unum fabricatus est ex-templo Aeneae soluuntur frigore membra (Aen )

Homer in Servius A Judgement on Servius as a Commentator on Virgil 305

we see that Homer has four winds East (Euros) South (Notos) West (Zephyros)and North (Boreas) one that is from each point of the compass whereas Virgilhas only three Euros and Notos just like Homer but then missing out Zephyrosthe West wind which is replaced by Africus the South West wind and not men-tioning the North wind (AquiloBoreas) at all Servius tells us that the Northwind is picked up later by Virgil at Aen 1102

Serv Aen 185 EVRVSQVE NOTVSQVE cardinales quattuor uenti sunt de quibus nunc tresponit paulo post unum quem omiserat reddit (Aen 1102) lsquostridens Aquilone procellarsquo

This point is missed by Servius auctus who comments on the line as follows

Serv auct Aen 185 EVRVSQVE NOTVSQVE ET AFRICUS bene modo hos tres uentos inferi-ores tantum nominauit qui a sedibus imis mare commouent Zephyrum et Aquilonem tacuitZephyrum qui ad Italiam ducit Aquilonem qui desuper flat ideo Homerus de eo Od5296 καὶβορέης αἰθρηγενέτης μέγα κῦμα κυλίνδων

Modern critics like Austin are not worried by the choice of winds here Accordingto them Virgil is just putting together an epic storm without any realistic mete-orological considerations on wind direction The ancients however were moreliteral-minded Seneca sees the passage as unrealistic because all these windscould not blow together the same time (as Aristotle had shown) complaininghoc non fieri potest⁴ and this literal view of literary criticism is again reflectedin Servius auctus who this time praises Virgil for omitting the West wind Zeph-yr because it would blow Aeneas back to Italy and the North wind Aquilo be-cause it blows vertically down desuper flat This literal approach persists withearlier modern editors who from the time of Mackail praise Virgil for giving agood description of a Mediterranean cyclone a view supported by Conwaywho gives us a vivid account of his personal experience in suffering one How-ever wrong-minded the Servius auctus comment is here and I offer it as anotherexample of the concern of ancient commentators for narrative credibility

b The Cyclopes

A similar case concerns Servius auctusrsquo comments on Aeneasrsquo visit to the land ofthe Cyclopes and his meeting with one of Odysseus crew Achaemenides who

On the impossibility of all the winds blowing at the same time see Arist Met a δῆλονὅτι ἅμα πνεῖν τοὺς μὲν ἐναντίους οὐχ οἷόν τε and Sen QN quod fieri nullo modo potest

306 Robert Maltby

had been left behind when Odysseus and the remainder of the Greeks had sailedaway (on this episode see Ch Michalopoulos in this volume)

Serv auct Aen 3590 CVM SVBITO E SILVIS arguitur in hac Achaemenidis descriptione Ver-gilius neglegentiae Homericae narrationis Ulixes enim inter initia erroris sui ad Cyclopasuenit quemadmodum ergo Aeneas post septimum annum quem a Troia profectus est soci-um Ulixis inuenit praesertim cum eum tribus mensibus in regione Cyclopum dicat moratumet mox Aeneas de Sicilia ad Africam uenisse dicatur

Here Servius auctus tells us that fault is found (arguitur) with Virgil in his de-scription of Achaemenides for ignorance of the Homeric narrative at thispoint He does not say who finds fault but such criticisms may well originatewith one of the first century AD commentators on Virgil Here the problem isone of chronology Odysseus visited the Cyclopes at the beginning of his journeyhome from Troy (inter initia erroris) according to Homer whereas according toVirgil Aeneas only reached their land seven years after setting sail from TroyAchaemenides himself says at Aen 3645 that he has only been there threemonths⁵ Similar criticism is found in Servius

Serv Aen 3623 VIDI EGOMET DVO Homerus (Od 9289 and 311) quattuor dicit ergo autdissentit ab eo ut etiam in temporibus nam ante ad Siciliam Aeneas quam Ulixes uenissedicitur aut certe hoc dicit duo uidisse se quot autem occiderit ignorare

Serv Aen 3678 AETNAEOS FRATRES aut similes aut feritate germanoshellipnam non sunt Pol-yphemi fratres quem Neptuni filium Homerus dicit (Od 168 ff) unde eo occaecato Ulixespertulit tempestatem qui ad eum uenit derelicta Calypso cum qua decem annis fueratunde ut supra (ad 3623) diximus Vergilii dictis dissentit temporum ratio

But Servius here offers a different (and wrong) chronological discrepancy with Ae-neas arriving before Odysseus The criticism here then as in 3623 on how many ofAchaemenides colleagues were killed and in 3678 on whether the Cyclopes werebrothers is based on a belief that Homerrsquos version of events is correct and departurefrom this narrative by Virgil is a sign of negligence Servius however in his notes onboth 3623 and 3678 makes some attempt to square the Homeric and Virgilian ac-counts A possible difference here is emerging between Servius auctus who aswe saw in his discussion of the storm at sea is willing to criticise Virgil openlyand Servius himself who in both cases offers Virgil an excuse

Verg Aen (Achaemenides) tertia iam lunae se cornua lumine complent


c Jove threatens Juno

Our third example moves on from arguments about the credibility of narrative tothe question of stylistic appropriateness that was touched upon earlier under (a)above

In this case in his comment on Aen 9801 describing Jupiterrsquos threat sent viaIris to Juno not to help Turnus in the fight Servius argues that Virgil is betterthan Homer

Serv Aen 9801 HAVD MOLLIA IVSSA FERENTEM melius quam Homerus (Il 8402 ff) hunclocum executus est saluo enim sensu uitauit et fabulosa et uilia nam ille ipsas minas ex-sequitur

The passage from Homer he has in mind is Il 8402 ff where Zeus sends Iris towarn Athena and Hera not to help the Greeks

γυιώσω μέν σφωϊν ὑφrsquo ἁρμασιν ὠκέας ἵππουςαὐτὰς δrsquo ἐκ δίφρου βαλέω κατά θrsquo ἅρματα ἄξωmiddotοὐδέ κεν ἐς δεκάτους περιτελλομένους ἐνιαυτοὺςἕλκεrsquo ἀπαλθήσεσθον ἅ κεν μάρπτῃσι κεραυνόςmiddot(Il 8402ndash05)

I shall maim their swift horses beneath the chariothurl them from the chariot and shatter it to piecesnor in ten yearsrsquo circuitwill they be healed of the wounds which the thunderbolt inflicts(trans MurrayWyatt 1999 with adjustments)

In the Virgil passage in question Jupiter sends Iris with haud mollia iussa to Junowithout spelling out what these harsh commands are

nec contra uiris audit Saturnia Iunosufficere aeriam caelo nam Iuppiter Irimdemisit germanae haud mollia iussa ferentemni Turnus cedat Teucrorum moenibus altis(Verg Aen 9802ndash05)

And Saturnian Juno did not dare grant him strength to oppose themfor Jupiter sent Iris down through the sky from heavencharged with no gentle commands for his sistershould Turnus not leave the Teucriansrsquo lofty ramparts(trans Fairclough Goold 1999 with minor adjustments)

308 Robert Maltby

In Homer however Zeus is more specific he will maim the goddessesrsquo swifthorses hurl them from their chariot smash it to smithereens with his thunder-bolt and inflict such wounds as will take ten years to heal Here then Virgil ispraised for suggesting horrible punishment without actually spelling it out Forto spell out the threats in the way Homer does is in Serviusrsquo view to includewithin the narrative elements that are fabulosa and uilia lsquodifficult to creditrsquoand lsquoof a low stylersquo not compatible with the dignity of epic In fact it couldbe argued that both Virgil and Homer have plenty of elements that are fabulosaand uilia throughout their epics but what is important here is the ancient criticsrsquobelief that an appropriately elevated epic style and content should be main-tained at all times Again the positive comments on Virgil tend to come from Ser-vius rather than Servius auctus who is happier to relay criticism

d Even Homer nods

One of these criticisms comes in Servius auctusrsquo note on 12538

Servauct Aen 12 538 CRETHEV hellipet quidam reprehendunt poetam hoc loco quod in nominuminuentione deficitur iam enim in 9771 sq Crethea a Turno occisum induxit ut 775 lsquoCrethea Mu-sarum comitemrsquo sed et Homerus et Pylaemenem et Adrastum bis ponit et alios complures

Again as with the vague reprehenditur in his note on Aen 192 and with arguiturin that on 3590 here the vague quidam seems to refer back to unspecified anti-Virgilian critics of an earlier age In this case Virgil is guilty of killing off thesame warrior twice Cretheus in fact had already been killed by Turnus atAen 9771 and here he is again falling to the same warrior at 12538 This consti-tutes a serious slip in narrative credibility but one which even Servius auctus iswilling to admit that it occurs frequently enough in Homer as he illustrates withthe cases of Pylaemenes Adrastus and others This perhaps is one of the incon-sistencies Virgil himself would have corrected had he lived long enough to editthe final version of his poem

The two remaining detailed comparisons of Homer and Virgil in Servius canbe treated more briefly


e The shields of Aeneas and Achilles

The shield of Achilles is described by Homer as lsquoshiningrsquo or lsquoflashingrsquo μαρμαρέην(Il 18480) and μαρμαίροντα (Il 18617) and this provokes from the commenta-tors on Virgilrsquos description of Aeneasrsquo shield the following comments

Serv Aen 8527 non autem mirum est a Venere allatis armis inesse fulgorem nam Homerusdicit a Thetide oblata arma habere motum quondam et spiritum quae duo in aqua essemanifestum est Thetidem autem nouimus nympham esse

Serv auct Aen 8529 PVLSATONARE recte arma quae iisdem ignibus quibus fulmina factasunt ait tonare pulsa et hic magis proprie quam Homerus ille enim spirare ait et moueri hicvero armis Aeneae caelestem sonitum dedit unde ueniebant

In a reversal of the trend mentioned above it is here Servius auctus who finds Vir-gilrsquos description more fitting than that of Homer Aeneasrsquo shield thunders whenstruck revealing its divine origin in the forge of Hephaestus maker of thunderboltsServius by contrast finds good points in both descriptions with Homerrsquos epithetsrelating Achillesrsquo shield with his mother Thetis the shining sea nymph

A little later in the same passage Servius auctus approves of the fact that Vir-gil unlike Homer does not describe in detail the shield before it is brought toAeneas For him Homerrsquos long description is unconvincing as it suggests thatthe shield can be made as quickly as it can be described

Serv auct Aen 8625 sane interest inter hunc et Homeri clipeum illic enim singularia dumfiunt narrantur hic uero pro perfecto opere noscuntur nam et hic arma prius accipit Aeneasquam spectaret ibi postquam omnia narrata sunt sic a Thetide deferuntur ad Achillem op-portune ergo fecit Vergilius quia non uidetur simul et narrationis celeritas potuisse conecti etopus tam uelociter expediri ut ad uerbum posset occurrere

f The flaming helmets of Aeneas and Diomedes

At Aen 10270ndash75 the flames flashing from Aeneasrsquo helmet are likened to thebaleful blood-red glow of a comet in the night sky or to the ill-omened Dog-star (Sirius) which threatens mortals with drought and plague The shining hel-met element of this comparison comes from Il 54ndash6 where Athena causes abright light to shine from Diomedesrsquo helmet and shield which is likened tothe Dog-star⁶ Servius is correct in seeing that the passage in Il 54ndash6 does

For Virgilrsquos fondness for imitating this passage see Macr Sat hoc (ie Il ) mir-

310 Robert Maltby

not mention any baleful effects of the Dog-star whereas Virgil mentions such ef-fects to foreshadow the doom to be brought by Aeneas on the Rutulians

Serv Aen 10270 ARDET APEX CAPITI hellip est autem Homeri (Il 54) et locus et comparatiohoc autem iste uiolentius posuit quod ille stellae tantum facit comparationem hic etiamstellae pestiferae respiciens quas clades Rutulis sit inlaturus Aeneas

But what the commentator has missed is that Virgil here is combining theIl 54ndash6 reference with a reference to Il 2226ndash31 where the bronze breastplate of Achilles as he pursues Hector shines like the Dog-star which bringsfever to wretched mortals in a double allusion technique common in Virgilwhich we saw mentioned by Macrobius above (n 3)

All six passages where significant literary comparisons are made betweenVirgil and Homer in Servius or Servius auctus have now been discussedThese I think throw significant light on the differences between modern and an-cient concerns in this area as well as illustrating some interesting if less funda-mental distinctions between Servius and Servius auctus with the former on thewhole being less willing to criticize Virgil than the latter

g Concluding statistics on mentions of Homerin Servius

In order to set the six detailed comparisons discussed above in context I set outhere in descending order of frequency all the types of Homeric reference occur-ring in Servius and Servius auctus There are in all some 151 references in whichHomer is actually named in Servius and 37 in Servius auctus By far the majorityof these are concerned with showing that Virgil follows Homer either in plot eg

Serv Aen 14 VI SVPERVM uiolentia deorum secundum Homerum qui dicit a Iunone ro-gatos esse deos in odium Trioanorum

Serv 57 = 38 Serv auct 8 = 22

atus supra modum Virgilius immodice est usus (Aen [Turnus] Aen [Aeneas])


or in translating a Homeric word or phrase eg

Serv Aen 1379 fama super aethera notus Od 919 καί μευ κλέος οὐρανὸν ἵκει


The third most common category in both is where Homer is used to establishsome factual point for example that Homeric heroes did not recline to eatbut simply sat or that Hera (Juno) commonly made use of a chariot in war eg

Serv Aen 117 CVRRVS aut uere currum quo secundum Homerum in bello utitur (sc Iuno)significat


The detailed literary comparisons which form the main discussion of this paperabove come next in frequency They constitute a relatively low proportion of allHomeric references for Servius 3= 2 with a much higher proportion (6=16)coming from Servius auctus who as we have seen is less hesitant about relay-ing criticism of Virgil

Next in frequency come comments on differences between Virgil and Homerwhich are far fewer than those on similarities eg

Serv Aen 8670 HIS DANTEM IVRA CATONEM hellipet supergressus est hoc loco Homeri dis-positionem siquidem ille Minoem Rhadamanthyn Aeacum e impiis iudicare dicit hic Ro-manum ducem innocentibus dare iura commemorat

Servius 11 = 7 Serv auct 2 = 5

The remaining six categories in descending order of frequency may be classedunder the following headings

(i) Homeric epithets eg

Serv Aen 7550 INSANI MARTIS AMORE Homeri epitheton


(ii) Homeric imagery eg

Serv Aen 9435 lsquoLASSOVE PAPAVERA COLLO DEMISERE CAPVT Homeri (Il 8306f) etcomparatio et figura nam et ille sic ait ut multorum unum dicere caput

Servius 7 = 5 Servius auctus 1 = 3

312 Robert Maltby

(iii) Homeric calques eg

Serv Aen 135 SALIS maris secundum Homerum (cf Homeric ἅλς )

Servius 6 = 4 Servius auctus 1 =3

(iv) natural philosophy eg

Serv Aen 193 INGEMIT non propter mortem ingemit hellipsed propter mortis genus graueenim est secundum Homerum perire naufragio quia anima ignea est et extingui uideturin mare id est elemento contrario

Servius 5 = 3 Servius auctus 0

(v) morphology metre eg

Serv Aen 1100 SARPEDON et in ultima possumus accentum ponere et in paenultima namHomerus et lsquoSarpedonisrsquo declinauit et lsquoSarpedontisrsquo unde et uarius accentus est (= 10471)


(vi) etymology eg

Serv Aen 6132 Cocytusque fluuius inferorum est dictus ἀπὸ τοῦ κωκύειν id est lugerenam Homerus sic posuit Od 10514


Information under the final three headings may have originated in the Homericscholia but this must remain for the present the subject of another paper

The focus on Homer in this paper should not obscure the fact that the mainaim of Serviusrsquo commentary is to instruct his pupils on points of Latin languageby using Virgilrsquos text as a source of exempla⁷ Whereas two notes in every threefocus on Virgilrsquos language only one note in seven is concerned with the broaderliterary mythological and historical background⁸

In conclusion we can say that Serviusrsquo interest in the Homeric backgroundto Virgilrsquos epic though an important element is not his main focus of attentionwhich is directed towards Virgilrsquos use of the Latin language Furthermore theway in which the Homeric literary background is discussed in the ancient com-mentators differs considerably from approaches found in modern criticism BothHomer and Virgil are expected to abide by ancient ideas of narrative credibility

On this function of the commentary see in particular Uhl Figures in Kaster


and stylistic appropriateness Most detailed literary comparisons between thetwo authors are centred on a consideration of these two criteria More oftenthan not especially in Servius auctus it is Homer who is held up as themodel and Virgil who fails to live up to his expertise but both commentatorsare willing to concede that on occasion it is the Roman poet who surpasseshis teacher Servius comes at the end of a long tradition of scholarly commenta-ries and although he himself may not have had direct knowledge of AlexandrianHomeric scholia the methodology and much of the technical terminology to befound in Servius clearly has its origins in the Greek scholarship of that period astransferred to the Latin tradition by earlier scholars such as Valerius Probus ofBeirut writing in the Flavian period⁹ The emphasis on a clear and credible nar-rative expressed in a style appropriate to the epic genre which has been shownas central to Serviusrsquo literary critical approach to both Homer and Virgil in hiscomparisons of the two derives ultimately from Aristarchus and his fellowGreek commentators on Homer

Maltby ndash

314 Robert Maltby

Ivana Petrovic

On Finding Homer The Impact of HomericScholarship on the Perception of SouthSlavic Οral Traditional Poetry

That Homer was not a person but an embodiment of a bardic institution the an-thropomorphization of the epic tradition is an idea with ancient roots Questionsregarding the origin and ancestry of Homer were notorious in the Ancient worldNot only did many Greek states vie for the honour of being his native-city he alsoreceived cultic honours in many of themsup1 Ascribing divine origins or heroic sta-tus to Homer in Antiquity can be interpreted as a way to acknowledge the impactand importance of his poetry but also as an expression of doubt regarding hisexistence as a historical character

Flavius Josephus (Contra Apionem 12) first raised the question whether writ-ing actually existed in the ninth-century BC Greece the traditional date forHomer and thus laid the foundations of the oral-traditional theory (for Homericorality see also Papaioannou Efstathiou and Michelakis in this volume) In the18th century several scholars promulgated the idea that Homer was neither a his-torical person nor the author of the Iliad and the Odyssey but that the epics werea result of compilation of older traditional poetrysup2 Franccedilois Heacutedelin abbeacute drsquoAu-bignac was the first modern scholar who argued that the Homeric poems werecollections of shorter songs stitched together by a compiler (Conjectures acadeacutem-iques ou dissertation sur lrsquoIliade drsquoHomegravere written in 1670 and published in 1715forty years after the authorrsquos death)sup3 In 1730 Giambattista Vico published a sec-ond edition of his monumental and influential book Scienza nuova In a chapterentitled lsquoThe discovery of the New Homerrsquo Vico advanced the thesis that Homerwas not a person but an idea created by the Greeks⁴ However it was the clas-sicist Friedrich August Wolf whose theories about Homer turned out to be themost influential In his Prolegomena ad Homerum published in 1795 Wolf ar-gued that the process of composing the Homeric poems was exceptionally com-plex According to Wolf Homer lived in an illiterate age his poems were theproduct of a long tradition of oral composition and compilation finally collected

On the status of Homer in the ancient world see Porter b with bibliography On the cultsof Homer Petrovic ndash (with bibliography) Grafton On DrsquoAubignac see Porter b Porter b ndash

and edited under Peisistratus or his sonsWolf saw the Iliad and the Odyssey as acollection of popular songs a multi-layered text containing lays from differentperiods and the task of a philologist in detecting the older genuinely Homericparts of the songs from younger parts of poems which according to Wolf were aproduct of later tradition and inferior bards⁵

The Homeric question gained renewed momentum in the twentieth centurywith the work of Harvard linguist Milman Parry who argued that Homeric languageis fundamentally traditional in character According to Parry the epic poet was acraftsman who skilfully manipulated the stock of metrically suitable phrases he in-herited from his predecessors Fieldwork in the countries of former Yugoslavia wasof crucial importance for Parryrsquos hypothesis and had focused the attention of inter-national scholarly community on the local Yugoslavian forms of oral traditional po-etryWhile Parry was working on his PhD at the Sorbonne his supervisor eminentlinguist Antoine Meillet introduced him to Matija Murko an expert in Slavic philol-ogy Murko was at the time studying the local oral epic traditions in Bosnia and hadeven made recordings of Bosnian bards Since Parry was interested in the waysbards use formulaic expressions he decided to learn Serbian and to visit Yugoslaviain order to observe traditional singers at work Between 1933 and 1935 Parry madetwo trips to Yugoslavia where he studied and recorded local oral traditional poetrywith the help of his assistant Albert Lord As a result of their fieldwork Parry intro-duced the hypothesis that the formulaic character of Homeric style is to be ex-plained as characteristic of oral composition Parryrsquos pupil Albert Lord further ex-panded and refined his teacherrsquos theory⁶

The orthodox view of the impact of Parry-Lord hypothesis is that it had es-tablished not only a new way of contextualizing and understanding Homeric po-etry but that it had also paved the way for a new branch of literary studiesmdashcomparative approach to the study of traditional epics from all over the worldThe assessment and understanding of many different branches of local oral tra-ditional literature changed dramatically as a result of Parry and Lordrsquos hypoth-esis once they were perceived as akin to Homeric poetry many local traditionaltexts were elevated in status and became objects of keen scholarly attentionlsquoWorld literaturersquo was born as a genre with Homer as its figurehead⁷

See introduction to Wolf Grafton Fowler and Porter b Lord and

Parry The texts of South Slavic lore and the recordings of bardsParry and Lord made in Yugoslavia are part of the Milman Parry Collection kept in Harvard

http wwwchsharvardedumpc On the impact of Homeric studies on the creation of world literature see general discussions inGraziosiGreenwood (eds) and Haubold (with bibliography) Recent samples of compa-rative approach to oral poetry are Foley and as well as Martin (with bibliography)

316 Ivana Petrovic

In this paper I shall question this orthodoxy and posit that Wolf rsquos work al-ready had a decisive influence on the establishment preservation and assess-ment of world literaturemdash at least in the Balkan area It is a little known factthat the most famous and influential collection of the South Slavic oral tradition-al lore was compiled edited and published partly as a result of Wolf rsquos theoriesEven in Serbia where the editor of this collection Vuk Stefanović Karadžić hasthe status of father of the nation (so much so he is universally known by hisforename only) the impact of Wolf rsquos theories on his activity as collector and ed-itor is little known

I shall demonstrate that Homeric scholarship exercised an indirect but cru-cial influence on Vukrsquos activity as compiler and editor of Serbian traditional lit-erature Furthermore Homer as a figure of international renown the fountain-head of European literature was repeatedly employed by Vuk in order to bestowauthority to the collection of folk poems he edited In his theoretical writings Vukdefended his work as collector and publisher by calling upon Homer the highestpossible poetic authority in Europe As collector and editor of Serbian traditionalliteratureVuk made conscious attempts to illustrate his editions with depictionsof bards similar to Homer This strategy had an immediate impact even on theway the local Serbian population came to view its own poetic tradition Morethan a century before Parry and Lord commenced their fieldwork in Yugoslavialocal bards were represented in the visual arts as resembling the traditional por-trait of Homer Last but not least the figure of Homer was employed as a shieldin order to counter the ban on circulation of Vukrsquos collection in Europe wheretraditional Serbian poems celebrating recent uprisings against the Turks wereseen as potentially dangerous and politically charged material

a Homeric scholarship and the first systematiccollection of Serbian oral literature

Vuk was born in 1787 in a poor peasant family in a Serbian village which thenbelonged to the territory of the Ottoman Empire He lived in tumultuous timesand had survived two bloody uprisings against the Turks Vuk contributed hissurvival to his physical impediment (he was lame) which prevented him fromtaking an active part in the battles and to his desire for learning which repeat-

For criticism of Parry Lord hypothesis de Vet and The objective of my paper doesnot concern the validity of the theory per se but the impact of Homeric scholarship on the percep-tion of South-Slavic traditional poetry and on the formation of written collections

On Finding Homer The Impact of Homeric Scholarship 317

edly drew him beyond the boundaries of Serbia⁸ A crucial event in Vukrsquos life washis arrival at Vienna where he met the Imperial censor dealing with Slavonicsubjects Jernej Kopitar in 1813 Kopitar was an astonishingly versatile andwell-educated scholar Politically he supported Austroslavism a doctrine thatsought to create a unity of Slavic peoples within the Austrian empire⁹ Austriawas interested in strengthening the national pride of its Slav subjects mostly be-cause it saw it as the best defence against the strong Russian influence in theBalkan area An important part of this policy was the encouragement of Slavpopulations to develop and strengthen their national identities Special effortswere made to encourage the development of national literature As a linguistby education and a true child of his times profoundly influenced by Herder Ko-pitar emphasized the importance of language and popular literature as expres-sions of national spirit It was Kopitarrsquos idea that Vuk adopted as his lifeworkhe took it to himself to comprise a grammar and a dictionary of Serbian languageand to collect and publish Serbian popular songs folk-tales and proverbs Vuknever subscribed to Kopitarrsquos political agenda and often actively opposed itbut he nevertheless wholeheartedly unreservedly and with great acknowledge-ment and gratitude adopted Kopitarrsquos literary programme

Whereas Serbian educational establishment saw it as necessary and urgentto produce a grammar and a dictionary of Serbian language collecting and edit-ing Serbian folk poetry and prose was in the eyes of many a futile and uselessendeavour In this respectVuk was going against the grain In the early 19th cen-tury oral tradition was very much alive in the Balkans As Vuk wrote himselfgusle the instrument that was used to accompany epic performance could inhis time be found in every house in Bosnia Hercegovina Montenegro and thesouthern parts of Serbia The art of performing was widespread especially inthe villages away from urban centres Apart from amateur performers therealso existed a guild of professional singers usually those who were blind or oth-erwise physically disabled and could not support themselves and their family byfarming This is how Vuk described performers of male or heroic songs in thepreface to the first edition of his collection

In the districts mentioned where heroic songs are still most often sung there will not be anyonewho does not know a number of songs (if not completely at least in part) and there will be somewho know more than fifty perhaps even up to a hundred Now anyone who knows fifty differentsongs if he has any gift for it will easily be able to compose a new one [hellip] Heroic songs are

There is a plethora of scholarly literature on Vukrsquos oeuvre in Serbian A well-researched andaccessible monograph on Vukrsquos life and times in English is Wilson On Vuk and Austroslavism Bonazza

318 Ivana Petrovic

circulated mainly by blind men travellers and hajdukssup1⁰ The blind men go begging from house tohouse right round the country In front of every house they sing a song and then ask for somethingto be given to them When something is offered they will sing more On holidays they go to themonasteries and churches for the services and sing the whole day long Again when a travellerarrives at a house for lodging it is usual to ask him to sing to the gusle so that travellers singand listen in the evening Then the hajduks in winter [hellip] drink and sing to the gusle all nightmainly songs about hajdukssup1sup1

Professional singers were not revered by their community on the contrary theywere beggars usually living in poverty This is the reason why the epic stories ofthe past were also called lsquosongs of beggarsrsquo in Serbian Those inhabiting urbancentres dismissed them as low peasantsrsquo songs and perceived them as possess-ing no literary value Consequently Vukrsquos attempts to collect and publish themwere viewed with suspicion and ridicule by the intellectual establishment ofhis native land Nevertheless Vuk worked tirelessly and had under great finan-cial strain managed to publish the first systematic collection of Serbian folksongs tales riddles and proverbs in the following orderndash A Small Simple-Folk Slavonic-Serbian Songbook Vienna 1814ndash Serbian Folk Song-Book (Vol Indash IV Leipzig edition 1823ndash33 Vol Indash IV Vien-

na edition 1841ndash62)ndash Serbian Folk Tales (1821 with 166 riddles and 1853)ndash Serbian Folk Proverbs and Other Common Expressions 1834ndash A book of lsquoWomenrsquos Songsrsquo from Herzegovina (1866) which was collected by

Karadžićrsquos collaborator and assistant Vuk Vrčević Vuk Karadžić preparedthem for publication just before his death

The preface to the first volume A Small Simple-Folk Slavonic-Serbian Songbookpublished in 1814 and partially quoted above is a fascinating document whereVuk also outlines the reasons for embarking on his project and provides valuableinformation about the dispersion and categories of Serbian oral lore Most puz-zling is the following passage

I am publishing these someone else could perhaps work to collect similar songs in Srem andothers still in Bačka Banat Slavonia Croatia and Dalmatia and if fate wills someone couldcollect further songs in Serbia Bosnia Hercegovina and Montenegro And then perhaps aman will be found whom God has endowed with gifts of poetry and who has had the chance

Hajduks were local brigands See also below From Vukrsquos introduction to book I of his lsquoLeipzig collectionsrsquo of Serb Popular songs InAppendix E of his monograph Wilson ( ndash) provides the English translation ofmost important passages


of learning its rules in the Latin or German tongue he may try to sift all these collections andwrite some poems himself according to the taste and manner of his race and thus out of allthese small collections create one big wholesup1sup2

This passage betrays the Janus-faced character Vuk intended for his collectionNot only was the collection of oral traditional poetry meant to serve as amodel for the standardization and establishment of the reformed Serbian lan-guage these poems were also meant to provide poetic material for foreign audi-ences Paradoxically whereas there was very little interest in the traditional orallore amongst Serbian intellectuals in the European literary circles traditionallsquonationalrsquo poetry was very much in vogue Especially popular were the worksof James Macpherson such as Fragments of Ancient Poetry collected in the high-lands of Scotland and translated from the Galic [sic] or Erse language a collectionof 16 poems which he published in 1760 claiming that it was a translation of laysadapted from old Irish songs Two subsequently published lsquotranslationsrsquo ofpoems Macpherson attributed to Ossian a Gaelic bard who was allegedly activein the third centuryWhereas the scholarly community denounced these transla-tions as extremely free adaptations of popular songs or even inventions literaryEurope was enchanted by Ossian Editions and translations of various local tra-ditional poems appeared en masse bringing fame to the nations that producedthem Kopitar and Vuk had very probably hoped that Serbian folklore would alsoattract the attention of some enthusiastic European poet like Macpherson How-ever the idea of making one big whole out of individual local lays betrays someknowledge of modern philological theories especially Wolf rsquos ideas on Homer

Commenting on this passage Wilson astutely notes that it may be lsquoan indi-rect reference to current theories of Homeric scholarship with which he (scVuk)could have become acquainted through Kopitar (1970 95)Wilson also notes thatKopitar as one of the leading intellectuals in Vienna must have been aware ofWolf rsquos Prolegomena ad Homerumsup1sup3

In fact we have definitive evidence not only that Kopitar was aware of Wolf rsquoswork but that they knew each other and even collaborated Kopitar and Wolfhad met in Vienna in 1810 and corresponded from 1811 to 1819sup1⁴ At that timeWolf was editing three dialogues of Plato and had asked Kopitar for help withmanuscripts form the Vienna librarysup1⁵ In 1819 Kopitar wrote to Wolf in order

TransWilson ndash Wilson Seleškovic In the preface to the Platonis dialogorum delectus which Wolf had published in hethanks Kopitar for his help with the manuscripts

320 Ivana Petrovic

to draw his attention to the four German translations of South Slavic poetry fromVukrsquos collection which he probably completed himself The reason why theseshould interest Wolf he explained as follows

Nirgends gibt es heut zu Tage treffender Pendants zu Ihren Homeriden als in Serbien undBosnien Ein Exemplar von (Hormayrrsquos) hier erscheinendem Journal Archiv fur GeographieHistorie Staats- und Kriegskunst mag doch auch Berlin erreichen Dort habe ich nun vierRhapsodien aus dem Freyheitskriege von 1804 uumlbersetzt [hellip] Par curiositeacute sehen Siersquos doch anIm illyrischen Original sind auf meine Veranslassung bereits 2 Bde solcherley serbischerVolkspoesie heraus 2 neue liegen druckfertig in allem koumlnnten 10 voll werden

Kopitarrsquos comparison of Serbian bards with Homeric rhapsodes is a first known in-stance of comparative approach to the study of South Slavic oral traditional poetryIn my opinion even the choice of poems for translation into German was Kopitarrsquosbow to Wolfrsquos theories out of many poems Vuk had already gathered by 1818 Ko-pitar had picked four lays depicting the recent Serbian uprising against the Turksand the events spanning from 1804 to 1809 one depicting its very origins and trac-ing the history of the Turkish rule from the battle of Kosovo in 1389 and the otherthree ordered chronologically and celebrating the decisive battles which took placein 1806 and 1809 All four were noted down from one bard Philip Višnjicsup1⁶ Takentogether these four poems convey an impression that a large-scale continuous nar-rative depicting the origins and the development of the uprising could originate ei-ther in the hands of one skilful traditional poet or as Vuk suggests in his prefacequoted above in the hands of a gifted foreigner and that lsquoone big wholersquo couldbe created lsquoout of all these small collectionsrsquo Kopitarrsquos translation into Germanwas probably published with the intention of attracting the attention of Germanscholars who were familiar with Wolfrsquos ideas and could be inclined to comparehis Homerids with the Serbian illiterate blind singers This would not only lend sup-port to Wolfrsquos theory but would in turn also support the Serbian national causefor surely a tradition capable of producing someone like Homer was worthy of beingconsidered a nation in the first place Furthermore all four lays were noted downfrom the same bard one who was already groomed to become a Serbian Homeras I shall argue below

However anyone truly familiar with the Serbian oral traditional poetry like Vukmdashwho after all not only had an expert knowledge of the tradition as a collector butknew it intimately having grown up in the area where the tradition was very muchalivemdashknew that Serbian songs fall naturally into cycles but do not tend to exceed500ndash700 lines These cycles roughly correspond to the early history of the Serbian

On Philip Višnjic see below


Empire The oldest strata of Serbian oral poetry accessible in Vukrsquos time he calledthe lsquoPoems of the earliest daysrsquo They depict the Serbian rulers before the Battleof Kosovo (1389) the building of cities churches and monasteries royal weddingsquarrels and minor wars Due to the historical importance of the battle of Kosovo awhole cluster of poems centred on it and was called lsquoThe Kosovo Cyclersquo Thesepoems commemorate the Serbian Empirersquos defeat at the hands of the Turks inthe late fourteenth century all are grouped around the historic decisive battlebut most depict events preceding the battle and the aftermath Most famousamong these are lsquoThe fall of the Serbian Empirersquo lsquoThe mother of the Jugovicirsquoand lsquoThe maiden of Kosovorsquo One of the most popular characters of Serbian tradi-tional poetry was Marko Kraljević There is a whole cycle dedicated to him a ple-thora of poems from various times depicting the exploits of prince Marko wholsquocame too late to the battle of Kosovorsquo Marko was in fact a historic character anda vassal of the Turkish sultan but the figure of Marko from popular lore stubbornlyresists the Turks and dedicates his life to defending the orthodox population JakobGrimmwho followed Vukrsquos work from the very beginning and paved the way for thereception of his collection in Germany by publishing a very influential and favour-able reviewsup1⁷ was struck by the Marko cycle and had asked Vuk whether it might bepossible to construct one continuous epic on Marko out of all these DoubtlesslyGrimm too was influenced by Wolfrsquos Prolegomena Also popular was the cycle ofpoems depicting the exploits of lsquoHajducirsquo Serbian brigands Finally the lastcycle contemporary with Vuk was the group of poems about the uprising againstthe Turks

In a society with no local courts such as Serbia under the Ottoman Empirethere were no aristocrats who would reward the singers for their praise Therewas no native-speaking ruling class with enough leisure for listening to oldsongs and stories Traditional storytelling took place in private houses andthe art of singing traditional poems was usually transmitted from father toson In Bosnia however the situation was quite different In the parts of thecountry where Muslim religion spread and became dominant local aristocratsembraced the oral tradition and the heroes of the poems changed places theMuslim lords became the heroes and the orthodox populace the enemy RichMuslim aristocrats supported the singers and awarded them generously This isthe reason why Muslim culture developed songs much longer than Christians

The review by Jakob Grimm of book III of Vukrsquos Leipzig collection of Serb popular songs waspublished in Goumlttingsche Gelehrte Anzeigen ndash November Wilson AppendixD provides a full English translation

322 Ivana Petrovic

and this was the area where Parry and Lord were to find their lsquoYugoslav Homerrsquoin the early twentieth century

Consequently there was no reason to expect a monumental epic of Homericproportions to originate in Serbia This state of affairs did little to prevent Vukand Kopitar from searching for Homer among Serbian bards One guslar provedto be a particularly good fit for the role It was the blind singer Philip Višnjićwhom Vuk met in the monastery Šišatovac and described in the following way

Philip Višnjić crossed into Serbia in 1804 the summer that the Serbian forces retreated overthe Drina and from then until 1813 he lived only in the Serbian camps around the Drina [hellip] In1813 when the Turks reconquered Serbia he fled with his family to the Srem and settled in thevillage of Grk I had heard that he knew some good songs particularly about the times ofKaradjordjesup1⁸ and got him to come to Šišatovac in 1815 [hellip] I then took down from himnot only the songs here printed but also a further three from Karadjordjersquos timesup1⁹ which Ihave left over to make a fifth book with if God grant me health By and large I think thatPhilip himself composed all those new songs of the times of Karadjordje He told me thathe had become blind as a young man as a result of smallpox and then went around thewhole Pashalik (province) of Bosnia and right down to Skadar begging and singing to theguslesup2⁰

The blindness of the bard his journeys and the subject matter of his poems in-stantly reminded both Vuk and Kopitar of Homer It is not a surprise that the por-trait of Višnjić was meant to illustrate the whole collection In March 1817 Vukwrote to Lukijan Mušicki eminent poet and archimandrite of the monastery Ši-šatovac specifically requesting a portrait of Višnjić to be taken but to no availsup2sup1

Due to unfortunate circumstances no portrait was made of Višnjić during hislifetime However the most popular depiction of the bard both in Serbia andabroad one that is nowadays also used as an emblem of the Oral Tradition jour-nal is meant to represent Višnjić As argued by Vojislav Jovanović in 1954 thisportrait had nothing to do with Višnjić but presents an idealized representationof a type called lsquoSerbian Homerrsquo an image which Jovanovic aptly calls lsquoapocry-phal iconrsquo It was painted by the Croatian artist Josip Danilovic in 1901 and was

Karadjordje was the leader of the First Serbian uprising against the Turks (ndash) Afterthe failure of the uprising he was forced to leave the country and was assassinated upon hisreturn in probably upon the order of the new Serbian ruler Miloš Obrenović Visnjicrsquos most famous poems were the compositions commemorating historical events hewitnessed himself such as Početak bune protiv dahija (The Beginning of the Revolt against Da-hijas) Boj na Čokešini (Battle of Čokešina) Boj na Mišaru (Battle of Mišar) Wilsonrsquos translation of Vukrsquos preface to the Book IV of the Leipzig collection ofpopular songs published in The letter is quoted in Jovanović


immediately accepted as the exemplary portrait of a bard The similarities of thispresentation with the blind Homer type (as presented by Raphael or Mattia Preti)are immediately obvious

An image of Višnjić was not destined to adorn Vukrsquos edition of Serbian tradi-tional poetry but Kopitar and Vuk did not abandon the idea of linking Homer tothe collection visually In 1823 Kopitar sent an illustration of the instrumentgusle to Vuk and wrote with regard to the cover illustration of the Leipzig edition

I think however that we should provide a group-scenemdashperhaps a Homer surrounded by lis-teners young and oldsup2sup2

At the end a lithography was made of a guslar surrounded by listeners Themodel for the bard was not Višnjić but probably Vuk himselfsup2sup3 However theidea of a traditional Serbian guslar resembling Homer somehow took roots In1839 a famous painter Katarina Ivanović published a lithograph in a Serbian lit-erary magazine with wide circulation called lsquoSrpski narodni listrsquo It depicts abard with gusle surrounded by an admiring audience a maiden in the right cor-ner and two young men in the left corner of the pictureWhat is most interestingabout this representation of a bard is the title Srpski Omir lsquoSerbian Homerrsquo Byproviding her lithography meant for popular circulation with such a title Katar-ina Ivanović must have been stating what had by that time become obvious toSerbian educated audiences

b Homer as a shield in the creationof Serbian national identity

The year is 1842 By that time Vuk was an eminent scholar in his 50s who hadalmost single-handedly created the basis for a national literature and yet hewas repeatedly forced to defend his endeavour from bitter critical attacks Asthe first systematic collection of Serbian oral literature Vukrsquos edition played acentral role in the development of Serbian literature it was translated into Ger-man and French very soon after its original publication and had a major impacton European literature Jakob Grimm Goethe Alexander Puškin Prosper Meacuteri-meacuteeWalter Scott and many other European scholars and writers admired Serbi-

Ibid Ibid

324 Ivana Petrovic

an poetrysup2⁴ but at home Vuk encountered less enthusiasm for his editorialwork The new Serbian state soon established an uneasy peace with the OttomanEmpire and the publishing of Vukrsquos editions was banned on Serbian territory Bytheir very nature since they depicted the recent uprising these poems were ca-pable of stirring patriotism and inciting Serbs to new uprisings The new ruler ofSerbia Miloš Obrenović found personal offence in the publication of the poemsdepicting recent political events since they did not celebrate his own roleenough and glorified instead the leader of the first uprising Karadjordjesup2⁵

The second wave of opposition came from Serbian intellectuals who per-ceived folk poetry as unworthy of scholarly attention being a product of illiteratepeasants They complained about Vukrsquos striking practice of writing down thepoems precisely as he heard them without correcting the grammar or changingthe lines to comply with the standards of poetry composed with the aid of writ-ing A formidable opponent of Vukrsquos language reforms Metropolitan of KarlovciStefan Stratimirović remarked lsquoIf we see a drunken man stumble and fall wewould help him rise againrsquosup2⁶ thus suggesting that Vuk ought to have changedthe grammar and language of the common folk in order to closer resemblethe written discourse Furthermore Vuk was slighted for publishing the songsof lsquoblind beggarsrsquo In his response to the critics published in 1842Vuk defendedhis collecting methodology and the editing programme on the whole Vukrsquos col-lecting method was in fact exemplary even by modern standardsmdashas a memberof the oral society he fully understood the nature of the songs and their contex-tual importance and had made transcriptions which were completely faithful tothe song as sungWhen accepting transcriptions from others he insisted on ver-ifying himself that the song in question was actually sung that way among thefolk In his defence Vuk argued that the songs of the common people whichhe had published were not less worthy simply because some singers wereblind and reduced to begging and wrote lsquoWhoever has any sense and criticalacumen will understand upon reading these poems that there is no shame atall in the fact that they are performed by blind beggars In fact in this respectthe Serbs should be no more ashamed than the Greeks who are certainly not

On the international reception of Vukrsquos edition see Wilson Wilson ( ) provides an English translation of Miloš Obrenovićrsquos letter to Vuk from where the new ruler of Serbia is expressing his dissatisfaction with the way he has beenportrayed in contemporary oral poetry The following passages illustrate his point sufficientlylsquoAll of us who were present at these events and witnessed them were disgusted at the lies inyour (sic) songs which ought to have been founded on truth seeing that they are about myown times [hellip] I shall not permit you to circulate among our people lies about my exploitsrsquo Quoted in Karadžic a


ashamed of the fact that their Homer was a blind beggar In fact were he alivenow kings and emperors would pay him heedrsquosup2⁷ Vuk goes on to argue that thelanguage used in the Serbian oral poems is the best possible example of Serbianand should become a standard and serve as a measuring rod due to its purityand simple beauty of the vernacular

By this time Homer had already served as a very useful point of defence forKopitar as well In 1824 the highest Austrian police authorities viewed the circu-lation of poems glorifying recent Serbian uprising with suspicion and fearedsimilarly to the Serbian establishment a renewed stirring up of anti-Turkish sen-timent It was Kopitarrsquos duty as censor for Slavonic languages to express an opin-ion regarding the circulation of the book Kopitar argued in favour of the circu-lation advancing the policy of Austroslavism and comparing Vuk to Homer

The fruits which this book will bear in providing the Serbs with their own independent andmuch-loved literature (which will soon outstrip the Russian in favour since it will rallythem around a national centre) would easily outweigh through the spirit and tendency onthe whole collection any objections against individual and temporarily perhaps harmful de-tails [hellip] Given that this collection is part of a three-volume edition with quite different con-tents and a purely scientific tendency (as shown in the preface to the Dictionary) the censoralready advised by competent critics of the author (who is recognized as the Illyrian HomerOssian etc) found no difficulty in approving ithellipsup2⁸

Kopitarrsquos defence was successful and the circulation of Vukrsquos collection in Aus-tria was allowed

In the age that had produced many attempts to renounce Homerrsquos very exis-tence he needed to be drafted in order to defend his fellow oral poets The mod-ern enlightened Europe in the 18th and 19th century killed Homer only to imme-diately resurrect him To use a popular modern phenomenon as an illustrationHomer became the vampire king of European literature He represents the end ofAncient Greek oral tradition that once written down ceased to exist in its pre-vious form as a composition in performance Once written down it embarks onan after-life as a relatively stable unchangeable written text Comparing a livingand existing local oral tradition with Homeric poetry brings to it renown andprestige but ultimately as it is written down it too ceases to exist in its naturalform It dies as an oral text only to be resurrected as a written one from then onremaining forever unchanged Comparing a local tradition with Homer is thus akiss of deathmdashbut a kiss from a vampire since it brings with it both death and inits final metamorphosis immortality The metamorphosis from traditional oral

Karadžic b Translation Wilson

326 Ivana Petrovic

literature to a published manuscript affiliated with Homeric poetry brings re-nown and prestige both to local traditional poetry and to the people that createdit The political repercussions of affiliating local poetic traditions to Homer werevast Comparison of Serbian bards with Homer were consciously employed inorder to bestow a hitherto little known Serbian nation with renown and prestigeOnce an analogy with Homer was made Serbian traditional poetry became partof the family of European literature The nation that gave birth to it came to beperceived as a part of Europe too The way was paved for the Serbian state toemerge from the Ottoman Empire and take its place in the European family

Finally more than a century after Vukrsquos collection was published it was Ho-meric scholarship again that exercised an impact in the way South Slavic poetrywas perceived in the Western world This time it was not Serbia but a relativelynew country Yugoslavia that profited from association with Homeric poetrysup2⁹Lord and Parry completed what Wolf had started though they placed a roofon the house of world literature it was Wolf who had laid its foundations

See on this Graziosi ndash



Katerina Mikellidou

Aeschylus reading HomerThe Case of the Psychagogoi

Aeschylusrsquo fragmentarily preserved Psychagogoi has at its core possibly as itstheme a dramatised adaptation of a well-known Homeric episode ndash the NekyiaThe meagre surviving fragments suggest that in broad strokes the story goes asfollowssup1 Odysseus travels to a lsquofearsomersquo lake (frr 273 273a2 R cf 276 R) andunder the guidance of local necromancers (frr 273 273a R) contacts Teiresiaswho gives him a prophecy about his death (fr 275 R) The subject-matter perse points to a by definition lsquoHomerisingrsquo play Book 11 of the Odyssey is usedas a source text and a point of departure The aim of the present paper is to in-vestigate this intertextual network between the Homeric Nekyia and its Aeschy-lean version As will emerge Aeschylus opens a persistent dialogue with the epictext and establishes a network of competitive dynamics Yet as well as persis-tently recalling his archetype he also makes a systematic attempt to revise itby endowing this distinctively Homeric episode with a diametrically oppositemeaning while in Homer necromancy unfolds the full proportions of Odysseusrsquoboldness courage and extraordinariness in its Aeschylean adaptation it is partof a process of bringing him closer to the ordinary man The normalisation ofOdysseus is carried out both by his prophesied death which is ignominiousand trivial (fr 275 R) and by the introduction of realistic and familiar elementsinto the necromantic ritual Though the practice registers some exotic featuresand retains a degree of its Homeric outlandishness it is in many respectsbrought closer to reality As we shall see the reduced exoticism of necromancyand the concomitant detachment of the Aeschylean Odysseus from the fantasticatmosphere of the Odyssey produce some very complex effects

On this play see the edition of PKoumlln (= fr a R) in Kramer ndash and thediscussions in Gelzer Lloyd-Jones Katsouris ndash Rusten Henrichs ndash Bardel ndash Cousin Dios ndash Discussions prior toKramerrsquos edition are useful (see Leeuwen ndash Mette ndash) but they ignorethe existence of fr a R The date of the play is uncertain The abbreviation R stands for thenumbering of Aeschylean fragments in Radt

The prediction of Odysseusrsquo death

The deconstruction of Odysseusrsquo Homeric presentation is first and foremost evi-dent in fr 275 R which is delivered by the summoned Teiresias and preserves aprophecy about Odysseusrsquo death The motif clearly derives from the Homeric Ne-kyia where the seer concludes his predictions about the herorsquos nostos (on theOdyssean nostos motif see Jacob and Thliveri in this volume) and the due pro-pitiatory activities by referring to the end of his life (Od 11134ndash37) As he says avery gentle death will come to him ΕΞΑΛΟCwhen he reaches old age Accordingto the ancient scholia this prophecy lends itself to a double interpretation de-pending on the rendering of ΕΞΑΛΟCOdysseus may die lsquoaway from the searsquo (ἔξα-λος) or lsquofrom the searsquo (ἐξ ἁλός) namely a marine death The poet of Telegony pres-ents us with a version that relies upon the inherent ambiguity of the Homericpassage as it actually combines both interpretations Odysseus is killed ondry land by Telegonusrsquo arrowwhose edge is made by the spine of a stingray (κέν-τρον τρυγόνος) Aeschylus chooses to differentiate himself from both epics andput forward his own distinctive version (fr 275 R)sup2

ἐρωδιὸς γὰρ ὑψόθεν ποτώμενοςὄνθῳ σε πλήξει νηδύος χαλώμασινmiddotἐκ τοῦδrsquo ἄκανθα ποντίου βοσκήματοςσήψει παλαιὸν δέρμα καὶ τριχορρυές

For a heron in flightwill strike you from above with its dung when it opens its bowelsand from this the barb of a sea-creaturewill rot your aged hairless skin(trans Sommerstein 2008)

The Aeschylean prophecy echoes the Homeric idea of the peaceful death in oldage as well as the Telegonian motif of κέντρον τρυγόνος However in this ver-sion a heron flying overhead will strike and infect Odysseusrsquo aged skin withhis dung that will contain a fatal spine of fishsup3 In this way Aeschylus keepsthe authority of the epic narrative but at the same time adjusts it to serve hisown dramatic ends

For the different versions of Odysseusrsquo death see Hartmann ndash Severyns f ndash The uniqueness of the Aeschylean version is underlined in scholium V on Od (Din-dorf) Αἰσχύλος δὲ ἐν Ψυχαγωγοῖς ἰδίως λέγει lsquoἐρρωδιὸς γὰρhellipτριχορρυέςrsquo

332 Katerina Mikellidou

In the Odyssey the hero may not meet a glorious death in the battlefield butthe rhetoric used by Teiresias elevates his predicted peaceful end to an ideal in-cident As the seer puts it Odysseusrsquo death will be lsquovery gentle (Od 11135 ἀμβλη-χρὸς μάλα) and will come when the hero is overcome with lsquosleek old agersquo(Od 11136 γήρᾳ ὕπο λιπαρῷ ἀρημένον) and his people will lsquodwell in prosperityrsquoaround him (Od 11137 ὄλβιοι ἔσσονται) The adjective λιπαρός qualifies this oldage as wealthy and healthy-looking strengthening the notion of the perfectdeath⁴ In contrast the prophecy in fr 275 R gives an ignominious twist tothe Homeric model by introducing the factor of the dung and by presentingold age in a negative light The Homeric λιπαρὸν γῆρας gives way to παλαιὸνδέρμα καὶ τριχορρυές that conjures up the image of a scrawny and wretchedold man The Homeric echoes of ὄνθος are suggestive There are only three occur-rences of the term in the Iliad all in the context of the footrace between Odys-seus Ajax and Antilochus during the funeral games in honour of PatroclusThere Athena wanting to help Odysseus intervenes and makes Ajax slip onthe dung of the sacrificed bulls as he runs The irony is obviousWhile in the Ho-meric passage ὄνθος grants an athletic victory to Odysseus in Troy in the Aeschy-lean play it causes him a totally unheroic and almost ridiculous death The ap-plication of the epic language to describe a reality that opposes the epicgrandeur underscores the distance from the epic world⁵ The process of sepsiscaused by the dung trivialises the herorsquos death yet more

Aeschylusrsquo departure from the Homeric archetype with reference to Odys-seusrsquo death must have resulted in diverse and complex effects On the onehand this is the kind of bridging of the divide between heroic past and contem-porary present which finds expression in a whole range of tragic effects mostnotably but not exclusively anachronism Part of the result is an enhancedsense of the relevance of what happens in the play to the world of the audiencerather than a dramatisation of a closed and distant past At the same time theignominious end reflects and further develops some aspects of Odysseusrsquo tragicprofile as well as making him more ordinary and contemporary it also under-mines his heroic status and undercuts his dignityWe may even have somethingof the belittling of Odysseus later found in Sophoclesrsquo Philoctetes The Aeschy-lean version of the hero should be understood as part of a larger tragic tendencyto underscore the less elevated aspects that surrounded Odysseusrsquo character ex-perience and behaviour from the start and were already magnified in the archaic

Cf Heubeck Hoekstra See Cousin

Aeschylus reading Homer The Case of the Psychagogoi 333

period⁶ This is not to say that the reduction of Odysseusrsquo heroic status is a dra-matic end in itself As will be noted below it may be a means of exploring largerissues such as the idea of human limitations

a The institutionalisation of necromancy

The proximity of Odysseus to the audience is enhanced by the lsquonormalisationrsquo ofnecromancy This process is mostly achieved through the institutionalisation ofthe practice which distances the episode from the impromptu and mythical na-ture of the Homeric source text and presents us with an Odysseus who now en-gages not in a dangerous and bold mission at the edge of the Ocean but ratherin an officially prescribed ritual within historical and recognisable surroundingsThere exist two indications that point to the institutionalisation of necromancythe locale of the ritual and the introduction of professional practitioners

Let us take the parameter of the locale first The main features of the spotwhere necromancy is performed can be deduced from fragments 273 273aand 276 RFr 273 R

Ἑρμᾶν μὲν πρόγονον τίομεν γένος οἱ περὶ λίμναν

We the folk that dwell around the lake honour Hermes as our ancestor

Fr 273a R

ἄγε νυν ὦ ξεῖνrsquo ἐπὶ ποιοφύτωνἵστω σηκῶν φοβερᾶς λίμναςὑπό τrsquo αὐχένιον λαιμὸν ἀμήσαςτοῦδε σφαγίου ποτὸν ἀψύχοιςαἷμα μεθίει 5δονάκων εἰς βένθος ἀμαυρόνΧθόνα δrsquo ὠγυγίαν ἐπικεκλόμενοςχθόνιόν θrsquo Ἑρμῆν πομπὸν φθιμένωναἰτοῦ χθόνιον Δία νυκτιπόλωνἑσμὸν ἀνεῖναι ποταμοῦ στομάτων 10οὗ τόδrsquo ἀπορρὼξ ἀμέγαρτον ὕδωρκἀχέρνιπτονΣτυγίοις νασμοῖσιν ἀνεῖται

See Stanford ndash cf Deforge n Cousin ndash


Come now stranger stand on the grassyprecincts of the fearful lake andwhen you have cut the throatof this victim let fall the blood for the lifeless onesto drinkinto the dim depths of the reedsInvoking ancient Earthand chthonian Hermes conveyor of the deadimplore chthonian Zeus to send upthe swarm of the night-wanderers from the mouths of the riverthe river whose branch this unenviable waterwhich washes no handis sent forth by the streams of the Styx

Fr 276 R

σταθεροῦ χεύματος

of stagnant current(trans Bardel 2005 with slight adjustments)

The geomorphology and hydrography of the landscape are modeled upon thetopographical instructions of Circe (Od 10513ndash 15)⁷ This is particularly noticea-ble with reference to the dominant role of water which becomes the hallmark ofthis unusual place and evokes the Homeric description of the infernal rivers Aseries of oxymora employed for the description of the setting presage the abnor-mal reversion of the natural order that necromancy inherently involves For in-stance in fr 273a R the notion of fertility denoted by ποιοφύτων σηκῶν is coun-tered by the reeds (δονάκων) that can only be found in marshy stagnant watersand are here closely connected with death and the Underworld⁸ the water a nat-ural source of life-giving and purification is unenviable (ἀμέγαρτον)⁹ andἀχέρνιπτονsup1⁰ namely unsuitable for ritual use and in fr 276 R the lake is descri-bed as a lsquostagnant currentrsquo (σταθεροῦ χεύματος)sup1sup1 combining contradictory qual-

See Ogden a ndash Cousin ndash Compare also σηκός (fr a R) toπέτρη (Od ) In Pythonrsquos Agen the landscape of necromancy seems to be very similar(cf fr Sn κάλαμος fr Sn ἄορνον) Reeds often form part of infernal vegetation cf Polygnotusrsquo painting in Paus Elpenorvase (Boston ARV

) On the vegetation in the Psychagogoi see Cousin τομεγαρτουδωρ emended to ἀμέγαρτον ὕδωρ by Kramer ndash According to the necromantic traditions the lake of Avernus exhaled noxious fumes that kil-led birds See Rusten ndash Ogden cf Paus f Call fr Pf For the meaning of this contradictory phrase see Cousin ndash


ities Also terms that denote death (ἀψύχοις φθιμένων σφαγίου αἷμα) and fear(φοβερά) or belong to the linguistic field of the Underworld (Χθόνα ὠγυγίανχθόνιον χθόνιον Στυγίοις ἀμαυρόν νυκτιπόλων) endow the landscape withstrong infernal connotationssup1sup2

Notwithstanding these numinous elements of otherworldliness and the aw-fulness that the description of the setting involves the Aeschylean Odysseus isunambiguously on the surface The upward movement of the souls (ἀνεῖναι)and the water (ἀνεῖται) cancels the Homeric blurring of necromancy and kataba-sis and locates the activities of the hero in the world of the living removing amodicum of their boldness and dangerousness Also the Aeschylean Odysseusno longer operates ldquooff the maprdquo and outside the world of human experienceas the necromantic incident seems to have been relocated from its literal escha-tological position at the end of the Ocean to a more realistic environment eventhough the place is not explicitly specified This transfer of the Nekyia into his-torical surroundings may also be dictated by the nature of the tragic genre as ittends to favour the unfolding of the action in existing locations In the Aeschy-lean plays in particular the first speaking character reveals the spatial coordi-nates of the plot which even though they are not always familiar to the audi-ence are still geographically identifiablesup1sup3

If the existence of the professional necromancers clearly points to an institu-tionalised framework the lake (frr 273 273a2 R) which constitutes the focalpoint of the ritual gives clues for the identification of the place with a real-life ne-kuomanteion-site Indeed the lake is a distinct topographical trait of two importanthistorical oracles of the dead the Acheron and Avernus nekuomanteiasup1⁴ Each iden-tification has its supporterssup1⁵ but arguing for the former or the latter is I thinkpointlessWhat really matters is the fact that Aeschylus deviates from the Homericexample by locating his Nekyia in a remote albeit historical spot Even if we as-

See Cousin ndash See Ag Ch (corrupted text) Eum Pers ndash PV ndash Supp Th See Ogden a ndash and b ndash Acheron oracle Katsouris n Ogden a b and Cousin Avernus oracle Max Tyr Wilamowitz-Moellendorf n Hart-mann Wikeacuten Phillips Hardie Kramer Gelzer f Rusten f Dunbar HurstKolde For furtherbibliography see Ogden a n A scholium in Ar Ra makes the Chorus inhabitnear the lake Stymphalus in Arcadia where Hermes was widely worshipped Lloyd-Jones and Dover on Ra were convinced by this but Wilamowitz-Moellendorf n rightly rejected it as lsquomodernrsquo Indeed lake Stymphalus is not a nekuomanteion siteand Hermes was not there worshipped as a chthonic deity or as psychopompos Besides thislake could not be reached by ship


sume that by Aeschylusrsquo time the specific nekuomanteion fell into disuse from theaudiencersquos viewpoint it would still form part of their cultural landscape and wouldbe connected with a real-life identifiable and accessible location In such surround-ings the practice loses a great deal of its exceptional character something that cer-tainly pulls Odysseus and his heroic world closer to the audience

Let us now move on to the identity of the Chorus which is an additionalpiece of evidence for the localisation of the ritual at a nekuomanteion-site andits resultant institutionalisation Ancient testimonia support the existence of aresident staff at the oracles of the dead who were often called ψυχαγωγοίsup1⁶while Maximus of Tyre explicitly locates this institutionalised group of professio-nal necromancers at Avernussup1⁷ In the Psychagogoi the title of the play is evident-ly borrowed from the identity of the Chorussup1⁸ One could perhaps argue that theirdesignation as psychagogoi derives from their specific activities in the narrowcontext of the dramatic plot rather than their actual and regular profession Inthis case their instructive role as can be seen in fr 273a Rsup1⁹ would parallelthat of Choephoroi just as the women instruct Electra on how to offer the liba-tions so do the choreutai here guide Odysseus in the process of ghost-raisingHowever fr 273 R suggests that the members of the Chorus actually profess ex-pertise in this ritual practicesup2⁰ This fragment is recited or sung by the Chorusand since it contains a self-introductory statement it must be located nearthe opening of the play perhaps at the beginning of the first stasimonsup2sup1 Itwould seem that the Chorus consists of native people who live by the shoreof the lake and honour Hermes as their ancestor The formal overtones of theverb τίομεν the designation of the group as a lsquoracersquo as well as their self-presen-

See Ogden b ndash Max Tyr cf Ephor FGrH F Plu Mor EndashF According to tradition Italianpsychagogoi were called to Sparta in order to lay the restless soul of Pausanias and release thecity from the plight (see Plu Mor EndashF fr Sandbach) On this episode see Burkert Faraone ndash Ogden a ndash The titles of the Aeschylean plays very often denote the Chorusrsquo identity or performative ac-tivities (eg Choephoroi Eumenides Suppliants Persae) Noteworthy is the fact that fr R belongs to those few examples of tragic verses deliveredin hexameters (see West ) This metrical pattern adds to the formality of the Chorusrsquolanguage but it also points to the subversive attitude of Aeschylus toward Homer epic styleis adopted only to be employed by a Chorus that corresponds to one of the most conspicuousinnovations in the dramatisation of the Homeric Nekyia Besides in ancient accounts ψυχαγωγός the term used to define the identity of the Chorusoften points to a regular and official profession rather than a one-off activity See eg Phryn PS schol in E Alc (Schwartz) Paus See also the oracular tablet from Dodona(Evangelidis no ) lsquoShall we hire Dorios the psychagogos or notrsquo See Mette


tation with reference to Hermes imply that the Chorus is constituted by officialattendants that preside over the operation of the sanctuary which is explicitlymentioned in fr 273a2 R (σηκῶν)

Aeschylus therefore introduces a Chorus of specialised necromancers whoreside in and attend the operation of a lake nekuomanteion possibly located atCumae This choice is not accidental The dramatist could well remain close tothe epic source text by presenting a Chorus of sailors accompanying Odysseusin his necromantic activities However the insertion of professionals reducesthe exotic element and contributes to the construction of less mythic andmore real surroundings The fact that Odysseus now acts under their official au-thority and practical assistance not only distances him from the fairytale worldof the Homeric Nekyia but it also subtracts from him part of his boldness Thiscontrolled and guided performance of the ritual differs from the Homeric versionof the episode in which Odysseus had a leading role There even though he fol-lowed Circersquos instructions he was certainly helpless and unprotected for Circewas physically absent throughout the ritual

It is tempting to suppose that Aeschylus in line with the complex intertex-tuality that he develops with the Homeric text assigns the role of the psychago-goi to the Homeric Cimmerians Just as the Homeric necromancy takes place atthe lsquoland and city of the Cimmeriansrsquo (Od 1115 ff) so its Aeschylean dramatisa-tion is spatially related to this tribe In fact the Chorus represents the native pop-ulation of the place from their viewpoint Odysseus is a stranger (fr 273a1 R ὦξεῖνε) and they call themselves a lsquoracersquo (γένος) In Ephorusrsquo account (4th centuryBC) the mythical Cimmerians are explicitly associated with the lake Avernussup2sup2

but germs of this tradition may be traced back to Sophoclesrsquo time if we assumethat frr 1060 R and 682 N2 belong to the same play The latter refers to an oracleof the dead at Aornos lake probably meaning the lake Avernus and comes ei-ther from Odysseus Acanthoplex or from Euryalussup2sup3 The former preserves thename Κερβέριοι which is in all likelihood an alternative designation of the Cim-merians The association of the Cimmerians with the oracle of the dead at Aver-nus seems reasonable enough in view of the growing tendency to attribute anItalian background to Odysseusrsquo adventures The localisation of the Cimmeriansin Italy turned out to be considerably influential and it might well be the casethat Aeschylus was the first to initiate itsup2⁴ If the tragic Chorus was indeed com-posed of representatives of this race this would lend further support to the al-

See Ephor FGrH F a See Phillips and n See Plin HN Silius Italicus Lactantius Diu Inst Origo Gentis Romanae Lyc [Orph] A ff


ready stated assumption that Aeschylus draws on his epic model with a view tosubverting it The Cimmerians like Odysseus would be displaced into real sur-roundings and their exotic lsquoland and cityrsquo would become identifiable to a spotwhich albeit remote would still be accessible to an ordinary man

b The profile of the dead

The above analysis shows that Aeschylus reworks the theme of Homeric necro-mancy in a variety of ways Inasmuch as he departs from it by imbuing it withrealistic elements he also recalls it by employing some distinctively Homeric fea-tures Aeschylusrsquo debt to Homer is evident also in the profile of the dead TheAeschylean dead are defined as ἄψυχοι In post-Homeric literature the termpsychē acquires an expanded semantic fieldWhile in Homer it denotes the spiritthat abandons the body at death outside the epics it is also loaded with thesense of the Homeric phrēn noos and thymos qualities that refer to the seatof emotions or the emotions themselvessup2⁵ In this vein a post-Homeric terminol-ogy is used to bring to the fore the Homeric concept of the senseless shadowsthat lack φρένες (Od 10494ndash95) and μένος (Od 10521 1129 49 ἀμενηνὰ κάρη-να) Lloyd-Jonesrsquo acute remark that the adjective here contrasts with πάμψυχος inSophoclesrsquo Electra (839ndash40) corroborates this viewsup2⁶ as opposed to Amphiarauswho exceptionally retains his consciousness in Hades the Aeschylean souls arehere deprived of it It is not surprising that ἀψύχοις appears closely connectedwith the motif of blood-drinking (ποτὸν ἀψύχοις)sup2⁷ which itself presupposesthe idea of the witless shadow as in the Homeric Nekyiasup2⁸ the witless deadneed the blood in order to regain their mental faculties However in an episodethat draws so heavily on Homer psychē is expected to retain to some extent itsinitial meaning creating an ostensible and purposeful paradox the same deadthat are mentioned throughout the Homeric Nekyia as ψυχαί are here defined asἄψυχοιsup2⁹ This contradiction which denies the dead the very essence of their ex-istence stresses even more their insubstantiality

The designation of the dead as νυκτίπολοι and the description of their gatheringin terms of a ἑσμός function as additional indications of their weakness Henrichs

See Solmsen ndash Sullivan ndash Bremmer ndash Lloyd-Jones See also Henrichs See Henrichs ndash See Sourvinou-Inwood ndash Ogden a Heath Contrast Bremmer n and Henrichs n who endeavour to provethat the contradiction is only superficial


argues that the adjective νυκτίπολος alludes to the nocturnal activities of the dead inthe terrestrial world and thus illuminates their alternative more active dimensionsup3⁰He bases his assumption on the fact that in its pre-Hellenistic occurrences the termbears Dionysiac ritualistic and mystic connotations that allow its transference fromthe nighttime mystic celebrations to the nocturnal wanderings of the dead in theworld of the living under the guise of dream-apparitionssup3sup1 Although Henrichsrsquo inter-pretation is possible it is more likely that in the framework of the Aeschylean Ne-kyia νυκτίπολοι refers to the inactive wanderers in the sunless and gloomyUnderworldsup3sup2 The term ἑσμός along with the plural of their representation (ἀψύ-χοις φθιμένων νυκτιπόλων) sheds light on another aspect of the witless andweak dead ndash their impersonal collectivitysup3sup3 This recalls the Homeric references tomassive and indiscriminate swarms of ψυχαί that rush toward the blood(Od 10529ndash30 1136ndash37 42ndash43 632ndash33) or are likened to birds (Od 11605ndash06cf S OT 175) and throngs of bats (Od 246ndash9)sup3⁴ In addition given that in AeschylusrsquoSuppliant Women (223ndash24) the term is used to convey the state of the frightened Da-naids it may here qualify the dead as skittish and cowardly This idea is further cor-roborated by the term ἄψυχος as in some contexts psychē can acquire the meaningof couragesup3⁵ Last but not least the emphatic use of the blood sacrifice is consistentwith the concept of the weak and witless dead who need blood to restore their men-tal faculties

The lsquoHomerizedrsquo profile of the dead not only reflects the resourcefulnesswith which Aeschylus interacts with the Homeric text but also shows the flexi-bility with which he refigures the same motif in different plays The dead as de-scribed in the Psychagogoi are far removed from the delineation of Darius theother Aeschylean summoned dead These multiple and insubstantial souls

Henrichs So Rusten n and Henrichs ndash On the association between dreamsand the nether powers see eg Od ndash A Ch ndash ndash Pers ndash SEl ndash E Hec ndash IT ndash TrGF II fr adesp Kn-Sn Ar Ra ndash cf Od ndash (see Van Lieshout ndash Padel ndash) For thedead in dreams see eg Il ndash Pi P ndash A Eum ndash Pers ndash EAlc ndash Hec ndash Cf S OC See Cousin and n On the association of this collectivity with a purposeless and insignificant infernal life seeBremmer cf Henrichs f Rusten ( f) assumes that S fr R (βομβεῖ δὲ νεκρῶν σμῆνος ἔρχεταί τrsquo ἄνω)must have drawn on the Aeschylean perception of the souls On the comparison of the deadto bats bees and birds see Ogden a ndash For the concept of the winged soul see Ver-meule f n On psychē as lsquocouragersquo see eg Ar Eq Th cf E Alc


that seem to be without power have nothing in common with the fearsome andawe-inspiring Darius who commands the stage in the Persians This discrepancybetween two plays composed by the same dramatist not only reflects the diversetreatments to which the necromantic motif can be subjected or the fluidity of itsadjacent eschatology but also shows that there is no single Aeschylean model ofnecromancy the dramatist varies the motif from play to play and manipulates itcreatively to serve his purposes

Concluding remarks

Aeschylus employs the Nekyia a distinctively Homeric episode to achieve an ef-fect which is the opposite of that achieved in the Homeric source text Odysseusthe cleverest of men is met with his limitations and human nature Of course aspointed out above this cannot just be about Odysseus The play touches uponbroader issues whose nature can be guessed at even though we lack the evi-dence to fully support our assumptions The normalisation of Odysseus is per-haps the concomitant of the line the play takes about heroism human potentialand human boldness Aeschylus brings the symbol of ultimate endurance andintelligence closer to the ordinary man and invites us to look at heroism in a dif-ferent way even the greatest have limits This idea is consistent with readings ofmyth in fifth-century tragedy which tend to place the emphasis as much on limitas on potential and achievement In the Sophoclean corpus Oedipus the clever-est of men is unable to escape his destiny in Aeschylusrsquo Myrmidons (fr 132c R)Achilles is threatened with stoning by the army in Euripidesrsquo Medea (1386ndash88)Jason is destined to be killed by part of his ship Similarly the normalisation ofOdysseus in the Psychagogoi probably initiates the audience into the larger ideaof human limits At the same time the Psychagogoi exemplifies the resourceful-ness of Aeschylusrsquo interplay with and manipulation of the Homeric source text


Daniel J Jacob

Symbolic Remarriage in Homerrsquos Odysseyand Euripidesrsquo Alcestis

The reunion between Admetus and Alcestis at the end of Euripidesrsquo Alcestis hasoften been described as a symbolic remarriage of the royal couple of Pheressup1

Capitalizing on this view Halleran (1988) maintained that the text offers severalclues of this symbolic matrimoniumsup2 since it suggests the ritual in which a fa-ther in legal possession of the bride delivers her to the groom (ἐγγύη) alongwith the ἀνακαλυπτήρια that is the unveiling of the bride in front of thegroom and the guests This view is further supported by the fact that the unveil-ing was normally accompanied by the bridersquos silence as I have suggestedelsewheresup3 which is in agreement with the heroinersquos silence at the end of theplay although the cause of the silence there is as we shall see differentEven if we are not prepared however to accept Halleranrsquos view there is a strongsense of the beginning of a new life that is a symbolic remarriage at the end ofthe play In what follows I shall try to show that this marriage creatively alludesto Homerrsquos Odyssey which is not in itself surprising if we consider that Euripi-des like so many other poets is deeply indebted to Homer⁴

Alcestis can be characterized as a play of nostos⁵ in that it displays the typ-ical phases of plays about a characterrsquos return and reintegration into the familyseparation hardshipstruggle recognition reunion⁶ In the play under discus-sion of course the type of nostos in question is singular and strange namely

A version of this paper was delivered at the international conference on the Homeric Recep-tions in Literature and the Performing Arts organized by the History Department of the IonianUniversity 7ndash9 November 2011 My warmest thanks go to the organizers of the conferenceAthanasios Efstathiou and Ioanna Karamanou for the invitation to David Konstan for hisgenerous comments in reading a draft of this paper and to Antonios Rengakos Stavros Fran-goulidis Yannis Tzifopoulos and Evangelos Karakasis for their valuable help For relevant bibliography see Halleran n The opposite view was formulated by Telograve ndash as well as Parker and Seeck in the relevant comments of their respective commentaries on the play See Jacob a See Lange Lange demonstrated the intertextual debts of Euripides to Homer in the so-called plays of nostos In pp ff he parallels Alcestisrsquo death with the demise of Patroclus andHector in the Iliad but he does not discuss at all the theme of the symbolic marriage in the play On the topic apart from the aforementioned book by Lange see the monograph by Alexopou-lou Cf Lange and Houmllscher

the heroinersquos return from Hades and her restoration to the palace Its strangenessis also underlined by an additional feature the fact that the separation is notlong-lasting as happens in analogous cases As a result the recognition doesnot require specific signs (γνωρίσματα) to confirm the identity of the personwho returns This is due also to the fact that according to the well-known dra-matic convention the play maintains the unity of time that is the confinementof the action within a single day which is that of the queenrsquos death and burial⁷The recognition takes place at once and it is superfluous to pose over subtlequestions as to why Admetus did not recognize his veil-wearing wife by herclothes⁸ and the jewelry with which he had buried her earlier on The king ofcourse realized that the figure and the age of the stranger matched his wifersquosappearance ndashand this accounts for his persistent refusal to receive her to his pal-acendash but understandably enough he fails to perceive that the dead woman hascome back to life Admetus in his lament had already stressed that the presenceoutside the palace of a company of women having the same age as Alcestis willcause him sorrow (951ndash52) let alone I might add the continuous presence inthe palace of a woman so similar to his wife

The stranger offers Heracles the chance to organize a well-intentioned gameat his hostrsquos expense In this way the saviour of Alcestis exacts his revenge con-cealing the identity of the veiled woman just as Admetus had earlier concealedthe identity of the dead person he was mourning in the palace⁹ each time bymeans of ambiguous phrases This game results to a dramatic retardation thatis necessary for the king to adjust to the presence of the stranger During the en-tire conversation with Admetus Heracles ambiguously argues that he wasawarded the woman as a prize in an athletic match a fact which only partly cor-responds to the truth as it was not a public and common athletic contest butrather a personal struggle with Thanatossup1⁰ In addition he refers to a new mar-riage though implying of course the reunion of Admetus with Alcestissup1sup1 Theking is certainly not able to decode the ambiguous words of his friend and ter-

In the Helen where the separation lasts for years ndash years have passed since the breakout ofthe Trojan warndash the meeting recognition and escape of the spouses take place on the crucial dayof the impending wedding of the heroine to Theoclymenus In the Odyssey Arete understands that the clothes Odysseus wears must have been given tohim by Nausicaa But there the clothes perform a different function Cf Houmllscher For this mirror scene see Jacob Here too one should not ask logical questions for example why the guest Heracles sud-denly decided to abandon the palace and what urged him to take part in athletic games Inany case Admetus does not doubt or regard his friendrsquos words as impossible Halleran ( ) points out that Heracles repeatedly uses the word γυνή in both itsmeanings woman and wife

344 Daniel J Jacob

rified he copes with obviously ironically the eventual settlement of the strangerin the marital room which would actually amount to a second marriage (1055)

However it turns out that this remarriage involves the same woman just asin the case of the Helen where Menelaus meets the very same Helen who re-mained pure in Egypt The cause is a strange phenomenon Hera created anidol or image of Helen which Paris fetched to Troy The stunning similarity ofthe two women initially causes comic awkwardnesssup1sup2 as Menelaus recognizeshis real wife only when it is announced to him that lsquoHelenrsquo who had been carriedfrom Troy was an idol and had dematerialized in the air Here the play betweentruth and appearances reaches the limits of absurdity as it leads the spectator toconclude that a ten-year war with thousands of victims on both sides was con-ducted for the recovery of a non-existent person In any case a death occurs inthe Helen as well the difference being that it is only verbal as in the case also ofOrestes in Aeschylusrsquo Choephori and in Sophoclesrsquo Electra In the eve of her un-wanted marriage to Theoclymenus the heroine announces the death of her firsthusband and expresses her wish to pay him the last tribute In this manner shemanages to escape with Menelaus on the ship assigned to her for the ceremonyThe so-called death leads to a reversal the reunion of the spouses in a symbolicremarriagesup1sup3 Another reunion not of spouses but of a brother and a sister oc-curs in the Iphigenia in Tauris where the Greeks believe that Iphigenia is dead(IT 8) while she is still living in Tauris All three plays are conditioned by a com-mon theme the miracle return from Hades duplication of a person mysteriousdisappearance of the victim from the altar

But let us return to the Alcestis An immediate meeting of Admetus with hisresurrected wife would not only cause him surprise but also great confusionsince Heracles would not have had enough time to give his friend the necessaryexplanations That an immediate recognition of the dead Alcestis would be psy-chologically damaging is further evidenced by the meeting of Odysseus andLaertes in the Odyssey (24224 ff) Odysseus finds his father alone in the gardenDevastated by years of suffering the old man is unwashed and poorly-dressedas his son observes a sign that he has given up the daily care of himself becauseit no longer affords him any pleasure It is noteworthy that Laertesrsquo appearance istransformed after the recognition of his son The hero oscillates between twoplans as the poet explicitly indicates (24235 ff) either to immediately disclose

See Seidensticker ff See Hel for the renewed ὑμέναιον It is worth noting that Heraclesrsquo expected reunionwith Deianeira in their marital home (S Tr ) is joyfully received by the Chorus but as isoften happens in Sophoclean drama it will be annulled by the death of the protagonists (seeDavies ) For a conflation of marital and funeral customs see Rehm

Symbolic Remarriage in Homerrsquos Odyssey and Euripidesrsquo Alcestis 345

his identity to his father or to test his fatherrsquos reactions first He goes for the sec-ond plan apparently out of fear that a sudden recognition might have dangerouspsychological repercussionssup1⁴ Therefore he gives a false genealogy and originand claims to have offered hospitality to Odysseus some time ago in order to fa-miliarize the old man with the idea of his sonrsquos return the fact that Odysseus isstill alive is a positive indication The old man bursts into tears At this pointOdysseus yields to the sight of his devastated father and decides to disclosehis identity The old man asks for incontestable signs confirming the strangerrsquosclaim Odysseus shows him the scarsup1⁵ a sign also used in previous recognitionsin the Odyssey and additionally mentions the kind and the exact number oftrees Laertes offered him when Odysseus was a child Hence the moving recog-nition of father and son takes place

A further example is offered by Charitonrsquos Callirhoe (31) a novel with whichI am dealing below Dionysius convinced that Callirhoe has turned down hismarriage proposal decides to starve himself to death Plangon however sud-denly announces to him that Callirhoe has accepted his proposal Overwhelmedby the good news he falls senseless to the ground and the servants believe thathe is dead Odysseus knows from the beginning whom he is talking with as isalso the case with Heracles and the spectator who are both aware of the strang-errsquos identity All can see that a certain period of time has to lapse so that unwel-come side-effects resulting from unexpected joy are avoided Coming back fromHades is an extremely rare event The Chorus had already underlined that such areturn was impossible νῦν δὲ βίου τίνrsquo ἔτrsquo ἐλπίδα προσδέχωμαι (130) οὐδrsquo ἔστικακῶν ἄκος οὐδέν (135)sup1⁶ From this perspective the heroinersquos silence is also jus-tified Adjustment to the world of the living requires time and above all a rite ofpassage which even if not foreseen is completely understandable and expect-ed Certainly the playwright was not interested in describing this ritual more pre-cisely and for this reason postpones it for three days a number with obvious re-ligious connotations It is also worth mentioning that Heracles speaks ofἀφαγνισμός (1146) while Thanatos had used the verb ἁγνίζω indicating that Al-cestis definitely belongs to Hades (76)sup1⁷ I believe that views like those of Naiden

See scholia Q on line (Dindorf) ἵνα μὴ τῆι αἰφνιδίωι χαρᾶι ἀποψύξει ὁ γέρων ὥσπερκαὶ ὁ κύων ἀπώλετο Compare Heubeck Danek ff Woumlhrle ndash For the scar see Houmllscher ff The ghost of Darius in Aeschylusrsquo Persians points out how rarely the Underworld gods con-sent to a dead personrsquos exit from Hades (ndash) See Naiden n Halleran found a further correspondence between Alces-tisrsquo farewell to life and her return to it the use of antilabe with lexical similarities Objectionsagainst Halleran were raised by Telograve ndash

346 Daniel J Jacob

(1998) eliminate the autonomy of poetry and undermine its lsquologicrsquo because theyattempt to define with precision the nature of the resurrected Alcestis that iswhether she is a ghost or a body still dead able to move but not yet able tospeakWhat matters is the fact that the heroine returns to life and not the actualcircumstances of this return namely how Heracles manages to free the queenrsquosshadow from the arms of Thanatos and bring it back to the dead body lying inthe grave Similar realistic problems concern neither the poet nor the spectatorAlcestisrsquo silence is therefore imposed by religionsup1⁸ and is complementary to thebridersquos silence during the ἀνακαλυπτήριa as I mentioned above The view thatAlcestisrsquo silence expressly betrays her disappointment coldness and probablyher anger also against her selfish husband is groundless The interpretation isin opposition to the heroinersquos personal and explicit statement that she sacrificedherself because she could not continue her life with their orphan children onher own in separation from Admetus forever (287ndash88) Of course a few linesearlier (285ndash86) she had claimed that she could remarry the husband of herchoice who would not only be well-off but would also have royal status It isapparent however that this is an ad hoc statement to stress the magnitude ofher sacrifice because the law at least in fifth-century Athens did not providefor a choice of husband by a widow After all it would be contradictory onher part to impose a stepfather on her children once she has demanded that Ad-metus should avoid imposing a stepmother on them (305) There is therefore noindication that Alcestisrsquo attitude to her husband has changed let alone that ithas turned negative

Heracles as already observed recovers Alcestis after a struggle with Thana-tos of a kind which as a rule leads to the acquisition of a wife or her retrieval incase of separation the difference being that in our play the recovered wife is as-signed to her husband by the winner in return for his generosity and hospitalityThis development is necessitated by the plot as Heracles was the only onesup1⁹ who

See Trammel and Betts Compare Riemer ndash This unique event evokes the archery contest in book of the Odyssey where as we shallsee Odysseus is the only one able to stretch the bow (compare Houmllscher ) In both casesthe result is the same the reunion of the couple Lesky ( ) cites the view of Maas only toreject it ( n ) according to Maas the invincible Admetus as the etymology of hisname suggests fights with Thanatos and thus secures his wife However such a version wouldrun counter to the plot of the drama On the husbandrsquos combat with his rival see Houmllscher and Admetus of course wishes he had Orpheusrsquo melodic voice in order to descend toHades and bring his wife back to life ( ff) nonetheless his unfulfilled wish stresses the in-feasibility of the undertaking Assael claims that the play includes references to mysticrites In my opinion the characterization of Alcestis as μάκαιρα δαίμων () might refer tothe apotheosis of the dead known from later golden tablets See Jacob b


had the ability to descend to Hades and return alive ndashhe is to repeat this achieve-ment after the accomplishment of his last deed carrying Cerberusrsquo back up tothe earth An example of a similar recovery on the husbandrsquos part is offeredin Menelausrsquo conflict with the Egyptians on the ship at the moment of the escape(Hel 1592 ff) the hero had previously expressed his wish to fight with Theocly-menus (843ndash50) but his duel is cancelled after the plot against the Egyptianking has been planned

Two instances of lsquowife-acquisitionrsquo after a struggle are cited below They de-viate from the classical procedure in which the bridersquos father invites the suitorsto perform a feat or solve a difficult riddle in order to be given her hand becausemarriage is by no means the initial goal of the deedssup2⁰ The first comes up asearly as in book 6 of the Iliad In the belief that Bellerophon has tried to rapehis wife Anteia Proetus commissions a relative of his to kill the presumed cul-prit (160 ff) Proetusrsquo father-in-law wishing to avoid defiling his hands withhuman blood orders Bellerophon to murder the Chimaera believing that this at-tempt will cost Bellerophon his life However he kills the Chimaera and success-fully performs further exploits such as his battle with the Solymoi the Amazonsand finally the elite Lycians who had ambushed him Then the king of the Ly-cians convinced of the herorsquos innocence gives him his daughter as a wife alongwith half of his kingdom In other instances a successful outcome has tragicconsequences In the prologue of Euripidesrsquo Phoenissae Jocasta informs usthat she has been given to Oedipus as a wife along with the kingdom becausehe was the only one who was able to solve the enigma of the Sphinx and freeThebes from her predations (50 ff)

In my opinion the case of Alcestis directly alludes to the archery contest inthe Odyssey Penelope postpones an undesirable marriage with one of the suitorsfor quite a long time by using various tricks After her delaying tactics are re-vealed she is obliged to choose a second husband For this purpose she sug-gests upon Athenarsquos advice that the suitors perform a deed entirely compatiblewith the occasion to stretch Odysseusrsquo bow and make the arrow pass throughtwelve axes (211 ff) Penelope states that even if Odysseus disguised as a beg-gar manages to stretch the bow she is not going to marry him (21310ff) thusnullifying the deeper narrative reason for this contest in advance The ironic cor-

On the motif in question and its use in the Odyssey see Krischer Krischer conclusivelyremarks that it is not about a simple archery contest it is instead about a concrete attempt of thesuitors to stretch Odysseusrsquo bow so that a suitor having a potential equivalent to that of themissing hero would be chosen Accordingly the event betrays psychological motives Themain deviation of course lies in the fact that the contest is not organized by the bridersquos fatherbut by the bride herself who is about to have a second marriage

348 Daniel J Jacob

respondences with the Alcestis are obvious the disguised Odysseus correspondsto the veiled heroine and Penelopersquos rejection of Odysseus the beggar has itsparallel in Admetusrsquo refusal to welcome the unknown woman Both situationsresult in a happy reunion the unknown figure to be rejected is revealed to beno other than the spouse The reunion in epos is postponed because of the inter-vening narrative of mnēstērophonia whereas in the Alcestis the reunion of thecouple is immediately achieved Heraclesrsquo struggle with Death underlies theshort and vague comment that he participated in an athletic contest and isnot described in an elaborate messengerrsquos rhēsis due to Heraclesrsquo well inten-tioned deception of Admetus As in the Odyssey in the Helen too the heroineis on the threshold of a new and unpleasant marriage cancelled at the last mi-nute when the separated spouses are reunited

In the Alcestis the new marriage of which Heracles speaks persistently andironically eventually proves to be identical with the first one in contrast withboth previously cited instances What constitutes a real threat in the Odysseyand the Helen is in the Alcestis only a seeming danger The reason is that the pro-posal for a new marriage comes from a trusted friend of Admetus who is by nomeans willing to harm his companion Heracles is one of those loyal friends alsoknown from other Euripidean plays Pylades in the Electra and above all in theOrestes and in the IT as well as Theseus in the Heracles At this point it is worthnoting that the friend either accompanies his comrade or appears as the crisisreaches its peak In the Alcestis in particular the guest Heracles learns thetruth about the identity of the dead woman too late but his intervention turnsout to be beneficial Thus what seems to be a violation of Admetusrsquo promiseto his wife namely that he will never remarry ends up as a happy reunionwith her Furthermore one more characteristic reversal is to be observed theperson who is subjected to Heraclesrsquo noble yet at the same time ironical pressureto remarry is this time not a woman (Penelope Helen) but a man who acceptsthe proposal and is reunited with his wife

In the Alcestis therefore the typical phases of nostos are present separa-tion more precisely the final separation due to death trial (here representedby Heraclesrsquo struggle with Thanatos for the reasons I mentioned above) recog-nition and reunion This thematic sequence recurs later in the Hellenisticnovel A typical example appears in an early example namely CharitonrsquosCallirhoesup2sup1 which presents some notable similarities with the Alcestissup2sup2 Chaereas

See Reardon A list of parallels between Chariton and other Greek novels is offered byGarin ndash


On Callirhoersquos relation to tragedy see in general Trzskoma n with earlier bib-liography On Callirhoersquos relation to the Alcestis see Alvares ndash Alvares points outtwo similarities between the novel and the drama Admetusrsquo wish that the dead Alcestis mayappear in his dreams (Alc ndash compare Callirhoe ) and Alcestisrsquo wish that Admetusshould not impose a stepmother on their children (Alc ff compare Callirhoe ) The lattersimilarity had already been observed by Hirschberger ( ) but like Alvares she too isunaware of the fact that the concern of the heroine as is also the case with Alcestis in her pray-ers to Hestia ( ff) is her childrsquos marriage and what is more that in the novel the bride isknown in advance it is the orphan daughter of Dionysius I also do not believe that Hirschberger( ) is right in maintaining that Hermocratesrsquo claim concerning his daughterrsquos wish thatChaereas may outlive her () alludes to the Alcestis because the issue is not her sacrifice forher husband but the longevity of Chaereas after her death as well Her view ( ) that theChorus refers to the means of Admetusrsquo suicide (ndash) is also groundless The Chorus comesto realize that the situation is so desperate that it can only be cured by suicide This realizationhowever which also occurs in other dramas as a rhetorical way to describe despair is not direct-ly associated with Admetus On the contrary Hirschberger correctly believes ( ) thatPheresrsquo accusation that Admetus killed his wife () is repeated in Dionysiusrsquo allegationagainst Chaereas (Callirhoe ) as well as that the beautiful woman in Arados can makeup for the loss of Callirhoe just as a new marriage can console Admetus ( compare Cal-lirhoe ) Finally Hirschberger ( ) correctly points out that the veiled strangerChaereas meets in Arados (ndash) who upsets him because of her similarity with Callirhoerefers to the veiled Alcestis at the end of the play (ndash) Of course we must note that Cal-lirhoe in unescorted and alive and it is she who recognizes Chaereas by his voice and accord-ingly reveals her identity In any case it is thanks to this strange ἀνακαλυπτήρια that the reunionof the separated spouses is attained in the novel as well However I believe that further simi-larities exist Callirhoersquos assumption that the gods of the Underworld are summoning herwhen she regains her senses in the grave () evokes the hallucinations which the dying her-oine experiences in the drama (Alc ff) In after the unexpected meeting of Chaereasand Callirhoe in the court the heroine wonders whether what she saw was simply the ghostof Chaereas recalled by some Persian magus Admetus also similarly wonders about Alcestisrsquoreturn to life (Alc ndash) In contrast however to the silent Alcestis Chaereas not onlyspeaks but is also aware of the relevant facts It is notable that Dionysius even after receivingCallirhoersquos letter still believes that the child is his as also happens with Xuthus in Euripidesrsquo Ion(see Ruiz-Montero ) Two further yet stereotyped passages may also be informed by theAlcestisWhen blaming Polycharmus for preventing him from killing himself during Callirhoersquosburial () Chaereas is reminiscent of Admetus accusing the Chorus of not letting him fall intohis wifersquos grave ( ff) After Callirhoe and Chaereas have fled to Syracuse Artaxerxes announ-ces that he is not able to give him Callirhoe although he wants to and therefore assigns himpower over Ionia () Heracles also appeals to the same inability but ironically the veiled Al-cestis is by his side ( ff) The similarities between Callirhoe and the Alcestis lead to the hy-pothesis which however cannot be elaborated in the present paper that the change from thepainful events in the first books of the novel to the happy endwhich is foretold at the beginningof book draws its origin from the Euripidean play The difference of course is due to the factthat in the Alcestis Apollo prophesies the rescue of the heroine as early as in the prologuewhereas in the novel the hardships of the protagonists constitute simple fiction For the relationof Chariton to theatre see Tilg ndash Tilg ( ) describes Chariton as a prisoner

350 Daniel J Jacob

and Callirhoe get married out of mutual love at first sight Chaereas falls victimof an intrigue of his wifersquos former suitors and thinks that Challirhoe is cheatingon him Out of jealousy he kicks the pregnant Callirhoesup2sup3 and she loses hersenses Believing her to be dead Chaereas lays Callirhoe to rest but the heroineregains her senses in the tomb and is then abducted by grave-robber pirates Thiscauses her separation from her husband her being sold as a slave to Dionysiusand her remarriage to him which results in the birth of Chaereasrsquo childWhen hefinds out that Callirhoe is alive Chaereas commits himself to the quest for herHe arrives at Miletus and is close to discovering her but his triremes are seton fire and he himself is captured and sold as a slave to Mithridates the satrapof Caria Callirhoe is informed of his arrival but disinformation makes her be-lieve that Chaereas and his comrades have been killed so she builds a cenotaphin his honour Mithridates is accused of adultery by Dionysius as he believesthat Chaereasrsquo letter to Callirhoe which arrived from Caria is fake and betraysthe satraprsquos own erotic interest in Callirhoe In the trial in front of the Greatking Artaxerxes Mithridates brings along Chaereas who is still alive andthus he is found not guilty The spouses finally meet each other during thetrial but their reunion is postponedWhile Artaxerxes sets a new trial date to de-cide to which of the husbands he will adjudge Callirhoe a mutiny of the Egyp-tians from Persia breaks out and Chaereas joins them as an admiral and crushesthe Persian fleet He gains possession of the island Arados where Artaxerxes hasleft the women and children There unexpectedly he comes across Callirhoe andthey happily return to Syracuse

This is not the place to discuss the problematic hermeneutics that the plot ofthis novel presents I merely limit myself to those elements which suggest vari-ous analogues between the novel and drama in general and therefore constitutethe starting point for any interpretative approach of this novel(i) The various hardships the couple goes through are due to Aphroditersquos anger

at Chaereas for abusing his wife which is congruent with the notion of di-vine wrath triggering a tragic development (cf for instance EuripidesrsquoHippolytus)sup2⁴ After the repeated predicaments of the couple have assuagedthe anger of the goddess the spouses are reunited This means that Callir-

of prose Personally I would argue that just as Isocratesrsquo encomiasticrhetorical speeches areprose equivalents to Pindaric epinician poetry Charitonrsquos novel in a similar manner may beviewed as a prose equivalent to Euripidean drama From this perspective it is not coincidentalthat Tilg often characterizes Callirhoe as tragicomedy ( ) a term which definesEuripidean plays closing with a happy ending For historical parallels of cruel conduct see Tilg See the passages collected by Helms ndash


hoersquos marriage to Dionysius must also be dealt with from this perspectivenamely as part of Chaereasrsquo punishment and not as Callirhoersquos adulterylikewise Odysseusrsquo seven-year sojourn with Calypso is not assessed nega-tively since the hero like Callirhoe has the constant painful and ferventwish for nostos

(ii) Callirhoe is the central figure of the novel and as Helen in the homonymousEuripidean playsup2⁵ she blames her beauty for making her the object of desireof many important figures including the Great king

(iii) Finally Polycharmus is Chaereasrsquo friend faithful and inseparable to death(an exact equivalent to Pylades who accompanies Orestes to the exotic landof Taurians) and will marry his friendrsquos sister (88) just as Pylades willmarry Electrasup2⁶

Certainly the comparison of the novel with drama does not indicate a direct de-pendence the birth of the Hellenistic novel is an extremely complex phenomen-on coming into existence via various sources not always exclusively Greek ac-cording to some scholarssup2⁷ and presenting multiple combinations I am simplypointing to the use of common story-patterns with intertextual references to trag-edy and other earlier literary texts including the so-called tragic historiographyand the biographical traditionsup2⁸ There is of course no doubt that the novel hasmore realistic antecedents than tragic theatre That is why the heroine does notdie but she is simply placed senseless in the grave It is thus characteristic thatlsquorationalrsquo critics of Euripides such as AW Verrallsup2⁹ surmised that no real deathoccurs in the Alcestis either In the case under discussion however one should

For bibliography on Callirhoe and Helen see Trzaskoma n Cf E El and Or ndash It is noteworthy that both Helms and Billault intheir specialized studies on the characters of the novel leave out Polycharmusrsquo characterizationalbeit without justification I believe that Polycharmus is Chaereasrsquo alter ego insomuch as herepresents his friendrsquos innermost thoughts functioning in fact as his extension For examplewhen claiming that the sacrifice of their lives on account of their siding with the Egyptian rebelsagainst Artaxerxes is preferable to Chaereasrsquo suicide without a tangible result Polycharmusbrings to mind Pyladesrsquo suggestion to Orestes namely to lose their lives after having murderedHelen (Or ff) Surely Chaereas himself could have had this very thought In other wordsPolycharmus like Pylades in the play (cf especially Ch ndash where Pylades silent through-out the play utters the crucial three lines encouraging his friend to commit matricide) consti-tutes the outward expression of Chaereasrsquo inner world a fact that renders unnecessary Polychar-musrsquo characterization as an independent person See for instance Whitmarsh On this see Ruiz-Montero ndash (especially for Euripidean drama) Verrall ndash

352 Daniel J Jacob

consider both the fairy-tale origin of the plot of the drama and its divine direc-tion evoking the Ion and the Helen in that the homonymous heroes are alsounder the invisible protection of the gods

From this perspective one is justified I believe in maintaining that Euripi-des did have in mind the Odyssean remarriage yet he developed it with notabledeviations Alcestis settles again in the palace as queen after coming back fromHades which is the place also lsquovisitedrsquo by Odysseus before his nostos withouthowever losing his life This conclusion in conjunction with a variety of altera-tions pointed out in the case of the aforementioned tragedies (belonging accord-ing to Lange to the plays of nostos lsquoconversingrsquo with the Odyssey) proves withall the clarity one might desire how flexible and multivalent the story-patternsare (in this case the nostos theme) or more precisely how flexible and multiva-lent the various subtextual basic thematic units are (here separation hardshipstruggle recognition reunion) which interconnect and add up forming a storycharacterized by a concrete functional and architecturally structured arrange-ment and specific content Despite the demonstrable intertextual relationsthere is no slavish imitation here It is more like a palimpsest in which partsof the earlier text may be read through the overwritten text In particular theway the separation is brought about the beneficial intervention and struggleof the humans (which requires as a rule the assistance of the gods) the kindof struggle and the type of opponent the time of and the means used for the re-unionndash all these elements vary creating multivalent and in some cases unex-pected relations More precisely the Alcestis includes(i) Reversals a) a new marriage is proposed for a man and not a woman b) the

victor of the contest is not wedded to the woman functioning as his prizebut gives her back to her husband who is also his friend

(ii) The second marriage is identical to the first not a union with an unwelcomeperson that is finally avoided

(iii) The superhuman nature of the rivals the contest of the semi-god Heracleswith a supernatural figure Thanatos

(iv) Nostos a return from the world of the dead not from a place on earth

In conclusion Euripides in the Alcestis refigured the reunion of Odysseus andPenelope in the Odyssey which plays an archetypal role in similar instancesthen again the fairy-tale prehistory of the play on the one hand and the flexibledynamics of the nostos story-pattern on the other contributed to the literaryprocesses shaping the transformation of the epic source text into dramatic plot


Ioanna Karamanou

Euripidesrsquo lsquoTrojan Trilogyrsquo andthe Reception of the Epic Tradition

In 415 BC Euripides produced the Alexandros Palamedes and Trojan Women fol-lowed by the satyr-play Sisyphossup1 All three tragedies draw on the Trojan myth dis-play unity of locale with Troy as the place of action and share dominant themesconcepts and dramatic characters Consequently scholarly consensus from GilbertMurray till now including the influential monograph by Ruth Scodel regards thisEuripidean production as presenting the features of a lsquoconnected trilogyrsquosup2 My pur-pose is firstly to contribute to the argumentation in favour of the thematic and ideo-logical connection of these plays which I shall argue is of a different nature thanthat of Aeschylean trilogies (it is for this reason that I shall be using the term lsquoTrojantrilogyrsquo in inverted commas) Secondly I shall explore the generic transformation ofthe epic material into tragedy in the light of fifth-century intellectual and ideologicalcontexts which could yield insight into the cultural processes filtering the Euripi-dean reworking of the Homeric source textsup3

The Alexandros treats the nostos of the ill-omened exposed baby Alexan-dros Paris to the palace of Troy following his athletic triumph in the funeralgames held in his memory a failed murder-attack against him by his mother He-cabe in ignorance of his true identity and a speech of prophetic frenzy by Cas-sandra foretelling the future disaster of Troy and of Priamrsquos royal oikos The sec-ond tragedy the Palamedes presents the victimization of the homonymous heroby Odysseus at Troy Palamedesrsquo trial before Agamemnon as a judge and his sub-

Schol Ar Vesp b (Koster) Ael VH Murray ndash and ndash (cf earlier Schoumlll ff conjecturing thatthis was a firmly connected trilogy Krausse ndash Wilamowitz

ndash)Schmid Staumlhlin ndash Menegazzi ndash Pertusi ndash Friedrich ndash Mason ndash Scarcella ndash Webster ndash Wilson ndash Stoumlssl II ndash ndash Lee x-xiv Scodel ndash Jar-kho ndash Barlow ndash Sopina ndash Ritooacutek ndash Hose ndash Kovacs ndash Falcetto ndash (with rich bibliography on thismatter) Cropp ndash Sansone ndash Di Giuseppe ndash Cf the scep-ticism expressed in Planck ndash Koniaris ndash Conacher ndash On the investigation of contexts as a fundamental concept of classical reception theory seeMartindale ndash Hardwick esp ndash ndash Hardwick Stray ndashsee further lsquoIntroductionrsquo (this volume)

sequent unjust condemnation to death⁴ The Trojan Women concludes the TrojanWar by presenting its repercussions from the side of the defeated and in partic-ular of the Trojan womenfolk

The first obvious connecting link between these three tragedies is the unityof locale with Troy as the place of action Moreover the third tragedy of this pro-duction the Trojan Women contains scenes reflecting and recalling earlierevents from the previous plays following the technique of the lsquomirror scenesrsquoof Aeschylean trilogies⁵

A striking mirror scene aiming at illustrating the antithesis before and afterthe reversal of fortune for Troy is the Cassandra episode in Tr 308ndash461 whichreflects Cassandrarsquos scene of prophetic frenzy in the Alexandros (frr 62endashhK⁶) Her prophecies in the Trojan Women involve an inversion of her earlier fore-tellings in the Alexandros in that in the latter she foretells disaster out of pros-perity while in the former she prophesies victory out of defeat⁷ The ironic an-tithesis between seeming and being is clear in both cases and Euripidesseems to be exploiting Cassandra and the implications of her prophecies (seem-ingly unbelievable albeit true) as a means of highlighting this very contrast Inboth cases her prophetic madness is described as baccheia (Tr 307 341 348ndash49366ndash67 408 414ndash 15 Alexandros fr 62e K)⁸ I would note that this term seems tobe particularly nuanced it not only alludes to bacchic frenzy but also to the col-lective character of bacchic cult not least because Cassandrarsquos prophecies affectthe whole Trojan community⁹ Apart from the visual and thematic links betweenthe two scenes already noted by Ruth Scodelsup1⁰ it should be added that Cassand-rarsquos virginal modesty in the Alexandros as expressed in fr 1733 J of EnniusrsquoAlexander which was evidently modelled upon the homonymous Euripidean

On the plot of the Alexandros see the hypothesis preserved in POxy ndash On the Pal-amedes see schol E Or (Schwartz) Hyg fab [Apollod] Epit On this Aeschylean technique see Taplin ndash ndash and on its exploitation inEuripidean drama see Strohm ndash Mastronarde ndash Burnett ndash ndash n ndash Dingel ndash Steidle ndash Haller-an ndash The abbreviation K stands for the numbering of Euripidean fragments in Kannicht Scodel Webster ndash See also Mazzoldi ndash Croally ndash Mossman ndash Gartziou-Tatti ndash See Scodel ndash Karamanou ndash On the communal dimension of bacchic rites see for instance Segal f ndashndash Guettel-Cole ndash Henrichs ndash See Scodel

356 Ioanna Karamanou

playsup1sup1 provides an ironic antithesis to her imminent status as Agamemnonrsquos mis-tress in Tr 310 ff Moreover the torch imagery foreboding the Trojan disaster inher prophecies in the Alexandros (Ennius Alexander fr 1741ndash42 J) is employedantithetically in the third tragedy of this production to allude to the weddingtorch as a means of her avenging the injustice done to herself her family andTroy (Tr 308ndash325 353ndash364)

Hecabersquos ritual lamentation for Astyanax in Tr 1156ndash 1255 seems to recall apossible earlier ritual lamentation for the exposed baby Alexandros at the begin-ning of the homonymous play as I have argued in a publicationsup1sup2 More specif-ically fr 46a col ii K of the Alexandros contains the choral cry ἒ ἔ (l 41) as wellas a reference to γόοι (l 35 lsquogrieving criesrsquo) which are typical of ritual lamenta-tions revolving around a herorsquos death This scene is consistent with the testimonyof the hypothesis (hyp Alexandros POxy 3650 col i 8ndash 10) referring to He-cabersquos mourning for the apparent loss of her baby and with the consolation ad-dressed to her by the Chorus-leader (frr 44ndash46 K) earlier in the play According-ly the possible lament for the seemingly dead baby boy in the Alexandros couldbe interestingly mirrored in the actual funeral of Hecabersquos grandchild in the thirdtragedy of the lsquoTrojan trilogyrsquo ironically enough the fate of Astyanax is sealedwith Alexandrosrsquo survival

In addition the indirect evidence for the Alexandros (Hyginus fab 91 in con-junction with a group of Etruscan mirror-back relief-representations dated to thefourth and third century BC LIMC I lsquoAlexandrosrsquo figg 21ndash23) suggests thatAlexandros sought refuge at an altar to escape the attack against him organizedby Hecabe with the assistance of her son Deiphobus in ignorance of his trueidentitysup1sup3 Hyginus (fab 91) mentions that this was the altar of Zeus HerkeiosThis detail recurs only in a Coptic textile medallion (Hermitage Museum invnr 11507) which is dated to the fifth century ADsup1⁴ and could have either beenmodelled upon an earlier (and now lost) artistic representation or may havedrawn on an intermediary literary work such as Hyginusrsquo handbook whichwas a common source for mythological lore in late antiquity It is worth bearing

On Enniusrsquo use of the Euripidean Alexandros as a source text see Snell Jocelyn Timpanaro ndash Jouan van Looy ff Skutsch CollardCropp Gibert Collard Cropp I Di Giuseppe ndash The abbrevia-tion J refers to the numbering of Enniusrsquo fragments in Jocelyn Karamanou ndash On the plotting scene between Hecabe and Deiphobus (fr d ndash K) see Huys ndash For more detail on the relation of Hyg fab and the Etruscan mirror-back relief-repre-sentations to the Alexandros see Karamanou ndash See Kannicht I Nauerth pl

Euripidesrsquo lsquoTrojan Trilogyrsquo and the Reception of the Epic Tradition 357

in mind however that though the Roman mythographerrsquos account largely re-flects elements which are congruent with the evidence for the Euripidean Alex-andros it is not a hypothesis and therefore does not necessarily report everyaspect of this tragic plot with accuracy Nonetheless if the possible implicationsof this piece of information are investigated with due caution then Alexandrosrsquoconceivable flight to the particular altar of a domestic god protecting blood tiessup1⁵may acquire special dramatic significance within the framework of this produc-tion Alexandrosrsquo supplication at this altar and in turn his rescue and recogni-tion with his family signpost the beginning of the Trojan disaster ironicallyreaching its climax in the Trojan Women in which Priamrsquos slaughter is men-tioned to have taken place at the very same altar of the god who protectedblood kinship and the integrity of his oikos (Tr 16ndash17 481ndash83) As the altar ofZeus Herkeios stands in the courtyard that is at the crossroads between privateand public sphere it serves to represent the connection of the oikos with thepolissup1⁶ in both the Alexandros and the Trojan Women the events of the house-hold (the repercussions of Parisrsquo rescue and Priamrsquos slaughter respectively) affectdirectly the city of Troy which collapses along with its royal oikos

As has already been notedsup1⁷ particular characters in the Trojan Women areclosely connected with incidents or characters in the previous plays of this produc-tion which I shall briefly mention Andromachersquos entry in a carriage with Hectorrsquosson and Hectorrsquos armour as well as her focus on her life with him in her speech(Tr 643ndash56 673ndash78) recalls Hectorrsquos role in the Alexandros which will be exploredbelow Helen as the cause of the Trojan War in Tr 914ff mirrors the figure of Alex-andros in the first play Her particular reference to the crown which she demands forher alleged contribution to the Greek victory (Tr 937) alludes to the crowned winnerAlexandros in the homonymous play (fr 61d6 K) Alexandrosrsquo brother Deiphobusappears as his athletic rival in Alexandros fr 62andashb K (see also hyp POxy 365022ndash25) and is referred to as an erotic rival in Tr 959ndash60 Odysseusrsquo ruse and maliceare brought forward in both the Palamedessup1⁸ and Tr 281ndash91 713ndash25 1224ndash25whereas the satyr-play of this production bears the name of Sisyphus Odysseusrsquo fa-ther according to a branch of the tradition adopted by Euripidessup1⁹ The figure of Sis-

On the cult of Zeus Herkeios see Il ndash Od Hdt S Ant withthe notes of Jebb

and Griffith schol Pl Euthd D (Greene) Harpocra-tion sv Ἕρκειος Ζεύς p Dindorff Nilsson

I Burkert For the spatial connotations of the altar of Zeus Herkeios in tragedy see Rehm See especially Scodel ndash See above n See Cyc and IA


yphus therefore is associated with the previous plays by means of his relation toOdysseus as well as by his incarnating the very theme of deception and ambiguityderiving from the antithesis between seeming and being which permeates this pro-duction as mentioned above in the first tragedy Alexandros is not the low-bornherdsman that he seems to be but a royal son and the seemingly happy endingof his return designates the beginning of Trojan disaster Palamedes appears tobe a traitor without really being one and the Greeks seem to have won the warwhile they are in fact defeatedsup2⁰

The latter remark sets a challenge to explore the connecting links among theseplays not only in terms of theme but with regard to concept as well It is notewor-thy that all three tragedies are named after the victims whether they are actual vic-tims as Palamedes and the women of Troy or near victims as Alexandrossup2sup1 BothAlexandros and Palamedes fall victims of their opponentsrsquo phthonos (that is resent-ful envy or indignation at onersquos prosperity)sup2sup2 I would argue that this idea culminatesat the Trojan Women in which punishment is also instigated by phthonos and inthis case divine phthonossup2sup3 since the insolent behaviour of the Greeks towardsthe gods incurs divine wrath (Tr 65ndash97) As Gilbert Murray noted the Alexandrosand the Palamedes provided a sketch of the main Trojan and Greek characters re-spectively alluding to their fatewhile the third play the Trojan Women encompass-es the fate of both the Greeks and the Trojanssup2⁴ Moreover it should be pointed outthat in the three trial-debates of these tragedies the accused is perceived as anenemy of the community The first agon in the Alexandros presents the clash ofthe royal son who has been raised as a herdsman with his fellow herdsmen Inthis trial-debate Alexandros is accused of haughty behaviour towards the othershepherds before Priam as a judge (frr 48 50 56 60 61 K and hyp POxy 365015ndash21) Subsequently Palamedes is falsely regarded as a betrayer of the Greekarmy (fr 588 K) while Helen is held responsible for communal damage and claimsto be innocent albeit guilty (Tr 860ndash1059) The idea of the clash with the commun-ity in all three plays is a factor suggestive of the political implications of this produc-tion which interwoven with the opposition of seeming and being pervading these

See also Murray ndash Scodel ndash notes that these three tragedies present lsquothe murder of the innocentrsquo See Scodel for Odysseusrsquo phthonos against Palamedes see schol E Or (Schwartz) Gorg Pal Ba D-K for an analysis of Deiphobusrsquo phthonos see Karamanou ndash For the features of divine phthonos see Walcot ndash ndash Bulman ndash Milobenski ndash Lloyd-Jones

ndash Murray ndash and ndash followed by Barlow Dunn ndash Shapiro Burian


debates evidently reflects the socio-political ambiguity of that period The brutalityand vagueness of contemporary warfare as well as the abusive power of the mightyover the weaker (an idea recalling the Melian Dialogue in Th 584ndash116 with refer-ence to events which broke out in 416 BC) are suggestive of a social and ideologicalcrisis In the Trojan Women Euripides seems to have aimed at conveying a stronganti-war message whilst powerfully illustrating throughout this dramatic produc-tion the ambiguity and frailty of human judgment in that troubled periodsup2⁵

Hence the unity of the lsquoTrojan trilogyrsquo does not rest upon a tightly construct-ed continuity of plot which is represented in most trilogies of Aeschylus As ar-gued above this production displays thematic and conceptual coherence aswell as structural links among the plays such as the aforementioned mirrorscenes Its unity may thus be perceived not as a tight sequence of plot as in Ae-schylean trilogies but rather as a sequence of thought

In his lsquoTrojan trilogyrsquo Euripides largely draws his mythical material from thecyclic epics of the seventh and sixth century BC In more specific terms the sub-ject-matter of the Palamedes is provided in the Cypria (fr 30 Bernabeacute) havingalso been treated in the Palamedes tragedies by Aeschylus and Sophocles andthat of the Trojan Women mainly derives from the cyclic poem Iliou Persis Sim-ilarly the Alexandros contains elements narrated in the Cypria such as Cassand-rarsquos foretelling of the disaster which is to be caused by Alexandrossup2⁶ and herprobable reference to the Judgmentsup2⁷ Yet the theme of Alexandrosrsquo exposureand reunion with his family which is treated in the Alexandros tragedies by Euri-pides and Sophocles does not occur in Proclusrsquo brief summary of the Cypria Theearliest evidence for the exposure motif in this legend is found in early fifth-cen-tury iconography depicting Alexandrosrsquo recognition and reunion with his natalfamilysup2⁸ Due to the fragmentary state of Pindarrsquos Eighth Paean fr 52i (A) 14ndash25 (dated to 490480 BC) there is no concrete literary reference to the boyrsquos ex-

See Murray f ndash Hose ndash ndash Falcetto ndash (withrich earlier bibliography) Croally ndash Goff ndash Mastronarde ndash Shapiro Burian ndash For the events of that period see Kagan Rhodes

ndash ndash Hornblower ndash See hyp Alex POxy ndash E Alexandros frr endashh K Ennius Alexander frr J and [Procl] Chrest ndash nonetheless in Proclusrsquo summary of the Cypria Cassandraforesees the impending disaster at the point of Alexandrosrsquo departure for Greece to gain Helen(cf similarly Pi Paean fr i (A) ndash SnndashM and schol ad i (A) ndash) and not within thecontext of the reunion with his natal family as in Euripides See Ennius Alexander fr ndash J and [Procl] Chrest ndash cf also West ndash ndash ndash On the tragic reception of the Epic Cycle see most recently Sommerstein ndash See LIMC I sv lsquoAlexandrosrsquo figg and dated to and BC respectively


posure before fifth-century tragedy apart from a description of Hecabersquos ill-om-ened dream preserved in this Pindaric passagesup2⁹

Although Euripides does not treat Homeric episodes as such in this produc-tion it is particularly interesting that he tends to reiterate Homeric characteriza-tion and ideology His appropriation of Homeric ideology probably rests uponthe widely held assumption that Homerrsquos epics superseded the other epic tradi-tions through an adaptation of the heroic tradition to the new self-image of Greekculture and the shaping of collective memory towards the end of the Archaicperiodsup3⁰ The epic tradition of the Trojan myth thus crystallized into the Homericpoems which became an indisputable frame of reference and an inseparablepart of classical Greek identity

Basic Homeric features appropriated and refigured by Euripides in his lsquoTro-jan trilogyrsquo such as the anthropomorphic gods and the character-sketching ofHecabe Helen Odysseus and Andromache have already been the subject ofmuch studysup3sup1 My purpose is to focus selectively on less studied and even unex-plored aspects of Homeric reception by Euripides from the standpoint of his trag-ic rhetoric which enables him to approach elements of the epic tradition throughlate fifth-century spectacles

In an earlier paper I argued that the fragmentary material from the Alexan-dros preserves parts of an interesting second agon clearly signposted as an ἅμιλ-λα λόγων between Hector and his brother Deiphobus before their mother Hecabeas a judgesup3sup2 The objective of this formal debate which takes place after the ath-letic triumph of the herdsman Alexandros is Hectorrsquos disagreement with hisbrotherrsquos intention to have the unknown herdsman eliminated Deiphobus re-sents the encroachment on his royal status by the socially inferior herdsmanwho deprived him of the prize at the games which the prince regards as his le-gitimate privilege and rightful possession As I mentioned above Deiphobusrsquoemotion could be best described as phthonos which involves the resentment

See also Robert ndash Snell Stinton ndash Guidorizzi Collard Cropp Gibert Tsagalis c ndash On the other hand Jouan ndash favoured the possibility that the exposure motif originates in the Cypria See Finkelberg ndash Graziosi ndash esp and on the vast impor-tance of Homer for tragedy see for instance Griffin Easterling Davidson esp ndash For Euripidesrsquo dialogue with Homer see Lange Croally ndash Mossman esp ndash Davidson ndash ndash See Poole ndash Desch Barlow ndash Garner ndash Hard-wick ndash Croally ndash Easterling ndash Worman Xanthakis-Karamanos ndash Davidson ndash ndash Davidson Worman ndash Canavero ndash Dimock ndash Montiglio ndash Marshall For the substantiation of this scene as an agon see Karamanou


one feels against people who rise above themselves violating the status rules ofa highly class conscious societysup3sup3 and is also closely related to athleticprowesssup3⁴ His ethical stance follows the requirements of a shame culture andthe attention which must be paid to acknowledge onersquos honour

Homeric ethics form part of the ideological nexus of a shame culture accordingto which a man pursues the expressed ideal norm of societywhilst internalizing theanticipated judgments of others on himself (on the distinction between shame cul-ture and guilt culture and their implications for Homeric reception in the classicalperiod see also Volonaki and Mantzouranis in this volume)sup3⁵ In the Iliad Deipho-bus participates in the battle in 13156ff 413ndash16 and asserts his honour by killingHypsenor to avenge the death of Asios and vaunting that a payment in honour forhonour has been madesup3⁶ After Homer he is also mentioned by Alcaeus (frS26212 L-P) to have been killed during the sack of Troy and is given prominenceby Euripides as rival and near-murderer of Alexandros in the homonymous playsup3⁷Deiphobusrsquo feeling of phthonos due to his defeat by the herdsman Alexandros inEuripides rests upon an ideal self-image which is placed under threat and an aware-ness of the standards under which he is liable to be criticizedsup3⁸ Accordingly he dis-parages Hectorrsquos moderate attitude towards the herdsmanrsquos victory accusing hisbrother of being conspicuous to the Trojans as inferior to a slave (fr 62a14 K)The Homeric persona of Deiphobus is thus appropriated by Euripides and presentedto commend the traditional competitive values of honour and fame of the Iliadicshame culture His persistence in reasserting his honour by going as far as attempt-ing to eliminate the triumphant herdsman makes him an unsympathetic characterin the Euripidean play

In this formal debate Deiphobusrsquo phthonos is brought into sharp contrast withHectorrsquos sōphrosynē (fr 62a7ndash8 11ndash12 16 K) and sense of justice towards the herds-manrsquos well-earned victory (fr 62b10ndash13 K)sup3⁹ His justice and moderation are co-op-erative excellences and constituent features of a quiet moral behaviour commendedin late fifth-century Athens The Euripidean depiction of Hectorrsquos moderation draws

Arist Rh bndasha EE b f EN bndash see Ben-Zersquoev ndash Konstan ndash and ndash See Scodel The term lsquoshame culturersquo was coined by Dodds ndash See also Hammer ndash Redfield

ndash Adkins ndash ndash See Wilson Kyriakou esp ndash Deiphobus is employed thereafter as a character in later literature as in the Posthomerica( ndash ff ff ff) by Quintus of Smyrna For a further description of the features of shame culture see Cairns ndash Silk

Karamanou ndash


on his Homeric portrait In the Iliad Hector who is perceived as representing Troy atits best combines the traditional qualities of high birth and valour (6403 444ndash467215ndash18 24214ndash16 258ndash59) with co-operative excellences such as justice andmoderation he has a strong sense of duty towards his family and homelandwhile at the same time his mild temper emerges from his human attitude towardsHelen by not allowing her to be mistreated (24767ndash75) and from his moderation to-wards furious Achilles in 22256ndash57⁴⁰ Hence the Euripidean agon between Hectorand Deiphobus seems to showcase the continued existence of competitive valuesalong with co-operative excellences in late fifth-century Athens⁴sup1 and Euripides ex-ploits the polarity of the argumentation of these Homeric characters to allude to thisperiod of ideological transition

In the Iliad Hectorrsquos heroic ethos is clearly defined in contrast with the lessheroic character of AlexandrosParis In books 3 (30ff 264ff) 6 (280ndash85 325ndash31 523ndash25) and 13 (769ndash73) Hector strongly disapproves of Parisrsquo reluctance tofight and his military weakness⁴sup2 AlexandrosParis seems to display an almost un-socialized attitude in that he is insensitive to the moral disapproval of others in-cluding Helen who expresses her low opinion of him in books 3 (428ndash36) and 6(349ndash53)⁴sup3 Accordingly I would suggest that in the Alexandros Euripides seemsto have taken up the Homeric idea of Parisrsquo clash with his social context as Alex-androsParis comes to conflict with his foster-environment that is the group of hisfellow-herdsmen in the aforementioned first agon of the play in which he is accusedof haughty behaviour In the argumentation employed in this trial-debate Alexan-dros is rebuked for his fondness for the noble class (fr 50 K) and for his arrogancewhich is described as useless and vile (fr 48 K) arousing the hostility of his fellow-herdsmen This accusation displays his anti-social attitude and bears serious impli-cations in a period in which onersquos usefulness to the household and the polis wasregarded as a cardinal virtue of the good citizen⁴⁴

For Hectorrsquos moderation see also Aeschylusrsquo Phrygians or The Ransoming of Hector fr R(and Sommerstein ) On the coexistence of competitive and co-operative excellences towards the end of the fifthcentury see Cairns ndash Adkins ndash See also the delineation of Hectorrsquos virtue by Priam as compared to his other sons (includingParis) in ndash For Parisrsquo unheroic portrait see for instance Gartziou-Tatti ndashndash See Redfield

ndash Dover ndash Fouchard ndash Adkins ff Bryant ndash Pearson ndash


Unlike Hector and Andromache who are presented particularly in book 6 ofthe Iliad as embodying virtue and loyalty to their household and homeland⁴⁵the figures of AlexandrosParis and Helen are displayed as representing calamityand social disorder I shall argue that book 6 also seems to provide the main ma-terial for Euripidesrsquo reception of Helenrsquos figure in his lsquoTrojan trilogyrsquo In fact itmay not be fortuitous that Euripides regularly draws on this very book for issuesof characterization and ideology particularly with regard to Helen Hector andAndromache As has been observed book 6 of the Iliad succeeds in arousingthe tragic emotions of pity and fear by underscoring the clash between individ-ual needs and social expectations and delineating the psychological complexityof the characters as well as divine detachment⁴⁶ thus providing ample materialfor the shaping of a tragic plot

Eustathius was the first to note that this book includes a manipulative mdashandalmost seductive (according to Graziosi and Haubold)mdash speech of Helen ad-dressed to Hector in front of Paris⁴⁷ To appease Hectorrsquos anger towards his broth-er she addresses him with soothing lsquohoney-sweet wordsrsquo (6343 μύθοισι hellipμειλι-χίοισι) which may well be paralleled to the honeyed dangerously seductivemanner of the Sirens in book 12 of the Odyssey (12187 μελίγηρυν)⁴⁸ Helen attrib-utes her abduction to the will of the gods and sides with Hector isolating herselffrom Paris whom she regards as morally insensitive as he does not bear the bur-den of his shameful acts (6344ndash58) At the same time she seems to be guilt-rid-den and remorseful wishing that she had died in infancy⁴⁹ and even employs arhetoric of self-abuse through which she finally succeeds in gaining sympathyand deflecting blame by others⁵⁰ Hectorrsquos reaction at her speech is self-control-led though he clearly describes her tactics as involving the rhetoric of persua-sion (6360 οὐδέ με πείσεις)

See Redfield ff Schein ndash GraziosiHaubold ndash Arthur

Katz Grethlein See Redfield

ndash GraziosiHaubold See Eust schol Il ndash ndash (Vol II van der Valk) describing Helenrsquos attitudetowards Hector as flattering and wheedling see especially II ndash (van der Valk) Ἑλένημὲν κολακεύουσα τὸν Ἕκτορα ndash ἔοικε δὲ Ἕκτωρ ἐν τούτοις ὑποπτεύειν τὸ τῆς Ἑλένηςαἱμύλον and κολακευτικῶς ἡ σοφὴ Ἑλένη ἐναβρύνεται Cf GraziosiHaubold ndash See also Arthur Katz ndash Cf similarly Il ndash ndash see Maguire ndash See Worman ndash Day ndash


I suggest that Helenrsquos speech in the Iliad seems to be echoed in her adikos logosin the formal debate in Ε Tr 914ndash65⁵sup1 Her dangerously polite and softening wordstowards Menelaus at the beginning of the agon (Tr 895ndash900 903ndash04) recall hersoothing approach of Hector in the Homeric passage Following her Homeric per-sona and appropriating Homeric argumentation Helen in Tr 935ndash37 refers to herill reputation and casts herself to the role of the victim of divine will and Parisrsquo ac-tions (Tr 919ndash31 940ndash50) in order to be released from blame Nonetheless unlikeher Iliadic remorseful self Helenrsquos persona is transformed by Euripides in that shegoes as far as explicitly and shamelessly denying her culpability (Tr 916ndash65) Thedenial of her personal responsibility is the main line of argumentation also in Gor-giasrsquo famous defence of Helen which serves to illustrate the power of rhetoricalability⁵sup2 Her seductive stance and manipulative approach based on her beautyand her soothing use of words which do not mislead Hector in the Iliadic passageare appropriated in her unjust rhetoric and provocative appearance with the pur-pose of luring Menelaus in the Euripidean agon and are strongly reprimandedby Hecabe and the female Chorus-leader (Tr 966ndash68 1022ndash28) The latter is nottaken in by Helenrsquos rhetorical skill which she regards as employed at the expenseof truth and justice (Tr 967ndash68 πειθὼ διαφθείρουσα τῆσδrsquo ἐπεὶ λέγει καλῶςκακοῦργος οὖσα) echoing Hectorrsquos aforementioned remark about her rhetoric inthe Homeric passage Furthermore in the Iliadic scene Helen sets up a triangleamong herself Paris and Hector noting their fame in future poetry (6357ndash58)⁵sup3the triangle-pattern is reconfigured in two levels within the Euripidean formal de-bate among herself Menelaus and dead Paris throughout her speech as well asamong herself Paris and his rival Deiphobus at a particular point of her rhetoricalnarration (Tr 959ndash60)

Euripidesrsquo reception of Helenrsquos seductive and manipulative rhetoric of per-suasion in the Iliadic passage may also be explored from the viewpoint of audi-ence response To gain sympathy the Homeric Helen blames herself whilst tak-ing at the same time a fatalistic view of the plight which has been caused InHomer she is the daughter of Zeus (3171 199 228 418 426) and as such she isreleased from the blame of others being presented as the means of implement-ing Zeusrsquo nemesis (3164ndash65)⁵⁴ Helenrsquos theocentric position in the Iliad is trans-

For Helenrsquos adikos logos see Basta Donzelli ndash De Romilly ndashCroally ndash Gellie Conacher ndash Lloyd ndash Meridor ndash Gregory ndash Gorg Hel Bndash D-K see Worman Consigny ndash ndash Ballif ndash Bergren ndash See GraziosiHaubold Cf Cypria fr Bernabeacute see Austin ndash and ndash Roisman ndash


planted into the Euripidean play and put into criticism within the context of theagon and in turn before the audience The dramatist introduces Hecabe as Hel-enrsquos rhetorical opponent and enters into a lsquodialoguersquo with aspects of the latterrsquosHomeric persona and the surrounding ideology Hecabersquos rationalistic refutationof Helenrsquos position unveils the injustice concealed in the latterrsquos rhetorical elab-oration and the unscrupulousness hidden behind her manipulative stance Ac-cordingly in the eyes of the fifth-century audience divine influence as suchdoes not seem to count as an excuse since passion may be involuntary thatis god-sent but onersquos response is not⁵⁵ Therefore the theocentric argumenta-tion employed by Helen would have been questionable in everyday life andtends to be commonly associated in tragedy with characters whose attitude isimmoral as the Nurse in Hipp 433ndash81 and Pasiphae in Cretans fr 472e K⁵⁶ Atthe end of the debate the irony is palpable since Helenrsquos power of words andappearancemdashalso stressed by Gorgias (82 B118ndash 14 16ndash 19 D-K)mdash leads to heractual victory in the agon in that she manages to escape death whereas Hecabeis the lsquomoralrsquo winner in the eyes of the audience⁵⁷

Consequently Euripidesrsquo response to the epic tradition in his lsquoTrojan trilogyrsquodoes not merely involve the tragic shaping of the mythical legacy of early eposRather the dramatist engages in a complex dialogue with Homeric characteriza-tion and ideology whilst regularly embedding his epic referents within agonisticcontexts in accordance with the sophistic doctrine of dissoi logoi In the Alexan-dros the distinction between Homeric competitive values and fifth-century co-op-erative excellences is eloquently drawn in the Hector-Deiphobus agon At thesame time the anti-social Iliadic portrait of AlexandrosParis seems to be appro-priated in the first formal debate of the same play and is opposed to the cardinalfifth-century virtue of usefulness Furthermore Helenrsquos Homeric persona is refig-ured and challenged in the trial-debate of the Trojan Women In the agon heroicvalues tend to be confronted with new modes of thought⁵⁸ and Euripides oftenjuxtaposes aspects of traditional and contemporary ideology within the rhetori-cal framework of his formal debates Likewise in the famous debate of the Anti-ope between Zethus and Amphion representing the vita activa and vita contem-plativa respectively Euripides draws a sharp contrast between the traditional

On this fifth-century ideological position see Adkins ndash ndash ndash Gu-thrie ndash Lloyd-Jones

ndash Dodds ndash Barrett ndash Gregory ndash Dolfi ndash Reckford ndash Rivier ndash See Dubischar esp ndash Barlow ndash See Croally ndash Goldhill ndash VernantVidal-Naquet ndashLloyd ndash Kamerbeek passim


competitive values and the quieter virtues of late fifth century⁵⁹ Euripides thusrefigures aspects of Homeric ideology by juxtaposing them to late fifth-centuryethics the dynamics of his tragic rhetoric give ample scope for a dialogue whichbrings to the fore the dialectic as well as the tension between the virtues of theepic tradition and the values of his own era

On this debate see Carter ndash Gibert ndash Slings Kerferd ndash Famous comic parallels of the clash between traditional and contemporary ideologyrepresenting the common theme of lsquoNew vs Oldrsquo are provided in the agon scenes of ArNu ndash and Ra ndash (see Dover lxii-lxiii and ndash)


Varvara Georgopoulou

Andromachersquos Tragic Personafrom the Ancient to the Modern Stage

This essay aims at exploring the reception of the Homeric figure of Andromachewithin the dramatic genre across cultural contexts The transformation of the Ho-meric material by Euripides Seneca Racine Jean Giraudoux and Akis Dimoucould provide an overview of the key stages in the reception history of this leg-end in theatre as well as of the cultural processes shaping its refiguration over awide time-span and within different intellectual and artistic contextssup1

Although Andromachersquos appearance in the Iliad occupies a rather smallspace she has become a symbolic figure in world literature This is mainlydue to the moral and aesthetic function of the famous meeting of Hector and An-dromache at the walls of Troy in the Iliadic passage (6390ndash493)Within the omi-nous war atmosphere culminating at the duel of its two protagonists (Achillesand Hector) the peaceful and harmonious encounter of the couple in a militaryepic is an impressive indication of Homerrsquos knowledge of human nature focus-ing on human needs as against social norms (on the sixth book of the Iliad andits reception see also Karamanou in this volume) Andromache the daughter ofthe great Eetion king of Cilician Thebes (6395) enjoyed the honour of becomingthe wife of brave Hector and a noblewoman of Troy The serenity and happinessof her home were suddenly overturned by the invasion of the Achaeans whichdeprived her violently of her paternal family As she says to Hector Ἕκτορἀτὰρ σύ μοί ἐσσι πατὴρ καὶ πότνια μήτηρ ἠδὲ κασίγνητος σύ δέ μοι θαλερὸςπαρακοίτης (6429ndash31 see also A Michalopoulos in this volume) One cannothelp but admire their feelings for each other and Hectorrsquos warm sympathy ex-pressing his anxiety about her fate (6429)sup2 Andromachersquos fears are soon to bejustified as she is preparing Hectorrsquos bath to relieve his exhausted body afterthe battle Achillesrsquo horses are dragging his corpse (22448) Andromache rushesout of her house μαινάδι ἴση (22461) as she sees the terrible sight she swoonsand when she comes to her senses again she bursts into a heart-rending lament(22477ndash514) τὴν δὲ κατrsquo ὀφθαλμῶν ἐρεβεννὴ νὺξ ἐκάλυψεν (22466)sup3

On the significance of the exploration of these complex processes in the field of classicalreception studies see for instance Hardwick esp ndash Hardwick Stray ndashMartindale ndash On this scene see Schein ndash Graziosi Haubold ndash For more detail see Segal ndash Grethlein ndash Dueacute ch

An eloquent contrast may be drawn between the dark atmosphere of the Ho-meric farewell scene between husband and wife and Sapphorsquos epithalamium pre-served in fr 4424ndash34 L-P which describes the arrival of the two newlyweds atTroy The latter scene is perfectly structured in both content and form reflectingsocial and artistic contexts the outer and inner world of the poetess⁴ The per-sona of Andromache the noblewoman and the model wife and mother of Ho-meric heritage losing everything and becoming a captive and a slave-concubinewas to be taken over by the tragic Muse who continued her story appropriatingas well as deviating from the Homeric source text

Greek and Roman tragedy constitute key phases in the reception history ofAndromachersquos persona not least because they provide insight into those aspectsof the Homeric legend which were refigured in later theatre Of the three greattragic poets Euripides innovated in the description of human passions and of fe-male psychology The political circumstances of the Peloponnesian War and thesocial resonances of the sophistic movement formulate the key lines of theframework within which his plays may be located and assessed⁵ Euripidestransformed the Homeric Andromache presenting her as the protagonist in thetragedy of the same title and as a secondary character in the Trojan Women

The Andromache was produced in the 420s (possibly in 425 BC)⁶ and treats theevents following the Trojan War The title-heroine lives in Phthia as a captive andconcubine of Neoptolemus the son of Achilles who was her husbandrsquos murdererNeoptolemus is absent and his lawful wife Hermione threatens to kill Andromachealong with the little son whom she has borne to Neoptolemus Andromache has fledas a suppliant to Thetisrsquo altar Her character in this play as it emerges from her for-mal debate with Hermione is consistent with her Homeric figure as far as wisdompatience and maternal love are concerned (Andr 147ndash273) At the same time Euri-pides reshapes Andromachersquos persona in that she employs rhetorical elaborationand solid argumentation This agon is most interesting not least because it toucheson issues of female psychology by presenting two diametrically opposite views ofthe female role The haughty behaviour and female independence of Hermione asa high-born wife are eloquently contrasted to Andromachersquos representation of thesubmissive devoted and tolerant wife As the latter advises the arrogant SpartanHermione φίλτρον δὲ καὶ τόδrsquomiddot οὐ τὸ κάλλος ὦ γύναι ἀλλrsquo ἁρεταὶ τέρπουσι τοὺςξυνευνέτας (Andr 207ndash08 lsquoit is not our beauty but our virtues that fascinate ourbed-partnersrsquo) This onstage conflict between the two rivals disputing over their

See Bowra ndash See for instance Conacher Egli ndash Vellacott ch See Stevens ndash Lloyd ndash

370 Varvara Georgopoulou

twin beds which is an innovation in the treatment of this legend is a significantpiece of evidence for Euripidean ideology aesthetics and approach to matters ofgender⁷ Euripides also exploits this particular dramatic situation to implicitly criti-cize the Spartans as well as to challenge the widely held polarity between Greeksand lsquobarbariansrsquo and the unjustified bragging of the Greeks Andromache constantlystresses that she still regards Hector as her husband and that she was coerced tobecome Neoptolemusrsquo concubine⁸

In the ensuing dialogue with Menelaus Andromache deviates from the Ho-meric standards of female virtue and argues so strongly before the Spartanking that the Chorus-leader accuses her ἄγαν ἔλεξας ὡς γυνὴ πρὸς ἄρσενας(Andr 364 lsquoyou said a lot to men you being a womanrsquo) Then in her lamentwhen Menelaus threatens to kill her son if she does not leave the altar she ispresented as the affectionate and death-stricken mother we have seen inHomer this theme recurs in the Trojan Women⁹ With regard to erotic enchant-ment and sensuality the barbarian Andromache pleads for prudence and conti-nence which is a dominant idea in Euripidesrsquo critical and poetical reflectionThis tragedy displays certain peculiarities not only with regard to its diverseplot-structure but also in terms of Andromachersquos elegiac lamentation in theDoric dialect (Andr 103ndash 16) This lament which is the only example of the ele-giac metre in extant Greek tragedy has led some critics to assume that it mayoriginate in a lost tradition of threnodic elegysup1⁰

The Trojan Women was produced later in 415 BCwhen the Athenians were pre-paring for the Sicilian expedition and had already invaded the island of Melos (inthe previous year) which they occupied having slaughtered the men and enslavedchildren and women The fate of the Homeric heroine has been interpreted as animplicit Euripidean criticism of the aggressive Athenian policy and of the effectsof war on human conditionsup1sup1 In the second episode of the Trojan Women(Tr 577ndash779) Andromache maintains her Homeric profile consisting chiefly of fe-male wisdom dignity and companionship which however enhance her miseryas they inspire Achillesrsquo son Neoptolemus with the desire to take her with himto Greece Andromache cries bitterly because she would rather die than betray Hec-tor with another man but Hecabe advises her to submit herself to her new masterand forget her dear late husband in the hope of helping the future resurrection of

See also Allan passim Gould Lloyd ndash Conacher ndash See McClure ch Mastronarde ndash See Lloyd ndash See particularly Page ndash contra Bowie See Murray ndash Croally ndash De Romilly ch ShapiroBurian ndash Delebecque ff Goossens ff

Andromachersquos Tragic Persona from the Ancient to the Modern Stage 371

Troy perhaps through her offspring (Tr 577ndash683)sup1sup2 However a new lamentation ofAndromache follows Talthybiusrsquo announcement that Odysseus has decided to haveAstyanax thrown down from the walls of Troy (Tr 709ndash779) The image of Androm-ache clasping her little son on her bosom has been recorded in world art as a sym-bol of maternal affection as well as of the brutality of war (on the cinematic recep-tion of the Trojan Women see Bakogianni in this volume)

In his own Troades Seneca innovates compared to Euripidesrsquo Trojan Womenand Hecabe which are his main source textssup1sup3 According to his aesthetic predilec-tions he increases the pathos of his drama by adding to Astyanaxrsquos execution therepulsive sacrifice of the Trojan princess Polyxena on Achillesrsquo tomb Andromachebecomes totally obsessed with fear and lies to Odysseus about Astyanaxrsquos fate asher maternal love makes her abandon her regal dignity lsquoShow me flames woundsand the terrible art of tortures hunger cruel thirst several punishments All kindsof irons in my suffering flesh a prison with suffocating darkness and everythingthat a victor dares to do when he is angry or afraid A motherrsquos soul is not scaredrsquo(Tro 582ndash88) As with most of her literary refigurations Andromache is seeing thedead Hector in Astyanax lsquoIn my son Ηector I love only you Make him live so thatyou will live againrsquo (Tro 646ndash48) Virgilian echoes (Aen 2270ndash97) are evident inher wish that her son lives to create a new Troysup1⁴

In the context of French Classicism Racine returns to Virgil whilst bringingerotic passion to the fore Jean Racinersquos Andromaque (1667) is one of his earlyplays helping him to establish himself on the Parisian stage and emerge as aworthy rival of Pierre Corneille the dominant poet of that period Despite hisyoung age Racine was already experienced in treating human passions Accord-ing to his own account given in the prologue he had written for his play (Racine1994 15ndash 16) he derived the dramatic locale the plot and heroes from the thirdbook of Virgilrsquos Aeneid except for Hermione who originates in Euripides Hestudied and admired the plays of the latter in the humanistic environment ofthe Port-Royal monastery where he had been raised and educated Still in thesame prologue he emphatically draws attention to his conscious deviationfrom the Euripidean plot in contrast to Euripidesrsquo Andromache who had ason by Pyrrhus his own Andromache lsquodoes not recognize another husband be-sides Hector and has no other son besides Astyanaxrsquo (ibid 19) Racine defendspoetic freedom in his handling of the legend and focuses on the manner in

See Barlow ndash Dueacute ndash For more detail see Schiesaro ndash Fantham ndash Ahl ndashCalder See Schiesaro


which a poet adapts the available material to his subject thus highlighting thecomplexity of the reception processsup1⁵ He mainly draws on Virgil presenting An-dromache as married to another son of Priam the seer Helenus who grabbedfrom Aeacusrsquo son Pyrrhus his wife and royal power (Aen 3294ndash504) thus lsquoAn-dromache came again into the possession of a paternal husbandrsquo (3297) Racineretains chiefly from Virgil Andromachersquos devotion to Hector which characteristi-cally emerges from her description as lsquowife of Hectorrsquo (3488 coniugis Hectoreae)and the transfer of Troy to her new country symbolized by Hectorrsquos cenotaph andthe false Simoens (3300ndash05)sup1⁶

The French dramatist places unrequited love and passion to the core of histragedy raising issues of gender and female character-sketching his Androm-ache continues to be in love with her dead Trojan husband and albeit a captiveand a slave does not dare to reciprocate the love of her master Pyrrhus The lat-ter is enamoured of her despising Hermione provocatively Hermione is madly inlove with Pyrrhus and rejects the love of Orestes her childhood friend who iseager to commit crimes for her sake Of this group of love-stricken peopleonly Andromache has enjoyed mutual love and wants to remain faithful to Hec-torrsquos memory by adoring her son Astyanax whom she identifies with Hectorthus enraging Pyrrhus lsquoShe always talked about Hector In vain did I guaranteeher sonrsquos safety ldquohe is Hectorrdquo she said and clasped her offspring his handsldquohis lips his courage I recognize itrsquos you my precious husband the one I amnow touchingrdquo What is she thinking That I am going to leave her son withher to keep the flame of her love aliversquo (Act 2 Scene 5 650ndash56)

Racinersquos characters talk incessantly about the object of their love changemoods and feelings all the time contradicting themselvessup1⁷ only Andromache re-mains stable and clear-minded In her eyes Pyrrhus is the violent and blood-thirsty conqueror who killed her brothers and sisters during the fatal nightwhen Troy fell and nothing can erase this memory Hectorrsquos image is dominantin her thoughts which she interrupts only to address him talking to him as if hewere alive The memories of the fall of Troy of the violent extinction of her com-patriots and the atrocities of the conquerors are always present for her and byvisiting Hectorrsquos cenotaph she is searching for a solution to her dilemmaswhen Pyrrhusrsquos threat to kill her son becomes oppressive Eventually she de-cides to commit suicide immediately after the wedding in order to save herson and at the same time remain faithful to Hector Nonetheless fate works in

See for instance Goodkin See Martinez-Cuadrado ndash Otis ndash Berthelot Couprie Deacuteceacuteleacute Elliott passim Defaux ndash See De Romilly ndash Racevskis ndash


her favour Pyrrhusrsquo unexpected death releases her from her gnawing dilemmaand makes her a queen Once more the Trojan woman has the divine favour offulfilling her desire to remain faithful to her real love

Racinean passion is a substitute for God or Fate is all-powerful and thus de-structive The lovelorn Pyrhhus says lsquoLove wins and uproots perniciouslyrsquo (Act 4Scene 5 1297) He has totally succumbed to the erotic spell which leads him toconfront Trojans and Greeks and before dying he crowns Andromache as QueenIn Racinersquos plays madness and passions are dominant Pyrrhus and Hermionedie Orestes loses his mind Through Andromachersquos literary persona Racine reaf-firms Trojan merit identity and status as legend has it that French people de-scend from themsup1⁸

Some centuries later Jean Giraudoux the most prominent French playwrightof Interwar years revisited Andromache appropriating the Homeric legend tocorrespond to his antiwar visions Giraudoux had an excellent classical educa-tion and was also trained theoretically and practically in the school of war ndashhe was wounded in World War I and decorated for bravery Subsequently hehad a solid theatrical presence especially through his co-operation with a fa-mous man of the theatre Louis Jouvet who staged almost all of his plays In1936 Jouvet produced directed and played in Giraudouxrsquos The Trojan War WillNot Take Place on the Theacuteacirctre de lrsquoAtheacuteneacutee Giraudoux drew his material on an-cient myths in order to express the humanistic quests of his turbulent timesThis play presents prominent features of his dramaturgy humanism the conflictwith destiny dilemmas concerning the choice between two opposite options theemergence of simplicity in complexity and of the extraordinary in the ordinaryGiraudoux was a master of style at a time when theatre directing was takingprecedence and made stage language a sublime tool of expressionsup1⁹

Giraudoux chose Andromache in the opening scene of his play in order toexpress his ideological position ndashbased on wish and hope at the same time ndashwhen she announces to the prophetess Cassandra that lsquoThe Trojan war willnot take placersquo (Act 1 Scene 1) As always Andromache is Hectorrsquos belovedand loyal wife and is pregnant with his son to whom she sees Hector as shedid earlier in Euripides Seneca and Racine lsquoI am interested in him becausehe is yoursrsquo Her question to Hector lsquoDo you love warrsquo (Act 1 Scene 3) revealsthe pervasive influence of war on human conscience and the contradictory feel-ings towards the enemy Andromache is constantly defending peace refuting

For this legend see for instance Bizer ch See Brockett Body esp ch Reilly Moraud ndash Le Sage Mercier-Campiche


Priamrsquos arguments lsquoYou always die for your country when you have lived as aworthy active wise manrsquo (Act 1 Scene 6)

Giraudouxrsquos idiosyncratic irony which makes him resemble the playwrightsof the Absurdsup2⁰ demystifies the love affair between Paris and Helen as much asthe marital harmony between Andromache and Hector lsquoHector is my direct op-posite He does not share any of my tastesWe spend every day either by beatingone another or by sacrificing ourselves Happy spouses do not have clear facesrsquoIn his portrayal of the couple Giraudoux follows the dramatic path opened byAugust Strindbergrsquos incessantly fighting couples which will be later taken overby the hostile couples of the Absurd Andromache represents ordinary andpeaceful life and is aware of destiny whose sound and echo dominate in theplaysup2sup1 giving a tragic dimension even to humoristic scenes lsquoI do not knowwhat destiny isrsquo Andromache confesses to Cassandra whose very figure encap-sulates destiny (Act 1 Scene 1) The only power against almighty destiny is lovePerhaps love is the only thing worthy of a war so lsquoHelen must love Paris sinceno one not even destiny itself can attack destiny light-heartedlyrsquo (Act 2 Scene 8)is Andromachersquos argument towards the unrepentant Helen

Modern Greek theatre widely receives and reshapes ancient tragic myths start-ing with the Iphigenia written by the Cephalonian dramatist Petros Katsaitis in 1720Systematic refigurations of tragic legends appear from the Interwar period onwardsreaching their peak in Postwar times (on the transformation of ancient myths inmodern Greek theatre see also Petrakou in this volume) The playwrights of thatera enter into a creative dialogue with their ancient tragic models often deviatingconsciously from their source texts as in Iakovos Kambanellisrsquo trilogy O Deipnos(The Last Supper 1993)sup2sup2 The monologue Andromache or Landscape of a Womanin the Height of the Night (1999) written by the Greek playwright Akis Dimou is em-bedded within the context of postmodernist trends towards radical reworkings ofancient myths which developed at the end of the 20th and the start of the 21st cen-tury Dimou is a main representative of postmodernism in modern Greek theatreand his production belongs to the genre of poetic drama Τhe dominant featuresof all his plays are intertextual dialogue and female presencesup2sup3

In the prologue the dramatist mentions that he has selected Virgilrsquos versionaccording to which Neoptolemus gave Andromache to Helenus Hectorrsquos brotherwho is a seer and ended up being a captive and a slave like her She finds refugein a place in Epirus and settles there in a quasi Trojan landscape an imitation of

See Kofidou passim See Frois Lesot ndash Albeacuteregraves Robichez On the contexts of these refigurations see Chasapi-Christodoulou passim See Georgopoulou ndash


Troy watered by an equally artificial river Simoens a tributary of Scamander(Dimou 2006 244) Dimoursquos heroine has experienced deportation male decep-tion and violence in every possible way Hence she imagines and lsquocreatesrsquo afalse reality to which she totally adjusts and with which she identifies herselflsquoThis city is me away from citiesrsquo (ibid 246) In vain does she seek in Greek lan-guage lsquoa language that can bear the horrible burden of memoryrsquo (ibid 245)

Andromachersquos words reflect insufferable memories full of bloodshed and vio-lent loss native country husband child her bodily and moral freedom her wom-anhood The ideal vehicle to convey her despair is associative illogical speech goingfar and deeply into the dreams and the subconscious and even reaching at somemoments a real delirium Gradually however the memories fade and the feelingsbecome blunted lsquoI say Helen and I think that I am calling an old friendrsquo(ibid 247) Her female nature claims its rights as she becomes obsessed with thematter of her erotic deprivation lsquono man has touched me since the first darknessof the worldrsquo This isolation leads her imagination to her first and perhaps oneand only erotic interest lsquoIn the last summer before the war her erotic instinctwoke up and she felt a strong desire for a man who was bathing singingrsquo(ibid 251) This remembrance gives her some stamina and she reveals her sup-pressed female nature lsquoI am a woman and my knowledge what is left in the mir-rorrsquos teeth a lock of my plaits an edge of my worn out glancersquo (ibid 256)

Realizing all these she becomes stronger and comes out of the inertia of igno-rance and agony to plunge into conscious action The weak Andromache at lastmakes up her mind lsquoForget the promised epic ignore that they have you as amodel gallop deeply inside yourself so that the doctrines of time will not touchyoursquo (ibid 257) She is no more the fallen princess of Troy the devoted wife and af-fectionate mother An outcast and isolated she has found her own self and thestrength to manifest it and decide upon her own fate lsquoI shall draw vespers Ishall let no one forgetrsquo (ibid 258) Dimoursquos Andromache draws on the Iliadic An-dromache and the farewell scene sharing the theme of male cruelty with its epicmodel At the same time features drawn from the Homeric myth are interwovenwith everyday episodes and games of the imagination and the subconscious

Andromachersquos route from the walls of Troy to the postmodern paths of the sub-conscious makes her an authentic and everlasting symbol whose destiny has beenshaped by the polarity between love and war Key themes of the ancient dramatictreatments of Andromachersquos legend such as gender issues involving female other-ness as defined by war-violence and militarism are refigured in later theatre undervarying historical and socio-cultural circumstances Andromache as the protagonistin the Euripidean tragedy of the same title and as a secondary character in the Tro-jan Women is appropriated by Euripides to criticize war by castigating the militarismof the Athenian empire and the violence of human nature At the same time An-


dromachersquos rhetorically elaborate argumentation in her agon with Hermione suc-ceeds in revealing diverse views of the female role Subsequently Seneca amplifiesthe elements of revenge and bloody violence according to his aesthetic predilec-tions by adding to Astyanaxrsquos execution the repulsive sacrifice of Polyxena onAchillesrsquo tomb Racine brings erotic passion and unreciprocated love to the forein conjunction with gender relations within the literary contexts of French Classi-cism Later on the eve of the Second World War Jean Giraudoux conveys ananti-military message in his play The Trojan War Will Not Take Place Andromachebecomes his mouthpiece expressing his pacifistic ideas and at the same time hisbelief in the power of fate In the postmodern monologue of the Greek playwrightAkis Dimou Andromache or Landscape of a Woman in the Height of the Night An-dromache appears as stripped of her mythical past and as shaping a new identityThe ending of Dimoursquos Andromache perhaps the saddest of all Andromaches con-cludes the literary route of this figure through time whilst mirroring all her earlierpersonas lsquoI do not know another chain except for love that holds the other so ab-solutely boundhellip in this way born victors become slaves and the defeated triumphrsquo(ibid 248)


Kyriaki Petrakou

Odysseus Satirical The Merry Dealing ofthe Homeric Myth in Modern Greek Theatre

The title is playing with a common type of ancient satyr-play titles the differentspelling naturally indicating a different genre Odysseusrsquo figure as a Homeric in-tertext in post-antique sources makes its debut in Dantersquos Commedia Divina inwhich Odysseus does not return to Ithaca Subsequently he appears in Renais-sance tragedies drawing on the Trojan War Robert Garnierrsquos La Troade (1579)Shakespearersquos Troilus and Cressida (1602) Joost van der Vondelrsquos Palamedes(1625) Racinersquos Iphigeacutenie (1674)sup1 His figure is then employed in a whole seriesof plays none of which however are comedies By contrast in Greek antiquityOdysseus was a popular character in satyr plays (Aeschylusrsquo Circe Aristiasrsquo Cy-clops and Euripidesrsquo Cyclops ndash the only extant play) He also appeared regularlyin old comedy as in Epicharmusrsquo Cyclops Odysseus the Deserter Odysseus Ship-wrecked Sirens in Cratinusrsquo Odysseis in Theopompusrsquo Sirens Penelope Odys-seus and in Philylliusrsquo The Washing Women or Nausicaasup2 (on Odysseusrsquo parodicrefigurations in other genres see Alexandrou in this volume) In modern theatrea bitter parody of the Odysseus myth occurs in Jean Giraudouxrsquos The Trojan WarWill Not Take Place (1935) (on this play see Georgopoulou in this volume) Thissubject recurs to this day not only in drama but also in other forms of contem-porary theatre such as dance theatre and performancesup3

Mythological comedy or parody influenced by the French operetta and vaude-ville appeared in modern Greek theatre during the 1870s when neo-Classical trag-edy was the dominant genre in drama Alexandros Rizos Ragavis wrote Zeusrsquo Visit(1874) and Spyridon Vasiliadis Zeusrsquo Love Affairs or Semele (1874) The majority ofplays of ancient subject-matter written in that period were serious or tragic

Most of the plays with Odysseus as the pivotal character serious or comictreat his return to Ithaca and the murder of Penelopersquos suitors⁴ The first playof the comic genre which will be further explored was also staged (rather an ex-ception to the majority of plays written during the 19th century and being des-tined only for dramatic contests or publication⁵) It was Panagiotis Zanosrsquo lsquotragic

See Grammatas See for instance Revermann ndash and n Puchner ndash See Chasapi-Christodoulou ndash See Petrakou

comedyrsquo as he named it entitled Penelopersquos Suitors and Odysseusrsquo Homecoming(Zanos 1884) It mainly follows the Homeric plot while the comic element is pro-vided by the suitors the slaves and the folk people It supports the idea thatOdysseus is within his rights in imposing the traditional royal power as a divineprerogative The author dedicated the play to Queen Olga who accepted the ded-ication It was quite a success and remained for more than 15 years in the rep-ertory of several theatrical companies who performed it in Greece and inGreek communities abroad (Constantinople Smyrna and perhaps elsewhere)

In the first part of the 20th century satirical Odysseus seems to have appearedas a dramatic subject only in dramatic contests⁶ and in the shadow puppettheatre⁷ From the Interwar years to the present many plays of ancient sub-ject-matter have been written most of which with contemporary connotationsThe preference of the playwrights however is for serious content Of a total of130 plays written from 1930 to 1980 only 20 use the ancient myth with the pur-pose of satirizing it⁸ The satirical-political treatment of the myth started duringthe German Occupation and the Civil War with a focus on the Trojan War andOdysseus-subjects The playwrights of farce wrote some opportune and boldplays as The Trojan War (1948) by Alekos Sakellarios-Christos Giannakopoulosin which the three great ancient leaders Achilles Agamemnon and Odysseus(representing Churchill Roosevelt and Stalin) suppress the rights of the peoplesSince the Second World War a series of satirical plays have been produced byseveral Greek playwrights containing criticism of modern social and politicalcontexts in open or disguised connotations like Iakovos Kambanellisrsquo OdysseusCome Home (1952) and The Last Act (1997) Manolis Skouloudisrsquo Odyssey (1961)Demetris Christodouloursquos Hotel Circe (1966) Giorgos Charalambidisrsquo Penelopersquos300 These and other plays will be analyzed from the viewpoint of their criticalreception which tends to underscore the contemporary allusions and nuances ofthis very popular archetypal myth as well as the function of Odysseusrsquo refigura-tions within different socio-political contexts⁹

The first play of this case-study is the aforementioned comedy The TrojanWar which is thought to be a farce (the text has been lost but its writers are usu-ally labelled as farce-playwrights) On the basis of the reviews it may be inferredthat it had contemporary political implications They cannot have been very rad-ical however as the censorship of the time did not ban it

Petrakou passim Chatzipantazis ndash Chasapi-Christodoulou On the critical analysis of performances as an essential tool of exploring their reception seeHardwick ndash Bennett ndash Pavis ndash

380 Kyriaki Petrakou

Kambanellisrsquo Odysseus Come Home on the other hand written in 19501952could not be published or staged until 1966 and then it was understood as po-litical by the majority of the critics of its many productions In this play Odysseusdoes not really wish to return to Ithaca and regularly misleads his companionswho regularly rebel against him but in the end they succumb to his lies He is farfrom resembling the divine Homeric heromdashhe is short unattractive worn outNot even the Trojan Horse was his own invention he stole the idea from a com-mon soldier named Nikias who appears in the play but has no ambition to re-veal the truth Odysseus has arrived at an island whose irresponsible queen Ne-feli was identified by many critics as the real queen of Greece FredericaPenelope and the prime minister of Ithaca do not want him back as he is obvi-ously lesser than his myth and will damage the profits from tourism so they re-place him with Elpenor his stupid but handsomer and more virile companionOdysseus tells the truth and at first the trick works with the people who embracehim as an anti-hero and as one of them but the government puts him away anderects his statue instead For the first production of the play by Karolos KounrsquosArt Theatre in 1966 Kambanellis gave assurances (in the text he wrote for theprogramme) that his target was not to demystify and downgrade our heroesand ancestors He really wanted to make a play about those who started outfor their own Troy following their dreams and ideals They succeeded becamefamous but time transformed them into lsquomerchants of their own gloryrsquosup1⁰ Thedramatic time is defined as lsquotwenty years after the second Trojan warrsquosup1sup1 In gen-eral the playwright stressed its existential content in his statements for severalproductions of the play although its political dimension was not ignored eitherby the critics of its first production or of its second by the National Theatre in1980 However in the productions which followed the fall of the seven-year dic-tatorship (1967ndash 1974) many of them interpreted the hints as aimed also at theLeftsup1sup2 Kambanellis himself wrote that the absurd element of the play lies inthe collective situations especially those which deviated from the original inten-tions of their heroes and were transformed into something different even the re-verse of their expectations a statement that could be interpreted in a simplifiedway as the defeat of the ideals of the Left Later he explained that he used themyth in order to say something about contemporary times and he thought thewell-known ancient myth could be a vehicle for effective communicationsup1sup3

There have been more productions ndash it is a very popular play

Kambanellis Kambanellis Petrakou Kambanellis

Odysseus Satirical The Merry Dealing of the Homeric Myth 381

Skouloudisrsquo Odyssey labeled as a lsquotheatrical tragic-satirical trilogyrsquo waspublished and staged in 1961 Each of the three plays has in fact the length ofan act of a rather long three-act play and it is in verse The suitors pursue Pene-lope cynically in order to acquire the royal power and then discard her Pene-lope is sorry for her incompetence as a ruler which is also the case with Telema-chus even if he does not realize it Odysseus although he is as unattractive asKambanellisrsquo hero manages to seduce Circe and Calypso while Penelope is stilldreaming of him Odysseus finishes the play by killing the suitors and this con-ventional ending combined with the subversive lines of the text perplexed thecritics In fact this play had been commissioned from the playwright by theradio authorities on the condition that he would not deviate from the Homerictraditionsup1⁴ Homer appears in it as the narrator and the characters are more orless our familiar Homeric heroes In the first play the slave Melantho conspireswith her lover Eurymachus so that the latter can marry Penelope kill Telema-chus and keep her as his mistress forever The other suitors are equally cynicalIn the second part Odysseus and his companions are on Circersquos island Circe israther disappointed in him and transforms the companions into pigs but hearouses her desire by pretending to be erotically unwilling Odysseus has a littlechat with Homer about existential philosophy and the atomic theory Homerfinds the human race funny but Odysseus warns him not to say that openlyThen he has his affair with the nymph Calypso abandons her and travels toCorfu where he seduces Nausica Penelope has a dream in which she quarrelswith her three rivals which the critics interpreted as a conflict of her threeegos Odysseus returns to Ithaca and kills the suitors after the disgusting Eury-machus has killed Melantho

In his introduction at the programme for the production (actually extendingto a whole essay) Skouloudis explained that a contemporary writer who wants touse lsquothe immortal Homeric materialrsquo has inevitably assimilated the dogmas of Ju-daism and Christianity He may have satirized the Homeric epics but in fact headores them However he disregarded this idolization and turned to satire inorder to amuse the audience and help it overcome outdated social and tyrannicalsymbols His message is that man can create his own destiny His critics had dif-fering opinions Angelos Terzakis liked Odyssey and was happy that it had nopolitical implicationssup1⁵ Alkis Thrylos was rather surprised that a talented adap-tor of dramatic texts like Skouloudis did not do better in the text Thrylos be-lieved that Skouloudis really meant to satirize contemporary events and

Skouloudis Terzakis


situationssup1⁶ Considering Skouloudisrsquo statements Oikonomidis regarded his dra-matic intentions as too ambitious in the composition of a play containing real-ism materialism idealism surrealism academicism in the way they co-existedin those crucial times He considered the play to be really innovative startingfrom Euripidesrsquo challenges which still preoccupy human thought he enrichesthem with contemporary issues like space travels Nonetheless the play cansomewhat confuse the audience despite its perfect structure Still it is a stepof progress in modern Greek dramatic productionsup1⁷ Klaras praised it as express-ing the essence of Hellenism although the Homeric material is unsuitable for atheatrical adaptationsup1⁸ We could infer rather the opposite to judge from thenumber of plays that it has inspired all over the world Most of the critics enjoyedthe ironical-satirical tone of the play its theatricality its dramatic compositionwhilst approaching with some circumspection the too complex ideological pa-rameters and their multi-dimensional treatmentsup1⁹

The play Hotel Circe (1966) of the poet Dimitris Christodoulou is described byits author as lsquoa satirical drama taking place in contemporary timesrsquo The dramat-ic space is (again) Circersquos island on which she is running a hotel with totalitarianmethods It is not difficult to interpret it as an allegory of the islands used as pla-ces of exile for the communistssup2⁰ Her general manager is Cerberus (Plutorsquos dogin Hades) who is in love with Circe He interrogates the clients and according totheir answers puts them in the basement in an ordinary room or in the pent-house The servants either do not understand what is happening or they pretendnot to Circe is looking forward to Odysseusrsquo arrival in order to get involved intoan affair with him and in the meantime transforms his companions into pigsOdysseus comes rejects her advances and her politics re-transforms the pigsinto human beings and persuades the servants and the folk people to rebelbuild a ship and go away with him to freedom

The political implications are so obvious that the fact that it was produced in1966 and then again in 1972 is rather puzzling Few critics wrote about it perhaps inorder to protect the playwright and the theatrical company from being sent to a Cir-cersquos island by the government of defection or the threatened dictatorship of whicheverybody spoke The notoriously right-wing critic Alkis Thrylos delivered the verdictthat Christodouloursquos dramatic talent did not correspond to a remarkable poetic skill

Thrylos Oikonomidis Klaras Koukoulas Varikas Kokkinakis On Greek prison islands and the particular theatrical activity developed there see recentlyVan Steen esp ndash


The style of the work is in-between the theatre of the absurd and the orthodox the-atre (meaning realistic) as well as being absolutely indifferent and disappointingsup2sup1

Varikas wrote a serious aesthetic analysis in which he understandably avoided de-ciphering the specific political implications He characterized it as lsquoa theatrical alle-goryrsquo corresponding to Christodouloursquos poetry often inspired by ancient Greekmyths and symbols According to him Odysseus and Circe represent two rival pow-ers Circe symbolizes violence while Odysseus represents the free spirit whichcomes to wake up the vision of freedom and dignity in the souls of the slaves mak-ing them realize their strength and rebel Cerberus stands for the organized violenceused by the central power whereas the two cleaning-women embody the simpleand uncorrupted folk It is a miniature of contemporary society which depicts thetragic deadlock in which people live today as well as cherishing the hope for anew and better world Although it is a rather weak play dramaturgically it is never-theless a promising first attempt of the poet to write drama its merit lies not only inits lofty ideological target and questioning but also results from its general conceptcontaining many strong pointssup2sup2

George Charalambidisrsquo Penelopersquos 300sup2sup3 is written in a very different tonefull of comical impulse It was a great success when it was produced in the mid-dle of the seven-year dictatorship (1970ndash71) although it is possible that it wasbanned by the censorship the following year Subsequently a series of produc-tions by the same and other theatre companies followed The title seems toimply the three hundred members of the Greek parliament Ithaca is presentedas a totally corrupted country to which a cunning Cephalonian comes pretend-ing to be Odysseus and the others pretend to believe him The suitors try to ap-pear as protectors of the people while the Cephalonian manages to win the peo-ple by means of his rhetoric Telemachus is fatalistically ready to succumb to therich shipowner who wants to help Ithaca financially but is really aiming at ex-ploiting its natural resources particularly the oil of the Ionian SeaWe learn thatthe suitors are Americans British and Russians and they all want the samething The Cephalonian and Telemachus somehow manage to overpower themand Homer tries to understand what is going on

The playwright stated in a preliminary press conference that his play usedmaterial from Aristophanes the Greek shadow puppet theatre (Karaghiozis)and folk culture in order to deal with the present situation satiricallysup2⁴ The play-house was always packed mainly by university students At first the production

Thrylos Varikas Charalampidis Charalambidis


escaped the notice of the regime perhaps because it was considered to be a sat-ire of the parliamentary system Later someone may have interpreted the Ceph-alonian as a caricature of the opportunist dictator (Papadopoulos) and it wasbanned (It is difficult to reconstruct the true story as the newspapers did notpublish such news at the time) A prominent critic commented that Charalambi-dis obviously aimed at political satire but the play was really confused (and con-fusing) It seemed to follow the Brechtian model though not very successfullyOther critics just dismissed it as naiumlve or indifferent but one of them regardedit as a very timely allegory of universal politics powerful governments pursuetheir own interests either by pretending to protect the weak by stirring upriots that render their intervention necessary or by causing mortal conflictsamong the weak of whom they take advantage The playwright had composeda merry comedy on these very crucial issuessup2⁵

Then in 1997 Kambanellis decided to write a sequel to his first Odysseus Hewrote The Last Αct in which Odysseus returns to Ithaca in a state of psychologicalbreak-down where everyone has forgotten him and only a young journalist thinksthat she could exploit the subject Penelope and Telemachus have invited a second-rate theatre company to play the roles of the main figures of the Odysseus-mythhoping to get him out of his amnesia The director has a long speech about Odys-seusrsquo adventures and extraordinary abilities composing a political personality com-parable only to Eleftherios Venizelos among real politicians Odysseus escapes se-cretly from his room in order to stay incognito for a while in a room which thejournalist visits disguised as a call-girl in order to extract information out of himNot only that the younger generation is eager to listen to stories about strugglesand heroes of the past even though half of them are untrue Odysseus finallydoes come out of his stupor only to follow the itinerant actors and play out hisown story with them he wants to be the interpreter of his own life

The playwright stated that he was inspired to write a kind of sequel to hisOdysseus Come Home as he was watching its second production by the Art The-atre in 1990 He felt that he had left his Odysseus on Circersquos island in abeyanceand he should really send him back to Ithaca to see what would happen Thedramatic time of this second play is lsquotime presentrsquo showing all the developmentsof the historical-social context depicted in the previous one of the Fifties and Six-ties (the time of first writing and first production) Perhaps it is not clear fromthis concise narration of the plot that Odysseus as a dramatic character neverappears In the play-dance drama Par-Odyssey (1999) written and performedby the students of Art Theatre drama school Odysseus was also non-existent

Doxas


he was a small moving light The Last Act had two productions one in Thessa-loniki (1997ndash98) and another one in Athens by a different theatre company(2001) but its existential core did not seem to instigate many reviews exceptfor theoretical criticssup2⁶ Puchner analyzed it as an appendage of OdysseusCome Home In the first play Odysseus becomes marble ndashalong with his mythmdash and his statue gets smeared in the course of time by the droppings of birdsThe somehow Pirandellian questioning about the conflict between the ego andsociety ends with the victory of societysup2⁷ In the second play Odysseus defineshimself as he likes Almost all characters in this play turn to art in order togive a new meaning to the events of their lives Penelope Telemachus Odysseushimself (another Pirandellian idea) while the media intervene to create a storythat will interest the audiences and establish the journalistrsquos career Here Kam-banellis reduces the political satire and draws emphasis on another contempo-rary phenomenon the power of persuasion exerted by the mediasup2⁸

Apart from the aforementioned plays there are some more less well-knownand unstaged Stavros Melissinos wrote Odysseusrsquo Helmet (1961) based on Iphige-nia in Aulis and parodying the homosexual tendencies of the ancients (exclusive-ly) because of which Iphigenia is sacrificed contrary to the oracle Odysseusand the wise Nestor organize things so that the leadersrsquo misconduct does notbecome known As well as ridiculing the licentiousness of the leaders theplay criticizes the scandalously unfair tax system The text is imbued with Aris-tophanic obscenities and contemporary implications The play Penelope and herSuitors (1984) by the Cypriot Kostas Sokratous also has certain Aristophanic tar-gets which he expresses by means of sexual jokes a facetious atmosphere and amodern denouement the suitors stay alive and Penelope like a modern feministwoman punishes Odysseus for his prolonged absence and his more than certaininfidelities by demanding that he should help with the housework Charis Sakel-lariou with The Sleep of the Lotus-Eaters (1990) offered a new and fanciful inter-pretation of the familiar myth The latter cannot be understood without the au-thorrsquos prologue in which he interprets lotus eating as a hypothetical regime of asocialist nature in a North African country where the citizens lived in freedomand equality with social welfare etc Odysseus got lost and his companions re-turned to Ithaca and established such a regime there The old aristocracy inan effort to get its privileges back presents a vagabond as Odysseus Penelopeaccepts him and the bard Phemius composes an epic poem

See Pefanis in Kambanellis ndash Puchner Puchner and ndash


According to a contemporary critic the literary myth functions in three waysas regards its mythical background subjectively when one of its elements is se-lected and given prominence comparatively when new and strange elements areadded to the mythical material and deductively when some part of the myth iseliminated or minimizedsup2⁹ Perhaps all those deductions additions or selectionscan be freely used in an adaptation for a novel as well as in poetry since a poemcan be either brief or extensive However in the conventional performancelength of a play (extending to two hours approximately) all these three functionsare present In our own topic it is usually the central mythical figure (Odysseus)who is also the pivotal character even when he is absent as in the two chrono-logically subsequent plays mentioned In modern Greek and European dramathe Trojan cycle provides most of the subjectssup3⁰ Odysseus is a universally fav-oured character who is appropriated mainly to pose challenges to serious exis-tential issues related to the present

On the basis of this brief mdashin terms of the real extension of the subjectmdash andunavoidably indicative examination of the satirical or lsquoparody-likersquo handling ofthe Homeric Odysseus-myth in drama it can be deduced that the majority ofthese plays belong to the Postwar era and to Greek playwrights There are numerousliterary personas of Odysseus in prose works poetry and drama within ancient an-cient-like timeless or contemporary contexts The lampooning style however israther a Greek contribution with the exception of the most famous of all LeopoldBloom in Joycersquos Ulysses which contains sparse humoristic resonances

During the 19th century the dominating ideology in Greece mostly aimed atnational and social cohesion having the proof of the continuity of Hellenismthrough its long and mostly unbroken history which stemmed from ancientGreece and had its culture as its objective There is hardly any play makingfun of this issue only some weak points in public life were targets Zanosrsquoplay was fully appreciated because his satire aimed at those who tried to over-throw the government and there was a lsquocatharsisrsquo which was attained accordingto Homeric ideology by means of the punishment of the conspirators and therestoration of the status quo In fact a previous play by the same author stageda few months before his Penelopersquos Suitors in which he handled an ancient mythmuch more subversively was severely attacked by the critics (among whom thepoet Kostis Palamas) as sacrilegious towards ancient ideals As a result Zanosnever published that play and in the next one (Penelopersquos Suitors) he changed

Durand ndash Chasapi-Christodoulou


the focus of his satire making it consistent with the official ideology which re-sulted in the great success of his play

In the course of the 20th century this ideology changed completely and be-came subversive in most of the plays and almost never supportive of the essenceof the myth Among the plays discussed here the most important is KambanellisrsquoOdysseus Come Home on which less emphasis was given in this survey as it hasbeen so widely discussed and explored If the beginning of the dramatic currentof satirical Odysseus with a focus on political satire was The Trojan War by Sa-kellarios-Giannakopoulos the real turning-point came through Kambanelliswho produced a much more subversive play with Odysseus as its hero and atthe same time fertile as regards the difficult issues he wanted to touch on Con-sidering that it was written immediately after the Greek Civil War this was a verydifficult even dangerous attempt depending on the perception of the censorThe majority of modern Greek playwrights belong to or lean towards the LeftAt the same time less politically committed playwrights wanted to write aboutcertain crucial issues as well The farce playwrights managed to pass off somesubjects that were not really politically harmless but the plays were consideredlight theatre and the censors did not pay as much attention to them as to theplays of lsquoseriousrsquo writers even if they were comedies Kambanellis later statedthat he found authentic material in those farcessup3sup1 and that through the characterof the prime-minister of Ithaca (Evandros) he really wanted to satirize the Greekprime minister of that periodsup3sup2 Contemporary theoretical critics may use varioustextual or other methods as tools in their analyses but the press reviews especiallyof the time of the first production spotted better the political implications aboutpersons events and situations when this was possible

In this chronologically successive survey the influence of Kambanellisrsquo Odys-seus on subsequent plays is made quite evident both in terms of their handlingof the myth and their contemporary connotations They reflect Postwar political con-ditions in Greece cautiously distorted and point symbolically and crypticallymdashbutnot unrecognizablymdashto the deception and exploitation of the people the persecu-tion of the Left the intrigues of the palace the incompetence and perhaps the dou-ble game of the progressive parties the use of information as a means of guidanceand suppression the confusion of political leaders and other official factors trappedin conflicting financial class interests and ideologies and the need to anticipate thepolitical tricks and reversals which must be counteracted One can see that Odys-seus appears as a regular larger-than-life hero in Zanosrsquo play in which he wins

Kambanellis b Petrakou


and restores social order according to his interests while the playwright does notdispute his role In the 20th century however after the Second World War andthe Greek Civil War Odysseus was demystified and became a genuine anti-heroHis achievements are frauds (Odysseus Come Home) he is a leader of the people(Hotel Circe) he is a false person (Penelopersquos 300 The Sleep of the Lotus-Eaters)non-existent (The Last Act Par-Odyssey) and ridiculous (Penelope and her Suitors)Still he is dominant in his environment even when his presence is a void the fig-ures surrounding him need to occupy themselves with him either to make him con-form to the new circumstances or because it is simply impossible for them to forgethim and thus eliminate his imposing even devastating presence Nikos Kazantzakisconsidered Odysseus to be a concrete symbol of the Western man and employedhim as the hero of a tragedy a long epic and a short poem Many other writersalso seem to regard him as a fundamental figure capable of conveying eternal aswell as contemporary ideas Only writers who based satirical plays on Odysseus(with the exception of the aforementioned farce writers the others did not usuallywrite comedies) depicted him as an illusion of humanity about the value of the lead-ers (essentially an anarchic message) and a utopia tending towards oblivion al-though peoples do not seem capable of handling their own fate The divine and re-sourceful Odysseus the most attractive and ever-present Homeric figure has beentotally transformed yet he is a very good bearer of a contemporary anti-myth



Pantelis Michelakis

The Reception of Homer in Silent Film

Discussions of the reception history of Homer in cinema usually begin with theearliest commercially available films on the subject which date back to the1950s Earlier films on The Fall of Troy and on Odysseusrsquo travels and return toIthaca are usually dismissed as lsquonon-Homericrsquo or are confined to passing refer-ences in online filmographies and in the footnotes of scholarly books and arti-cles However by the advent of synchronised sound in the late 1920s morethan a dozen films had been produced across Europe and North America onor at least had evoked Troy and Odysseus Some of them are now lost butthose that have survived together with press reviews posters production stillsand other ephemera testify to a whole chapter in the cinematic history ofHomer that has hitherto been neglected What follows is an attempt to situatesilent films concerned with Homerrsquos poems in relation to the larger receptionof Homeric epic but also in relation to the cinematic genre of film epic

Silent films on early Greek epic vary in length from the one-minute Judgmentof Paris which was produced in France in 1902 (Le jugement de Pacircris dir GeorgesHatot) to the forty-minute Odyssey produced in Italy in 1911 (Odissea dir Fran-cesco Bertolini Giuseppe de Liguoro and Adolfo Padovan) and the more thanthree-hour-long Helen produced in Germany in 1924 (Helena dir ManfredNoa) The earliest among these films the Judgment of Paris and the Island of Ca-lypso Ulysses and the Giant Polyphemus (Lrsquoicircle de Calypso Ulysse et le geacuteant Pol-yphegraveme France 1905 dir Georges Meacuteliegraves) can be seen as examples of how earlycinema uses classical mythology as a platform for the display of optical tricksThemes such as a journey revenge or marital life are central to the half-dozen films whose titles evoke the Odyssey and Odysseus but whose subject isdistinctively modern An Odyssey of the North (USA 1914 dir Hobart Bosworth)A Polynesian Odyssey (USA 1921 dir Burton Holmes) Circe the Enchantress(USA 1924 dir Robert Z Leonard) and the two films entitled The Return of Odys-seus produced in 1918 (Die Heimkehr des Odysseus Germany dir Rudolf Bie-brach) and 1922 (Die Heimkehr des Odysseus Germany dir Max Obal) respective-ly At least two films demonstrate the strong impact on early cinema of theatrethe 1909 Return of Ulysses (Le Retour drsquoUlysse France dir Andreacute Calmettes) andthe 1913 King Menelaus at the Movies (Koumlnig Menelaus im Kino Austria 1913 dirHans Otto Loumlwenstein) And two films use parody and burlesque to revisit the

A different version of this paper appeared in Michelakis Wyke (eds) 2013 145ndash68

associations of Greek epic in early cinema with action and romance King Mene-laus at the Movies and The Private Life of Helen of Troy (USA 1927 dir AlexanderKorda) A single chapter cannot do justice to the many issues raised by this di-verse body of films but under the headings of epic film and Homeric epic it canat least begin to explore how silent film based on Homeric themes challengescommon assumptions both about epic as a film genre and about the receptionhistory of Homer

a Epic film

The films which stand out in terms of their artistic ambition monumental scaleand wide distribution in numerous countries across Europe and North Americaare the Italian Fall of Troy of 1911 (La caduta di Troia dir Luigi Romano Borgnet-to and Giovanni Pastrone) the Italian Odyssey of the same year and the GermanHelen of 1924 (both mentioned above) Scenes with hundreds of extras massivesets siege engines naval battles aerial shots of chariot races and special effectsranging from artificial rain to man-eating monsters dominate the three filmsfrom beginning to end In Helen the title character arrives in Troy on a chariotdrawn by lions and in The Fall of Troy she is transported through the ether ina giant Botticelli-style seashell pulled by little Cupids The strong presence ofspectacle however does not detract from the romance which in all threecases plays an instrumental role in the construction of the narrative As the fore-word in the press book of Helen puts it lsquoWhile presenting to you Homeric com-bats on land and at sea with mighty warriors and engines of war in scenes andsettings on a scale so colossal as to defy description yet throughout the wonder-ful love story of Helen and Paris predominatesrsquosup1

The scale and ambition of these films have an aggressive and sensationalpublicity campaign to match lsquoNever in the history of the film businessrsquo con-cludes a review of The Odyssey lsquohas such an elaborate advertising campaignbeen outlinedhellip We have no hesitancy in saying that no motion picture hasever been so thoroughly advertised and never was so much well-designed adver-tising matter placed at the disposal of the state right buyerrsquosup2 The advertisingcampaign for The Odyssey was assigned to no other than Frank Winch the pub-licity organizer of the Buffalo Bill show who was now invited to transfer his en-

From the lsquoForewordrsquo of the press book of the film held in the collections of the British NationalFilm Archive The Moving Picture World February

394 Pantelis Michelakis

trepreneurial skills to the new and promising film industrysup3 Twenty millionpieces of printed matter were claimed to have been produced lsquofor the exploita-tion of The Odysseyrsquo which included programmes music scores illustrated sou-venir booklets with the story of the Odyssey paperback cloth and leather-boundcopies of lsquothe greatest epic poem in all literaturersquo in Greek or English postcardsannouncing the playing date of The Odyssey and even printed copies of a lectureto accompany the screen viewing⁴ The advertising campaign also includedlobby displays of life-size photos as well as grottoes stucco effects lighting ef-fects plaster busts of Homer Grecian costumes for lecturers and glass-front fold-ing frames⁵ In addition to all this there were letters collected lsquofrom every uni-versity president in America commending the Odyssey as a masterpiece ofworldrsquos literaturersquo and a nationwide essay competition was launched with lsquoacash prize of $100 for the best thousand-word essay on the greatest of all epicpoemsrsquo in which a hundred thousand students were supposed to have takenpart⁶ As an advertisement in a trade journal put it probably without ironyand certainly without exaggeration lsquothere is no limit to the advertising possibil-ities that you may take advantage of rsquo⁷

It may be tempting to see the issues of length spectacle romance and pub-licity as defining the early cinematic reception of Homer in the way that theyshaped lsquothe epic filmrsquo of the Hollywood industry of the 1950s and 1960s orthe European low-budget lsquosword-and-sandalrsquo films of the same period oreven the more recent revival of epic cinema since Ridley Scottrsquos Gladiator(2000) However this would be both anachronistic and reductive doing little jus-tice not only to the many films mentioned above that would be excluded fromsuch an interpretative scheme but also to those that would be included Ameri-can film audiences first saw the journeys of Odysseus and The Fall of Troy in im-ported European productions which predated the cinemascope epics of Holly-wood by half a century In the period before the emergence of the historicalepics of DW Griffith this encounter with imported productions generated enthu-siasm and admiration rather than the derision customarily levied at non-Amer-ican cold-war attempts to deal with epic on film Generically too the diversity ofthe films under consideration speaks in favour of a more inclusive and flexibledefinition of the terms lsquoHomericrsquo and lsquoepicrsquo than those provided by epic film

Ibid Quotes from The Moving Picture World February Ibid The Moving Picture World February The Moving Picture World February

The Reception of Homer in Silent Film 395

(whether old or new) The term lsquoepicrsquo was first introduced as a generic title forfilms in 1911⁸ a year when the novelty and ambition of multi-reel films was the-matically channeled not through great historical events of the past but directlythrough a literary tradition of epic poems stretching back to ancient Greece

In the first three decades of cinema lsquoHomerrsquo not only meant a combination ofthe monumental the antiquarian and the ethical (ie the trademark qualities ofwhat was to become lsquofilm epicrsquo)⁹ lsquoHomerrsquo also embraced trick cinematographyeroticism fantasy and on occasion parody and burlesque In silent cinema thegreat civilizations of the past communicated not only lsquovia the peaksrsquo as Deleuzewrites about film epics drawing on Nietzschersquos conception of history as a seriesof great momentssup1⁰ They also communicated via the troughs of the mundanethe contingent and the everyday Consider for instance the search for a lostmanuscript entitled lsquoHelen of Troyrsquo in The Target of Dreams (USA 1916 Knicker-bocker Star Features) or the presence of a manicurist possessing the beauty ofHelen of Troy in Rigadin and the Pretty Manicurist (Rigadin et la jolie manicureFrance 1915 dir Georges Monca) or even the extended use of the word lsquoOdysseyrsquoto describe the adventures of a countryman in a metropolis (Odysseacutee drsquoun paysanagrave Paris France 1905 dir Charles-Lucien Leacutepine) of an entomologist in the army(LrsquoOdysseacutee drsquoun savant Patheacute France 1908) of a spaceship (LrsquoOdysseacutee de la voi-ture astral France 1905 dir Georges Meacuteliegraves) and even of a meal (Odissea di unacomparsa Italy 1909 dir Romolo Bacchini)

In terms of narrative development too the lsquofree-wheeling approach to plotmaterial from the Iliadrsquosup1sup1 and the Odyssey is striking when compared to classicalHollywood or more recent attitudes of film epic towards authenticity and fidelityFor instance in The Private Life of Helen of Troy Helenrsquos return to Sparta at theend of the film is only the beginning of new erotic adventures for her and of adecision by Menelaus to ignore her In The Fall of Troy the central Homeric her-oes Achilles Agamemnon and Odysseus are all made irrelevant and they are noteven introduced by name In Helen Achilles and Hector are both in love withHelen Patroclus is in love with Achilles Paris unsuccessfully tries to killPriam with the poisoned arrows meant for Achilles and as Troy is in flamesPriam attempts to poison Helen to appease the gods before drinking the poison-ous potion himself Moving beyond play with the Homeric source material in

On the origins of the use of the term lsquoepicrsquo as a generic label in film criticism see Hall Neale On film epic between history and the canon of Western literary epic see Paul See especially Deleuze ndash Sobchack Burgoyne a Nietzsche [] Winkler with reference to the Queen of Sparta (USA)


what follows I offer two particularly telling examples of how silent films relatedto Homer challenge homogenizing assumptions about epic as a film genre

Epic films are often seen as vehicles for community-building narratives es-pecially for national narratives as lsquoexpressions of the myth-making impulse atthe core of national identityrsquosup1sup2 More often than not they are perceived as lsquoeffec-tive instruments of ideological control which through spectacular and engaginghistorical reconstructions manipulate their audiences to assent to a celebratorymodel of national identityrsquosup1sup3 Historical epics of the silent era are not always ex-empt from this as the hegemonist tendencies of Giovanni Pastronersquos Cabiria(Italy 1914) and D W Griffithrsquos Intolerance (USA 1916) suggest Manfred NoarsquosHelen (1924) can be seen as participating in a similar search for a nationalepic through the ancient Greeks a distinctly German epic in this case such asthose we find in the works of GWF Hegel and Richard Wagner associatedwith the Hellenization of lsquothe entire genre of epic and through this German na-tional identityrsquosup1⁴ However Helen does not produce a nostalgic longing for heroicachievements of a glorious past The intertitles convey a sense of being spokenfor everyone lsquofrom a stance of sure knowledgersquosup1⁵ of the kind associated with theepic narrator of later epic filmsYet at the same time they also convey a sense ofdoom not normally expected from the epic narrator In this sense Helen envisag-es history as tragedy rather than romance with its motivating forces being guiltambition hate and fear Grave mistakes are committed out of the best motivesand personal decisions turn out to have unintended and uncontrollable conse-quences for the community Menelaus forces Helen against her will to travel tothe games in honour of the most beautiful Greek woman which leads to hisown rivalry with Achilles and to the night that Helen spends with Paris in thetemple of Aphrodite Helen sleeps with Paris persuaded she gives herself to agod and fails to listen to his warnings that he is a simple shepherd She then fol-lows Paris to Troy out of shame for having slept with him rather than out of loveParis kills Achilles not because he wants to ndash in fact Helen asks him not to ndash butbecause Helen is the reward for which other archers are keen to shoot Achilles ifhe does not Paris does not alert the celebrating Trojans to the Greeks inside theTrojan horse in order to prove to Helen that for once he can do what she askshim to do Priamrsquos role as the patriarch who holds absolute power over the life ofhis children and subjects Parisrsquo Oedipal relation with him Helen as an object of

Burgoyne b Wyke Foster Burgoyne a


desire and the death and devastation with which the film ends play out a com-plex web of intergenerational and gender relations that are in crisis

The film was made during a time when the aftershocks of the German defeatand loss in the Great War were felt most strongly Like other German films of theperiod it can be seen as lsquopart of a widespread discourse that sought to workthrough the traumatic experience of war and national defeatrsquosup1⁶ evoking lsquofearof invasion and injuryrsquo and exuding lsquoa sense of paranoia and panicrsquosup1⁷ If epicfilms of both the silent era and of later periods commonly help celebrate an im-perial and expansionist national identity Helen does not provide its spectatorswith symbolic solutions to troubling experiences brought about by war and mili-tary defeat Although like other war films or history films of the period it is in-terested in authenticity and like war films adventure films or melodramas itplays with generic formulas in various ways it also features expressionisticand futuristic costumes harsh lighting effects fragmented or unexpected storylines and extreme psychological states triggered by defeat deceit and betrayalOffering a strong sense that decline is inevitable it provides a preoccupationwith national history which is openly political yet focused on the lsquograndeur ofdoomrsquosup1⁸ devoid of the celebratory political tone usually associated with thecanon of film epic

If epic films are often seen as vehicles for community-building narrativesand their critical success depends on their ability to appeal to critics normallykeen to rehearse arguments for their lsquopolitical bad faith and cultural vulgarityrsquosup1⁹their commercial success depends largely on their ability to appeal to broaderinternational audiences Accounting for both critics and international audiencescan cause considerable friction between (and within) film narratives and the pro-motional discourses that surround them The critical acclaim and internationalsuccess of the 1911 Odyssey provides a notable exception to this rule lsquoThe out-look is for an indefinite run for these reelsrsquo reads a report from a cinema in Bos-ton on the phenomenal success of the film in the USAsup2⁰ The film appeals equallylsquoto mass and classrsquo notes another review from New Yorksup2sup1 All types of spectatorswere targeted by the filmrsquos immense publicity discussed above from right-hold-ers and exhibitors to academics librarians lsquolovers of sensational melodramarsquo

Kaes Ibid See Kracauer Burgoyne a The Moving Picture World May The Moving Picture World March


and last but not least lsquoschools and colleges the churches and lyceumsrsquosup2sup2 Ac-cording to the filmrsquos publicity invitations to the American premiere of the filmwere sent even to lsquoPresident Taft Col Roosevelt Attorney General Wickershamand the Principals of Yale Harvard Princeton Cornell and ColumbiaUniversitiesrsquosup2sup3

In a review article published in The Moving Picture World the American filmlecturer and trade journal critic W Stephen Bush undertook to explain how a for-eign film could meet with such critical acclaim and commercial successsup2⁴ Bushclaims that The Odyssey provides education in a very broad sense that combinesentertainment and instruction He argues that as such the film appeals to dif-ferent communities of spectators including lsquoreadersrsquo and lsquostudentsrsquo of Homeron the one hand and lsquothe massesrsquo or lsquogeneral publicrsquo on the other hand in away that lsquoleaves the critic silent in admirationrsquo The agency of the film is power-ful he claims marking lsquoa new epoch in the history of the motion picture as anactor in educationrsquo But Bush also makes the film mediate invisibly betweenlsquoevery human beingrsquo and lsquothe genius of Homerrsquo through lsquofeelingrsquo lsquoinfluencersquoand the lsquobeauty of formrsquo And he proceeds by establishing an analogy betweenthe lsquoprimitiversquo audience of Homer lsquowho knew nothing of libraries and of allthe aids of modern education and who had to be moved chiefly by the beautyof formrsquo and lsquothe masses of the people todayrsquo making a case for the power ofaesthetics to move peoples across social divides ages and art forms On top ofthese broad claims and generalizations Bush makes the even bolder claimthat Homer in his cinematic guise is the educator of all America That such aclaim about the educational power of cinema could be made with the help ofa foreign film that was setting the benchmark for the nascent national industryis quite unique in the history of American cinema There is no room here for theambivalence shown by critics towards cinemarsquos preoccupation with history andits aspirations to cultural authority that we find in the post-Second World Warperiod Nor do we find here any of the Postwar derision of European epics fortheir lsquoinauthenticityrsquo and lsquobetrayal of European high-art traditionsrsquo or scorn fortheir transnational orientationsup2⁵

The 1911 Odyssey does not focus thematically on the national motifs of muchepic cinema such as lsquothe legend of a people the battles and treaties that define asacred landscape and the emergence of particular heroic and sainted figuresrsquosup2⁶

The Moving Picture World February March May The Moving Picture World February The Moving Picture World March ndash Burgoyne a Burgoyne b


Instead it features themes related to the individual to travelling to foreign landsto family values and homecoming Free of geographically or culturally-specificreferences it becomes suitable for circulation across and beyond national andcultural boundaries It is precisely through the fact that this silent epic doesnot showcase a glorious national history or a common religion language or eth-nic background that it becomes central in debates about cinema and its ability tobring together a socially and culturally heterogeneous body of spectators in thename of a common past and a shared identity

b Homeric epic

Silent films related to Homer challenge homogenizing assumptions not onlyabout epic as a film genre but also about Homerrsquos poems and the history oftheir interpretation The generic diversity of early cinema breaks down the total-izing and canonical work of Homer into component parts that are spread acrossand reconfigured within a number of artistically and culturally contingent cine-matic modes and forms Homerrsquos name can perform a number of different func-tions in relation to the complex process of reception that situates early filmswithin and against Homerrsquos history of interpretation it can symbolize this proc-ess but it can also ignore or conceal it As in antiquity the name lsquoHomerrsquo can beused not only for the Homeric poems themselves but also for other narratives ofthe myth of the Trojan Warsup2⁷ A purist strategy would reject as non-Homeric filmson the Trojan War that break down and broaden the spatial and temporal frame-work of the Iliad and the Odyssey or downplay the primacy of their narratives infavour of formal and thematic preoccupations more familiar from other poems ofthe Epic Cycle including action romance the exotic and the miraculoussup2⁸ Analternative approach would be to question the possibility or usefulness of aclear distinction between Homerrsquos Iliad and Odyssey and other poems of theEpic Cycle which may have served as sources of inspiration for the filmsunder consideration or which can be used as a basis for intertextual analysisFor instance one could explore the reasons for which the authority of Homerfeatures so prominently in the publicity of films which may have otherwisetaken little interest in the plots or characters of his poems

On the name lsquoHomerrsquo applied indiscriminately to both the Homeric poems and the poems ofthe so-called lsquoEpic Cyclersquo already in pre-classical Greece see Burgess See for instance Solomon On the uniqueness of Homerrsquos poems in relation to theEpic Cycle see Griffin


Another possibility would be to challenge the priority of the dialogue be-tween films and ancient texts over a dialogue between films and their moderncontexts from novels theatre plays and paintings to wider historical technolog-ical and ideological practices and processes associated with the culture of mod-ernity and its fascination with Homer The French Return of Ulysses of 1909 inter-acts not only with the Odyssey but also with other dramatic and non-dramaticworks inspired by it works which its screenwriter Jules Lemaicirctre composedaround the same period Similarly The Private Life of Helen of Troy invites usto think not only of Homerrsquos poems but also of John Erskinersquos almost contempo-rary novel which shares with the film its title and on whose success the filmsought to capitalize (despite its many differences from it) And the film Helendraws not on a humanistic classicizing Homer but on the lsquostrange brutal andthreateningrsquo Homer of Friedrich Nietzschesup2⁹ anticipating Sigmund Freudrsquos pessi-mistic reading of the Iliad in his Civilization and its Discontents by several yearssup3⁰

The Homer of early cinema is not only a canonical figure of the Western lit-erary tradition The Fall of Troy begins with a white-bearded bard holding a lyrein his hands reciting in front of an attentive audience The image of the bard per-forming in front of an audience reappears in the films Odyssey and Helen Thisimage engages with a pictorial rather than literary tradition for the representa-tion of the epic bard in performance that goes back to antiquityWhat is static inpaintings can now be made more vivid and lifelike being set literally in motionAnd what is only a script in the literary tradition awaiting its performance andinterpretation by readers can now appear at the moment of its realization com-plete with a bard and an audience At one level of course this plays with theparadoxes of translating words into images inherited from the pictorial traditionAt a different level however early cinema claims for itself not just the visualityof pictorial representations of Homerrsquos poetry but also the textuality of writtenepic (not least through intertitles) Even more importantly it claims for itselfthe orality of Homeric poetry the sense of a performative event associatedwith the bardrsquos recital of epic poetry in front of an audience Silent film returnsto processes of pre-literary production and dissemination of knowledge associat-ed with orality not because of any interest in how alien they are for a post-liter-ary culture but because of their perceived relevance to it Like epic bards silentcinema adopts a lsquorhetoric of traditionalityrsquo that facilitates the interplay betweenfilm viewing and audiencesup3sup1

Porter a Porter b ndash On the rhetoric of traditionality and on the interplay between oral performer and audiencesee Scodel


What attracts early cinema to this image of the epic bard in recital is not itspotential contribution to the vision of film as a universal pictorial language Or-ality holds the promise of recovering not the lost indexicality of language but awhole process of artistic production and dissemination based on the liveness ofperformance repetition and the fostering of a sense of a community In thissense the appeal for early cinema of the oral performative tradition of archaicepic is quite different from the appeal for cinema of the pictorial languages ofancient Egypt Israel and Babylon Ong speaks of a post-literary form of oralitywhich lsquohas striking resemblances to the old in its participatory mystique its fos-tering of a communal sense its concentration on the present moment and evenits use of formulas [hellip] Like primary orality secondary orality has generated astrong group sense for listening to spoken words forms hearers into a groupa true audience rsquosup3sup2 Early cinemarsquos instantaneity and complexity then must beviewed lsquoas the spatio-temporal equivalent of Ongrsquos ldquosounded wordrdquo which ldquoex-ists only when it is going out of existencehellip [and] is not simply perishable butessentially evanescent and sensed as evanescentrdquorsquosup3sup3 Ongrsquos examples of secon-dary orality include media such as the telephone radio and television Howeverearly cinema too illustrates ways in which in a post-literary world orality is re-mediated through a technologically based but performance-oriented event of im-ages and sounds

In fact one could go so far as to argue that early film does not simply rep-resent the orality of archaic Greek epic but also helps define it (on Homeric or-ality see also Papaioannou Efstathiou and I Petrovic in this volume) There isno more obvious way to illustrate this than considering very briefly Milman Par-ryrsquos research into South Slavic heroic songs to which the role of storage and re-trieval technologies of sound and vision was central (on South Slavic oral poetrysee also IPetrovic in this volume) Parryrsquos audio recordings and his 1935 filmfootage of the Yugoslav singer Avdo Medjedovic one of lsquothe earliest ethnograph-ic filmsrsquo ever made have received little attention in this respectsup3⁴ The way how-ever in which they helped define the content they were supposed to document isprofound informing as they did the very rhythm and structure of versification(octosyllabic when dictated as opposed to decasyllabic when sung)sup3⁵ From Par-ryrsquos lsquokinorsquo to recent scholarly work discussing epic formulas in terms of lsquothe cuts

Ong Joyce quoting Ong Sound recordings by Milman Parry and what his fieldnotes refer to as a lsquokinorsquo can be foundin the CD that accompanies Parry They are also available in the Online Database of Har-vardrsquos Milman Parry Collection of Oral Literature On Parryrsquos lsquokinorsquo see Mitchell Nagy vii Scaldaferri


of montage or as a kind of zooming in on a particular feature of a larger scenersquosup3⁶film technologies practices and techniques have served as an often lsquotransparentrsquoor lsquonaturalrsquo feedback loop for the scholarship on Homeric orality

There is another aspect of early cinema as a subject of historical enquiry thatcan be associated with Homerrsquos epic poetry The material specificity of early filmschallenges the fixity and rigidity of the cinematic artwork in ways that raisemethodological issues similar to those associated with the multiformity of theHomeric texts Some of the films in question are lost others damaged shortenedor re-edited for distribution in different contexts Some exist in multiple copiesand each copy is different not only in terms of its condition of preservation butalso in terms of overall length number and order of scenes and number subjectmatter and language of intertitles The drive to police the boundaries of the filmicnarrative and to protect the interests of right holders is well documented in tradejournals lsquoWilliam J Burns the worldrsquos most noted detective announced a newdeparture in his work ndash he has entered the film industry throwing his power andprestige into the protection of a company controlling a reproduction of HomerrsquosOdysseyrsquosup3⁷ But similarly well documented are the fluidity and the shifting open-ended and evanescent boundaries of film narratives as they circulate throughtime and space Noarsquos Helen reappeared in Germany four years after its originalrelease in a shortened version under the title The Hero of the Arena (Der Held DerArena 1928) Seven years later it was re-released in the USA under the Italiantitle La Regina di Sparta (The Queen of Sparta) The sets and costumes of The Pri-vate Life of Helen of Troy were recycled at least in part in Vamping Venus andits plot reappears in Manu Jacobrsquos French novel of the same name which waspublished in the immediate aftermath of the filmrsquos release (a novel thenbased on a film that in its turn draws on a novel and a play which engagewith various stories around the Trojan War)sup3⁸

Film archivists often draw on the critical methods of recension and emenda-tion to analyze the complex genealogy of film prints Consider for instance theuse of a stemma to provide the genealogy of existing prints for The Fall of Troy inMarotto Pozzi 2005 111 However fascinating technically and aesthetically resto-rations of films such as The Odyssey and Helenmight be they should not be con-fused with the quest for a lsquodefinitiversquo or lsquooriginalrsquo version nor should they de-tract from the rich and adventurous history of the filmsrsquo dissemination On theone hand there is the archival drive to fix films through storage retrieval and

Elmer The Moving Picture World February Jacob


digital or other forms of preservation On the other hand to speak of early filmson Homer as lsquocapturing the imaginationrsquo of a whole nation or as lsquobeing forgottenrsquoby film-makers for several generations are not just turns of phrase but attemptsto situate them within a cultural framework based on memory rather than his-tory and on repetition through variation


Anastasia Bakogianni

Homeric Shadows on the Silver ScreenEpic Themes in Michael Cacoyannisrsquo Trilogyof Cinematic Receptions

Michael Cacoyannisrsquo (1922ndash2011) three cinematic receptions of Greek tragedy Elec-tra (1961ndash62) The Trojan Women (1970ndash71) and Iphigenia (1976ndash77) were created inthe shade of the Homeric epicssup1 Cacoyannisrsquo trilogy is modelled on Euripidesrsquo Elec-tra Troades and Iphigenia in Aulis However other lsquohiddenrsquo or lsquomaskedrsquo layers of re-ception open up channels that lead further back to the Homeric epics themselvesThis discussion focuses on the debt that Cacoyannis owes to the Homeric poemsand the ways in which the epics shaped his directorial vision both on the visualplane as well as on the level of narrative and characterization

Michael Cacoyannisrsquo three cinematic receptions construct a complex and multi-layered relationship with ancient Greece They operate at a closely interwoven nexusof multiple strands of reception that demonstrates the sophistication of their re-sponse to the classical past within a modern Greek context Cacoyannis openly ac-knowledged his debt to Euripidean dramaturgy but his debt to the Homeric epicscan be described by using a metaphor that also applies to the medium of cinemaitself lsquoflickering shadows on a silver screenrsquosup2 Cacoyannisrsquo Euripidean trilogy canthus be classified as a lsquomaskedrsquo reception of the Homeric epics

What makes this particular case study worth examining is precisely the in-direct nature of its dialogue with the epicssup3 While on the face of it Cacoyannisrsquo

This paper is dedicated to the memory of Michael Cacoyannis who passed away on 25 July2011 With sincere thanks to Ioanna Karamanou and Athanasios Efstathiou for their editorialassistance during the revision process I would also like to acknowledge the generous help ofMike Edwards (Roehampton University) Lorna Hardwick (The Open University) and Gonda VanSteen (University of Florida) I am paraphrasing Rickrsquos title The Shade of Homer () MacKinnon argues against la-belling the three films a trilogy ( ndash) More recently Michelakis is equally sceptical( ndash) I would counter that there are enough commonalities to warrant their consid-eration as one Moreover the extent of the debt these films owe to the Homeric epics can only befully appreciated if they are examined as a unit Karalis in his A History of Greek Cinema alsoapplies the label ( ) httpwcclibrarieswordpresscomflickering-shadows-on-a-silver-screen The range of receptions of the Homeric epics some of which are showcased in the presentvolume is both rich and varied Some further representative examples of scholarship from

Euripidean trilogy is defined by its open dialogue with another ancient literarygenre that of tragedy it also enjoys a less obvious lsquomaskedrsquo relationship withancient epic that enriches and to a large extent determines the overall shapeand content of the three films This is Greek tragedy mediated through thelens of the Homeric epics an anachronistic inversion of the traditional chrono-logical narrative of the relationship between ancient Greek epic and tragic poetrythat leads us to re-examine our assumptions about the connections betweenthese two ancient genres and their dialogue with the modern world

In methodological terms this particular case study of the dialogue between pastand present falls under the purview of what Martin Winkler classifies as lsquoclassicalfilm philologyrsquo (2009 13) Indeed a close analysis of the filmic text is required inorder to discover the lsquoepicrsquo elements that exist hidden under the lsquotragicrsquo label thatCacoyannis assigned to his reception thus making his link to Greek tragedy explicitbut disguising his debt to the Homeric epics lsquoTragedyrsquo and lsquoepicrsquo are slippery termshowever our relationship to them is continuously renegotiated⁴ For the purposes ofthis paper I am focusing in particular on the ways in which they can contribute tothe project of unpicking the reception of these two ancient genres in Cacoyannisrsquocinematic trilogy but also in problematizing that very process Because ultimatelythese filmic receptions move beyond anything found in the ancient sourceswhethertragic or epic to offer a unique modern amalgamation of both ancient genres reima-gined for a cinematic audience

Cacoyannisrsquo status as an auteur is particularly relevant to this discussion Anauteur is defined as a film director who is not a mere craftsman working within aformula or simply an adaptor but one who utilises the medium to develop andexpress personal creativity Eisensteinrsquos theory of the dialectic of montage⁵ em-phasized the control that a director can exert over his film making his role anal-ogous to that of the author of a work of literature

Readerviewer response theory however complicates this equation by ac-knowledging the role of the readerspectator in the creation of meaning Cacoyan-nisrsquo receptions were created in the popular medium of cinema but appealed most-ly to art-house audiences interested in alternative types of films and to classical

this fast-growing area Graziosi Greenwood (eds) Latacz Greub Blome Wieczorek(eds) Vandiver Paulrsquos discussion of lsquoepicrsquo as a lsquoculturalrsquo phenomenon ( ) is relevant here as is her dis-cussion of the difficulties of classification and the importance of demarcating the boundaries ofonersquos own project (ndash) This refers to the process of editing a film the director chooses particular shots in order toconstruct a montage sequence that creates the desired meaning (Kolker ndash) Seealso Eisenstein

406 Anastasia Bakogianni

scholars who analyse films with ancient themes and use them as pedagogicaltools⁶ As a member of the latter category my reading of Cacoyannisrsquo trilogy is con-ditioned by my ongoing search for classical themes in modern culture I wouldargue however that the epic echoes in the trilogy would also resonate particularlystrongly with a large section of Cacoyannisrsquo intended audience modern Greekspectators (to which group I also belong)⁷ The Homeric epics have remained a cor-nerstone of the educational system in the modern state and have cast a long shad-ow over its cultural products Cacoyannisrsquo trilogy allows a knowledgeable audi-ence familiar with the Homeric poems the opportunity to form connectionswith the epic tradition⁸ Non-knowledgeable audience members who are howev-er familiar with the lsquosword and sandalrsquo genre could also discover epic resonancesin terms of Cacoyannisrsquo cinematic style⁹ Vrasidas Karalis criticizes Iphigenia forbeing lsquoheavy with the Hollywood aesthetic of the grand spectaclersquo but as Ihope to demonstrate below this emphasis on spectacle is not confined to thelast film in the trilogy Rather it forms part of the directorrsquos thoughtful responseto the dominant cinematic idiom of the time Cacoyannis creatively borrowed ele-ments of the Hollywood style and reconfigured them for use in his own personalvision of the classical past (Bakogianni 2011 162ndash66) Furthermore the distinctionI have drawn between knowledgeable and non-knowledgeable audiences has tobe dismantled at least in part because of the intersections in the membershipof these groups Such is the glamour and impact of the medium of cinema in mod-ern society that films provide a common point of reference a new type of lingua

For analysis of Cacoyannisrsquo trilogy from the perspective of classical film philology see Bako-gianni ndash ndash ndash a ndash and b ndashMacKinnon ndash McDonald and ndash McDonald Winkler ndash Michelakis ndash ndash ndash and ndash (Elec-tra) ndash (Iphigenia) ndash (on the use of ruins) For the use of film as a pedagogicaltool by classicists see McDonald ndash and Paul ndash The language of Electra and Iphigenia is Greek which potentially limits the filmrsquos appeal tonon-Greek speaking viewers to those viewers prepared to watch a subtitled film Both filmsdid reach foreign audiences particularly Electra which won the award for best screen adaptationat the Cannes and was nominated for an Oscar in the Best Foreign Film category Iphigenia wasalso presented at Cannes in but was less well received Even The Trojan Women with itsinternational cast which necessitated the use of English would only appeal to spectators pre-pared to engage in a film that openly acknowledges its debt to Greek tragedy I am using the term lsquotraditionrsquo here in the way that Paul defines it stressing the importance oflsquotextual relationshipsrsquo ( ) A distinction should be drawn here between contemporary cinema audiences whose point ofreference would have been the lsquosword and sandalrsquo epics of the s and s and modern au-dienceswho have also experienced the renaissance of the genre in the new millennium usheredin by Gladiator ()

Homeric Shadows on the Silver Screen 407

franca which allows the viewer to build multiple bridging points between the Ho-meric epics and Cacoyannisrsquo trilogy

This picture is further complicated by the lsquoHomeric questionrsquo If lsquoHomerrsquo is asign that stands for the collective efforts of a number of ancient rhapsodes (Ka-hane 2005 6) who created the oral tradition on which the surviving written ver-sion of the ancient epics is based then this destabilizes further the category oflsquoauthorauteurrsquo and hisher purported control over the finished product Myreading of Cacoyannisrsquo Euripidean trilogy brings to the surface its lsquohiddenrsquoepic elements It reads counter to the directorrsquos claim to authenticity that relieson his acknowledged relationship with Greek tragedy and undermines his direc-torial control of the intended meaning of his trilogy In other words I argue thatCacoyannis like a number of other modern Greek artists produced his receptionof Greek tragedy in the long shadow of Homer but chose not to explicitly ac-knowledge this debt

a Visual echoes

In the predominantly visual medium of cinema Cacoyannisrsquo debt to the Homericepics operates most accessibly on the level of the visual The opening of his Tro-jan Women transports his cinematic audience to the ruins of Troy and the worldof the Iliad The film was shot in a ruined castle in Spain as the director was in astate of exile from Greece to escape the censorship imposed by the Greek mili-tary dictatorship that was ruling the country (1967ndash74)sup1⁰ Cacoyannisrsquo decision toexcise the divine prologue that opens Euripidesrsquo play and to replace it with alarge-scale night scene starring a large cast of Trojan prisoners being herdedby Greek soldiers signals the directorrsquos desire to set an lsquoepicrsquo tone for his recep-tion He used the freeze-frame technique to create brief but significant pauses inthe narrative flow of the film focusing the viewerrsquos attention on shots of theruined walls of the citadel the enslaved women and the carts loaded with theGreeksrsquo war booty

These opening scenes establish an lsquoepicrsquo tone for Cacoyannisrsquo cinematic re-ception of Euripidesrsquo tragedy but also one that destroys the distancing effect ofEuripidesrsquo original deus ex machina prologue Instead the audience is guided by

The Greek military dictatorship known as the lsquoΧούνταrsquo banned Cacoyannisrsquo The TrojanWomen Goff ndash The modern trend of interpreting the play as an anti-war statementwas one that Cacoyannis embraced in order to reflect contemporary concerns Bakogianni ndash As Hall demonstrates this was part of the radicalization of Greek tragedy Hall ndash


an lsquoomniscient narratorrsquo (Winkler 2009 8) into viewing the fall of Troy in polit-ical terms This authorial voice tells the spectators that Helen was just an excuseThe Greeks went to war because they coveted Trojan gold The director is thusguiding his audience towards a particular interpretation of his source text onethat is set in an lsquoepicrsquo register that helps to bring to the surface the political di-mension of the tragedy

In the popular imagination the citadel of Mycenae has become a potent andwidely recognizable visual symbol of the Homeric epics themselves (Wiener 2011535) Cacoyannisrsquo decision to set the prologue of his Electra in the ruins of theancient citadel and to have his Agamemnon (Theodoros Demetriou) walkunder that famous Lion Gate sets the tone for his reinterpretation of the Euripi-dean source text Cacoyannisrsquo choice of setting for these added scenes demon-strates how his view of ancient drama was transfigured through the prism ofthe Homeric epics The prologue thus serves a dual function It sets the sceneand tone of Cacoyannisrsquo first cinematic reception and it explains the back-story of Agamemnonrsquos return and subsequent murder to non-knowledgeable au-dience members The shock of Euripidesrsquo choice of the peasantrsquos hut as the set-ting for his Electra is thus destroyed by Cacoyannisrsquo decision to delay the scenesset at this humble dwelling to a later point in the filmic narrative Cacoyannisthus privileges the lsquoepicrsquo rather than the lsquotragicrsquo register in the opening scenesof his first cinematic reception

In Iphigenia we first encounter the heroine and her mother at Mycenae whenthey receive Agamemnonrsquos letter informing them of the false news of the pro-posed marriage to Achilles designed to lure them to Aulis This scene formspart of an added prologue that creates a sharp contrast between Agamemnonrsquosoikos and life in the Greek encampment In this third film the ruins of Mycenaerepresent a happy domestic world which Iphigenia (Tatiana Papamoskou) andClytaemestra (Irene Papas) leave behind to journey to the Greek military campat Aulis These two key scenes in Electra and Iphigenia help to construct aworld of lsquoepicrsquo proportions and to locate Cacoyannisrsquo trilogy visually in agrand heroic past They establish an lsquoepicrsquo register for Cacoyannisrsquo cinematic re-ceptions of Greek drama that is not actually present in Euripides

A larger visual analogy can usefully be drawn from the comparison of Ca-coyannisrsquo cinematic receptions to the narrative of the Homeric epics Cacoyannisrsquofilmic technique combines wide-shots of large-scale scenes with the use of themore intimate close-up during key dramatic moments He thus adapts for themodern medium of cinema the Homeric poemsrsquo alternation of large-scale sceneswith a big cast of characters with more intimate moments focusing on particularindividuals One could indeed argue that the Homeric narrative is ideally suited


to being discussed in lsquocinematographicrsquo termssup1sup1 The same does not hold true ofGreek tragedy which was confined to the performance space of ancient open-airtheatres and restricted by the genrersquos rules about the number of actors (2ndash3) andChorus members (12ndash 15) allowed

An illustrative example of Cacoyannisrsquo affinity for this element in the Homer-ic epics is the opening scene of his Iphigenia in which he establishes the scale ofthe Greek expedition by a tracking shot of the ships culminating in a wide shot ofa mass of soldiers on the beach In Euripidesrsquo play the army remains off-stage soCacoyannisrsquo vision of the Greek expeditionary force more closely echoes passag-es in the Iliad such as the extended simile that describes the Achaeans lsquoas themultitudinous nations of birds wingedhellip so of these the multitudinous tribesfrom the ships and shelters poured to the plain of Skamandros and the earthbeneath their feet and under the feet of their horses thundered horriblyrsquo(Il 2459ndash66 τῶν δrsquo ὥς τrsquo ὀρνίθων πετεηνῶν ἔθνεα πολλά [hellip] ὣς τῶν ἔθνεαπολλὰ νεῶν ἄπο καὶ κλισιάων ἐς πεδίον προχέοντο Σκαμάνδριον˙ αὐτὰρ ὑπὸχθὼν σμερδαλέον κονάβιζε ποδῶν αὐτῶν τε καὶ ἵππων) This wide-shot of theAchaean army in the epic is contrasted with close-ups of their leaders in thisparticular scene Agamemnon (Il 2477) In Iphigenia the camera also comes tofocus on Agamemnon after the opening shots of the army at Aulis Cacoyannisemphasizes Agamemnonrsquos struggle to retain control over the soldiers and to pre-vent their descent into anarchy and mob rulesup1sup2 The application of this cinematictechnique throughout the trilogy and the addedmodified prologues of all threefilms are some of the means by which the lsquoepicrsquo register of Cacoyannisrsquo cinematicreceptions is established

b Epic themes

These visual elements are reinforced by the narrative thematic connections thatunderlie the plot of Cacoyannisrsquo receptions and connect them to the Homericepics One of the overarching concerns of Cacoyannisrsquo Euripidean trilogy is theemphasis he places on the price of war that echoes the exploration of thistheme in the Iliad Cacoyannisrsquo The Trojan Women and Iphigenia in particular

My discussion of this particular Homeric narrative technique using the language of film stud-ies is indebted to Nick Lowe (Royal Holloway College University of London) For the visual im-pact of the epics see also Greenwood and in particular ndash The negative role that the army plays in the development of the plot of Iphigenia reflects con-temporary political concerns about the key role that the military played during the dictatorshipBakogianni b ndash


reflect the ancient epicrsquos emphasis on the darker aspects of the war the loss oflife and the impact on the civilian population Two well-known passages that ex-emplify the Iliadic exploration of this theme are the death of Sarpedon(Il 16462ndash505) and Hectorrsquos moving but brief reunion with Andromache(Il 6369ndash502)sup1sup3 Both Greeks and Trojans faced the possibility of death in battlebut for the Trojans defeat also meant the enslavement of non-combatants Themeeting between husband and wife foreshadows Andromachersquos fate in Euripi-desrsquo Troades enslaved and without a protector she is utterly helpless to preventthe murder of her son Astyanax In his Trojan Women Cacoyannis dramatizedthis scene for contemporary cinematic audiences expanding on the feelings ofempathy that the epic engenders for the doomed Trojans (on the transformationsof this Iliadic scene see also Karamanou and Georgopoulou in this volume)

The Iliad balances this awareness of the consequences of war with the desireof the warriors to achieve aretē and to win kleossup1⁴ Achillesrsquo choice of a short butglorious life over a long peaceful one a choice to which he recommits after Pa-troclus falls in battle (Il 1888ndash126) encapsulates the epic concept of heroismIn the justification of the heroic code provided by Sarpedon (Il 12310ndash28) a war-rior is motivated by both a desire for the material gains that he can win in battleas well as the glory that allows a herorsquos reputation to outlive him (Chiasson 2009187ndash88) Cacoyannis however disrupted this balance between the benefits andthe cost of war in the epic His films stress the negative impact the war had onthe non-combatants and diminish the kleos it confers He thus subverts both hisepic and tragic sources In order to understand his approach to this key themehis cinematic receptions must be considered within their contemporary context

Cacoyannis created his trilogy during the turbulent decades of the 1960s and1970s when wars and conflicts around the world gave rise to an increasinglyvocal peace movement Cacoyannis too raised his voice in protest and as anact of resistance (Bakogianni 2009) He had personally experienced the tollthat modern warfare takes on the civilian population He lived through theBlitz in London during World War II and he documented the Turkish invasionof his home island of Cyprus in 1974 In response to these political upheavalsand their human cost Cacoyannis focused not on the glory of war but on itsprice The Trojan Women accentuate the tragedy of the fallen city of Troy symbol-

Sarpedon is portrayed sympathetically in the epic so his death at the hands of Patroclus islsquotragicrsquo but it is also necessary if he is to achieve heroic status Janko ndash Hectorspeaks first of his duty to his family and city (ll ndash) and only gradually reveals howdeep his feelings for Andromache run and how the thought of her future suffering (ll ndash) makes his imminent death more acceptable to him Graziosi Haubold ndash For a discussion of the popularity of the theme in more recent films see Paul ndash


ized by the fate of its former queen Hecuba (Katherine Hepburn) who desperate-ly and unsuccessfully tries to hold the last remnants of her family together Overthe course of Cacoyannisrsquo film as in Euripidesrsquo play the audience watches herlose her daughter Cassandra learn the news of Polyxenarsquos sacrifice and standby unable to aid her daughter-in-law Andromache and her grandson Astyanaxwho is thrown to his death from the walls Cacoyannisrsquo sympathies lie with He-cuba as demonstrated in the agon scene in which she wins the argument on arational basis but Helen ultimately triumphs by using her seductive charms tomanipulate Menelaus

Cacoyannisrsquo Iphigenia followed and explored in more detail the causes of theTrojan War This film was released three years after the invasion of Cyprus Thedirector returned home when this news reached him in order to create a recordof these dark events His documentary Attila 74 explores the causes that precipi-tated the Turkish invasion as well as its tragic aftermath Cacoyannis visited therefugee camps and captured on film first-hand accounts of the experience of thedisplaced focusing in particular on the suffering of grieving mothers and the be-wilderment and pain of children Iphigenia portrays its heroine as an innocentgirl betrayed by her male relatives for the sake of their political and military am-bitions Cacoyannisrsquo second Clytaemestra is also a much more sympathetic char-acter whose hatred of Agamemnon is made comprehensible to the audience Inher grief at the loss of her daughter she becomes the Greek counterpart of theTrojan Hecuba and a symbol for all Cypriot mothers mourning their dead chil-dren (Bakogianni 2013a 216ndash 17)

Cacoyannisrsquo preoccupation with the importance of family life and domestic-ity reflects similar themes in the Odyssey Cacoyannis emphasized the impor-tance of home and family in his cinematic receptions by demonstrating the dis-ruptive effect that war has on them The Trojan Women accomplishes this bystressing the womenrsquos feelings of loss The men of Troy are already dead Domes-tic harmony has been destroyed and now lives on only in the memory of moth-ers wives and daughters In Iphigenia on the other hand Cacoyannis exploresthe gradual destruction of familial bonds The director provided a glimpse ofhappy domesticity in the scenes between mother and daughter at Mycenae men-tioned above and on their trip to Aulis only to show how the royal family breaksapart when Clytaemestra and Iphigenia learn the true purpose of Agamemnonrsquosrequest that his daughter joins him at Aulis The tragic results of the wedge thisdrives between husband and wife are demonstrated in Cacoyannisrsquo Electra whenClytaemestra murders Agamemnon in the prologue and thus irrevocably destroysthe last ties that bind the family together As the heir to his fatherrsquos throneOrestes is smuggled away to safety and the rift between mother and daughter wi-dens The audience has already witnessed the young Electra of the prologue


brush off her motherrsquos hand from her shoulder but her contempt becomes ha-tred after the murder of her father In another scene added by Cacoyannis theaudience sees Clytaemestra forcing her daughter now embodied by Papas tomarry the peasant against her wishes The relationship portrayed in this sceneis one of conflict Mother and daughter should be philoisup1⁵ but in Cacoyannisrsquo re-ception they are clearly echthroi This is demonstrated again in the agon whenthey verbalise their two diametrically opposite positions

A theme related to the exploration and validation of the importance of fam-ily life and domesticity is that of nostos Odysseusrsquo ten-year long quest to returnto his oikos is contrasted with Agamemnonrsquos fatal early return (HeubeckWestHainsworth 1998 16ndash 17) Cacoyannis explores Agamemnonrsquos nostos in thefirst and third film of his trilogy In the prologue of his Electra Cacoyannis dem-onstrated to his audience the unsuccessful culmination of Agamemnonrsquos nostosThe spectators act as witnesses to Agamemnonrsquos murder by Clytaemestra andAegisthus in the bath It is this crime that provides the springboard for the re-venge plot that follows and Cacoyannis accentuates this point by allowing hisfilm audience to view the murder In contrast the Agamemnon of Cacoyannisrsquothird film is not a returning hero murdered by an evil wife as in his ElectraAs embodied by Costas Kazakos Agamemnon is a weak man responsible for de-stroying his own family by his ambition to lead the Greek army against Troy Thelast scene of the film in which Clytaemestra gazes at the departing fleet with ha-tred in her eyes brings the audience full circle back to the first film in the trilogyand Cacoyannisrsquo portrayal of the murder of Agamemnon (McDonald 2001 100)Unlike Odysseus his nostos was unsuccessful as his ghost reveals to his old com-rade (Od 11405ndash34) In his third film Cacoyannis lays the blame for Clytaemes-trarsquos betrayal squarely at Agamemnonrsquos feet Despite trials and tribulationsOdysseus achieves his longed-for goal which is to restore domestic harmonyand order to his oikos In contrast Cacoyannis presented his audience with anAgamemnon who had irrevocably destroyed his family by sacrificing his daugh-ter at the altar of his ambitions and could therefore never really return to it

c Heroic values and characterization

Iliadic values underpin Cacoyannisrsquo characterization of many of his heroes and her-oines His three main female protagonists Electra Hecabe and Iphigenia display

For an exploration of the problematic nature of philia in Euripidesrsquo Electra see Konstan ndash


strong Homeric qualities such as their preoccupation with timē (honour) and kleos(gloryreputation) In his adaptation of a Euripidean play Cacoyannis created an ide-alized and sympathetic Electra who fights for justice and the restoration of the right-ful succession The royal oikos was brutally violated and its workings disrupted byAegisthusrsquo and Clytemnestrarsquos murder of Agamemnon Electra is determined to helpher brother Orestes restore order to their family and to the city but ultimately thesiblings fail and are obliged to go into exile Cacoyannis thus creates an lsquoepicrsquo ver-sion of Electra that contrasts sharply with Euripidesrsquo more prosaic tragic heroineworried about her status and inheritance (El 303ndash22)

The Trojan Women emphasizes the nobility of Hecabe in particular but alsothat of Andromache (Vanessa Redgrave) and the other Trojan survivors It por-trays them as heroic in their capacity to endure and to adapt to their tragicchange of fortune An illustrative example is Andromachersquos heroic but ultimatelydoomed attempt to protect Astyanax from the Greeksrsquo decree of death In the filmshe actively tries to resist by hugging her son to herself and trying to preventTalthybius (Brian Blessed) from seizing him and sending him to his death He-cabe and the Chorus surround her in a loose circle supporting her emotionallyIn the end however the tragic mother is forced to relinquish her son but shedoes so in a dignified manner that condemns the cruelty of the Greek perpetra-tors Cacoyannis drives this point home by allowing his audience to glimpse themurder of Astyanax He is shown at the walls of Troy accompanied by a Greeksoldier and a dizzying montage of the rocks below suggests his fall The abilityto survive thus becomes a heroic quality in Cacoyannis and an act of resistancein itself In contrast the Greeks are portrayed as weak unjust and downrightcruel which further enhances the heroic qualities of the Trojan women

In Iphigenia Cacoyannis explains the young heroinersquos change of heart as apatriotic sacrifice so that the Greek army can avenge the insult of Helenrsquos abduc-tion She realizes that she cannot save herself but she can choose the manner ofher death and how she is remembered Prompted by her love for her father andaware of the threat posed by the Greek army to her family she chooses a gloriousdeath that prefigures Achillesrsquo own choice The epic hero reconsiders his deci-sion after his quarrel with Agamemnon (Il 9308ndash429) but ultimately he recom-mits to it after the death in battle of Patroclus Cacoyannis thus created an Iphi-genia that was a fitting partner to this epic Achilles even though their marriagenever actually took place However Iphigeniarsquos decision indirectly leads to thedeath of Achilles and it destroys her own family as well as the city of Troy

Despite the good intentions of Cacoyannisrsquo heroines however their decisionshave terrible consequences Revenge comes at the cost of matricide in Electra andIphigeniarsquos heroic decision is shown to be manifestly misguided in Cacoyannisrsquo re-ception of the problematic text of the Iphigenia in Aulis Moreover the happiness of


domestic life briefly portrayed in the early scenes of the prologue of Electra andmore extensively in the depiction of the loving and nurturing relationship betweenClytaemestra and Iphigenia is utterly destroyed by the heroinersquos actions howevernoble in intent Iphigeniarsquos decision also leads directly to the destruction of He-cabersquos world Τhe tragic queen loses her last links to her past life over the courseof the film which ends with her and the Chorus walking away from the ruins ofTroy and heading towards the Greek ships that will bear them away to a life of slav-ery Cacoyannis portrays the traditional concept of heroism with its emphasis onhonour glory and a good reputation in a negative light He valorizes instead thecourage of the victim (McDonald 1983 132)

Many of Cacoyannisrsquo male characters retain a heroic presence reminiscent ofthat of the warriors of epic rather than of the ambiguous protagonists of Euripi-desrsquo dramas The director modifies the ancient concept of heroism based on mili-tary prowess by introducing modern concerns such as the responsibility of aleader to rule justly and romantic love The directorrsquos first conception of Aga-memnon as the audience sees him in the silent prologue of his Electra is asthe returning conqueror of Troy In the film his mantle is gradually assumedby his son Orestes (Yannis Fertis) His is a journey from ephebe to full heroic war-rior status similar to Telemachusrsquo trajectory in the Odyssey Nestor in fact holdsup Orestes as a role model for the prince of Ithaca (Od 3304ndash 10)sup1⁶ In Cacoyan-nisrsquo reception the audience watches Orestes grow in stature over the course ofthe film from an unsure youth to an active participant and shaper of the plotPylades Electra and the old retainer guide him but he takes the lead in the kill-ing of Aegisthus at the feast and afterwards His most heroic action by far how-ever is to go into voluntary exile at the end of the film because he has lost thesupport of the people after committing matricide (Bakogianni 2011 190ndash91) Inthe closing scenes of the film he even gives up on the companionship of Pyladessilently commanding him to follow Electra instead Cacoyannisrsquo Orestes can nowstand alone and stoically accept the consequences of his actions It is this newtype of heroism that is valorized by Cacoyannis

Achilles in Iphigenia (played by Panos Mihalopoulos) is also presented as aheroic if rather rash warrior This more closely resembles his portrayal in theepic than in Euripidesrsquo more ambiguous and questioning version of the Homerichero (McDonald 1983 156) Cacoyannis portrays the Achaeansrsquo greatest warrioras willing to defend Iphigenia even if that entails opposing the will of theGreek army Cacoyannis added a scene in which Achillesrsquo own troops throw

The epic marginalizes the matricide and instead stresses the rightful killing of AegisthusHeubeckWest Hainsworth


stones at him and refuse to help him defend Iphigenia He is thus a sympatheticfigure whose arrogance is tempered by his courage Cacoyannis also adds roman-tic love as a facet of his portrayal of the herosup1⁷ In the film as in the play hisagreement to defend Iphigenia after Clytaemestrarsquos supplication is motivatedby his sense that his honour has been impugned When however Iphigeniaand Achilles do meet later in the film Cacoyannis suggests that his young pro-tagonists fall in love at first sight (MacKinnon 1986 90 and Bakogianni 2013a229) This romantic love coupled with her love for her father and family formsthe bedrock of the motivation that leads Cacoyannisrsquo young heroine to decideto submit to the sacrifice demanded of her

Concluding remarks

In Michael Cacoyannisrsquo trilogy of films the close connection between the Homericepics and Greek tragedy is performed in the modern medium of cinema Cacoyannisinverts the traditional relationship between these two genres by re-heroizing Euripi-des (MacKinnon 1986 94) The directorrsquos purportedly lsquoEuripideanrsquo trilogy is in factinfused with lsquoepicrsquo elements in terms of its visual language as well as of narrativeand characterization However in contrast to other cinematic adaptations whoseclaim of being modelled on one of the Homeric epics can be more explicitlyconstructedsup1⁸ Cacoyannisrsquo relationship with the epics is a more indirect implicitone Moreover it is one that needs to be carefully disentangled like Penelopersquosun-weaving of the shroud of Laertes at night

Wolfgang Petersen in his Troy () also added romantic love as an essential element in hisportrayal of Achilles His love for Briseis is a powerful force that drives his heroism particularlyat the end of the film when he dies in order to save her For an exploration of this theme in thefilm see Chiasson ndash See also Allen ( ndash) and Blondell on the empha-sis the film places on the Achilles-Briseis romance ( ) For the reception of the Homeric epics in the cinema see Solomon ndash and Paul ndash In the new millenniumWolf Petersenrsquos film Troy () is one such reception thatinscribes its claim to have been lsquoinspiredrsquo by the Iliad in its opening credits


Hara Thliveri

lsquoTravelling to the Light Aiming at theInfinitersquo The Odyssey of Mikis Theodorakis

There are many elements in common between Mikis Theodorakissup1 and Homerfrom their birth on the same island Chios to their being claimed by many citiesThe most important is that Theodorakis the most famous modern Greek compos-er active during the last eighty years managed to elevate poetry to a continuingnarrative of national Greek myth The objective of the present study is to exploreTheodorakisrsquo refiguration of the idea of Homeric nostos in his most recent song-cycle entitled Odyssey with poetry by Kostas Kartelias The work was set to musicin 2006 and was recorded as a CD by Legend Recordings in 2007 with Maria Far-andouri as a soloist and orchestration by Irina Velentinovasup2 The official pressconference to launch the CD took place on 20 March 2007 at Pallas Theatre inAthens in the presence of the composersup3

I shall start by pointing out the significance of the photograph used on thecover of the CD in which the composer is depicted at the age of twelve at the

I am grateful to Mikis Theodorakis for his reading of my text and for his suggestions which ledI hope to a better overall structure Many thanks to Theodorakisrsquo assistant Rena Parmenidou tothe poet Kostas Kartelias for his invitation to attend the performance of Canto General at theHerodeion on July to the painter Nikolas Klironomos for his collaboration and hispermission to publish one of his paintings of Theodorakis to the company Legend Recordings forpermission to reproduce the cover of the Odyssey to Maria Hatzara for the information from thearchive of Maria Farandouri and to Alexandra Sgouropoulou from the Orchestra ldquoMikis Theo-dorakisrdquo I warmly thank Professor Gail Holst-Warhaft for her support and her permission to useextracts from her translation of the Odyssey of Kartelias and also the painter Yannis Psychopedisfor his permission to publish a photograph of his painting Lower Limbs ndash History Lesson (Figure) Finally I am obliged to Dr Ioanna Karamanou and Dr Thanasis Efstathiou for their invitation toparticipate in the Homeric Receptions Conference in Corfu (ndash November ) in a sessionentitled lsquoRefiguring Homer in Film and Musicrsquo The premiere of the Odyssey took place on June at Kyme Euboea at an event in hon-our of the poet Kostas Kartelias see httpwwwcumagrcontentblogcategoryIt was preceded by the live performance of two songs (ldquoBeautiful Helenrdquo and ldquoThe Song of theSirensrdquo) during a concert by Maria Farandouri in Munich on September at a timewhen the CD had not yet come out on January a substantial part of the work was pre-sented at the Megaron Mousikis (Concert Hall) in Athens with Maria Farandouri and the BerlinerInstrumentalisten as part of a tribute to Mikis Theodorakis For the entire press-conference see httpwwwyoutubecomwatchv= QYnEgJlzm (Part to Part b)

time when he lived in Patras with his family (Figure 1)⁴ In his autobiographyTheodorakis described his two-year stay in the Achaean capital (1937ndash38) aslsquocarefree yearsrsquo⁵ and states that the main event of that period which determinedhis later course was his enrolment in the Odeion of Patras and his decision toinvolve himself in music⁶ The publication of the childhood photograph becomesan important element adding to the autobiographical significance of the Odys-sey as a means of mythologizing the personal history of the composer Theodor-

The picture dates from and is part of a family photograph in which apart from theyoung Mikis appear his father Georgios Theodorakis his mother Aspasia and his youngerbrother Yannis see Theodorakis Theodorakis Theodorakis see also the painting Patras of Klironomos in Figure following

Figure 1 The cover of the Odyssey Legend Recordings 2007 Photograph of Mikis Theodorakis atthe age of twelve in 1937 Published by permission of Legend Recordings

418 Hara Thliveri

akis is here portrayed as the central figure of the myth as another Odysseus whowishes to return to his own Ithaca On this basis I shall attempt to show that thesetting of the Odyssey to music represents the completion of the composerrsquos per-sonal nostos Then

Odyssey could mean the long journey of Mikis Theodorakis in the Sea of Music which he start-ed when he wrote his first song in Patras in 1937 at the age of 12 continuing until the mostrecent stop in April 2006 at the age of 81 when he composed the 14 songs of this Odyssey⁷

At the same time Theodorakisrsquo Odyssey provides an incentive to explore the re-ception of the Odyssean nostos in popular discourse⁸ by posing the question ofhow ancient symbols feed collective memory (on the archetypal Odyssean nostosand its reworkings see also Jacob in this volume) Theodorakis himself at theage of 81 when he composed his Odyssey gave his own answer by realizingthe failure of social and cultural values to re-build a better world for the advo-cacy of which he has spent most of his life His Odyssey leads to a heterotopianenvironment a lonely performing toposwhich cannot exist anywhere else but atlsquothe depths of our beingrsquo As such Theodorakis highlights the end of a whole eramdashmainly of the 20th centurymdash which was characterized by the dramatic endeav-ours of the Greek people for territorial stability the establishment of democracyand political independence⁹ The new age is that of crushing people by isolationhard working conditions lack of free time cheap cultural prototypes for con-sumption and lack of spirituality

We are living the end of utopia which was as now our capacity to live together with theldquootherrdquo The awareness of such a great tragedy is that which desiccates us all the more Con-sequently salvation is found at least in the emotional return to the depths of our ldquobeingrdquo incase we find the water we lack and slake our thirstsup1⁰

Towards this direction I shall demonstrate that Theodorakisrsquo nostos is not staticit rather signifies the setting for a new orientation Self-knowing becomes thefirst step of an inner-outer process which reaches the linking of man primarily

From the leaflet included with the CD of the Odyssey Legend Recordings On the features of Homeric nostos and its reception see Taplin ndash Haubold ndash ndash Zajko On the persistence of this motif throughout an-cient as well as Modern Greek literature see Alexopoulou esp ch and Appendix Alex-opoulou ndash On the appropriation of classical models for socio-political purposes see the examples dis-cussed in Hardwick ndash van Steen esp ndash Hardwick ndash From the leaflet included with the CD of the Odyssey Legend Recordings

The Odyssey of Mikis Theodorakis 419

with himself and secondarilywith his external cosmic environment This type ofreturn already developed by the poet Angelos Sikelianos (1884ndash 1951) presents anew mythology of facing the world through the deliverance of poetry

Returning is at the core of Sikelianosrsquo poetry from the opening words of his first major poem(ldquoAlaphroiskiotosrdquo) to the great works of his maturity[hellip] Return is associated by Sikelianoswith rebirth and rejuvenation the poetic process is a form of resurrection and ancient mythand texts are given a new lease of life through their reworking in new poemssup1sup1

In the course of elucidating Theodorakisrsquo perception of nostos it will be worthcomparing it with the contemporary paintings of Yannis Psychopedis includedin his exhibition Nostos which was held in Athens in 2008 I shall argue thatPsychopedisrsquo view is totally different it rather seems to highlight the gap be-tween then and now in order to reveal the contradictory relationship of the an-cient past and the present His view bare critical but also nostalgic aspiresto portray social degradation and his nostos suggests that ldquothe idea-value-prin-ciple exists minus its ultimate receiverrdquosup1sup2 The symbols of antiquity statues andmyths typical elements of morality and humanistic development are lsquotrappedrsquoin a way that signals a non-return direction in the future

The Greece of today the wounded environment the neglected values the debasedmdashto a largeextentmdash cultural heritage of Greece the forgotten tradition sybaritism the imitation of un-worthy models In the end as well as at the very beginning it is Greece from which wehave turned away our gazesup1sup3

a The nostos of childhood

The depiction of the young Theodorakis on the cover of the CD (Figure 1) is note-worthy to the extent that it determines the external time of his life journey andthe features of his personal nostos The fourteen songs of the Odyssey are iden-tified as much emotionally as expressively with the deepest and purest facets ofthe composerrsquos soulsup1⁴ The Odyssey then concerns a return to the first starting-

Ekdawi Takis Mavrotas in Psychopedis opcit ndash The titles of the songs are lsquoBeside the Searsquo lsquoThe Song of the Companionsrsquo lsquoShip-wreckrsquo lsquoThe Song of the Sirensrsquo lsquoIn the Underworldrsquo lsquoOn Calypsorsquos Islersquo lsquoBeautifulHelenrsquo lsquoCircersquo lsquoLike a Beastrsquo lsquoThe Love Godrsquo lsquoSea Witchrsquo lsquoTo Nausicarsquo lsquoPe-

420 Hara Thliveri

point of life and to the settings to music of that period Theodorakis himself hasacknowledged that his artistic nature lsquowas the creationrsquosup1⁵ of his youthful periodand most importantly he has recognized the Odyssey songs as a recollection ofthe musical enquiries of his childhood (1937ndash43)sup1⁶ Morphologically the stylehere follows the composerrsquos turn in the 1980s towards utmost lyricism and mel-ody with harmony without populist elementssup1⁷ It is music with even greater spi-rituality The piano the violin the cello the percussion the mandolin the sax-ophone the guitar and the clarinet are the main instruments while the absenceof the bouzouki can be explained as a conscious return to childhood soundssup1⁸Theodorakis enthrals us with the density of the motifs and the overall strength ofthe composition so that the Odyssey comes to denote another stage in the evo-lution of the so-called popular art song which emerged in the 1960s with the Ep-itaphios of Yannis Ritsossup1⁹

In the case of Theodorakis the journey of life constitutes a crooked linethrough a large number of places in which the composer lived during his child-hood Chios (1925) Mytilene (1925ndash28) Syros and Athens (1929) Ioannina(1930ndash32) Argostoli (1933ndash36) Patras (1937ndash38) Pyrgos (1938ndash39) and Tripo-lis (1939ndash43)sup2⁰ The young Theodorakis followed his family moves because ofhis father who serving as a high civil servant had undertaken several unwel-come moves because of his pro-Venizelos viewssup2sup1 The year 1943 one year beforethe liberation of the country from the Germans constitutes a new page in Mikisrsquolife as he settles in Athens and begins his systematic involvement in music

nelopersquos Songrsquo lsquoWithout Identityrsquo For a wider approach to the song-cycle see Κoutoulas Theodorakis Theodorakis at the press conference on the Odyssey March Pallas Theatre Athens(Part ) see above n Theodorakisrsquo gradual move towards lyricism is initiated in with his setting to musicpoetry of Tasos Livaditis entitled The Lyrics followed more firmly with his setting to music po-etry of Dionysis Karatzas and more specifically The Faces of the Sun () Like an AncientWind () Beatrice in Zero Street (set to music in recorded in ) and The More Lyr-ical () For the significance of melody in the music of Theodorakis overall see Lazaridou-Elmaloglou Part ndash Theodorakis used the bouzouki and elements of rembetika for the first time in the Epitaphiosof Ritsos in see Mouyis ff On the Epitaphios see Mouyis ndash especially see also Beaton ndash Τheodorakis see also Giannaris ndash Τheodorakis


The constant displacements of Theodorakisrsquo family during the period 1925ndash43 made this period significant for moulding the composerrsquos personality As hasalready been noticed

Perhaps there might be sometime in the future seriously focused studies to show what hehimself (i eTheodorakis) implies that there is a relationship of his initial wanderings withother subsequent creative wanderings and pursuitssup2sup2

Going through Theodorakisrsquo autobiography of his first eighteen years one under-stands quite easily that in his case the geographical wandering leads to anotherversion of the persona of Odysseus Theodorakis bears the stigma of the ldquoself-imprisonedrdquosup2sup3 and self-exiled as the severance from his many homes carriesthe meaning of exclusion from the world of those who live without travellingWith the features of the outsider (ξένος) the young Mikis felt barely acceptedin each new city that he moved to

I was always the outsider In Ioannina an Athenian in Argostoli an Epirote in Patras aCephallonian and so onsup2⁴

Because in contrast to the child who lives permanently in the village or the town and has asteady reference point ndash even though low and inadequate - the child who is uprooted con-stantly does not manage to absorb anythingsup2⁵

Theodorakisrsquo diverse experiences in the Greek provinces constituted a source ofinspiration for the painter Nikolas Klironomos who created a series of ten im-pressive paintings naming them after the towns where the composer lived (seeFigure 2) The paintings of Klironomos were presented first in 2007 in an exhibi-tion of the painter in Athens entitled His childhood years hellip a journeysup2⁶ In 2008the works were exhibited at the lsquoMikis Theodorakis Museumrsquo in Zatouna Arca-dia as part of the celebrations of the 40th anniversary of Theodorakisrsquo exile inZatouna and in December 2010 they were lent to the Evgenidou Foundation dur-ing the celebration of the 85th birthday of the composer Klironomosrsquo work a kindof lsquowall newspaperrsquo of photographs sketches newspaper clippings manuscriptsand musical notes exploits elements of the composerrsquos autobiography by defin-

Kouyoumoutzakis Theodorakis Theodorakis All extracts from Theodorakis are translated by the author op cit The exhibition took place in the Gallery lsquoEkfrasi-Yianna Grammatopouloursquo see Klironomos (Catalogue) Hermann ndash

422 Hara Thliveri

ing his private space the bedrooms of his childhood which acting as a colourfulfantasy lsquoshellrsquo protected him from the lsquohostilersquo outside world

The prerequisite for the perpetuation of the figure of Odysseus though isnot the journey but his capacity to return In its core nostos is schismatic asthe breakup of the primordial image of the cosmos mdashthrough alternations of pla-ces traits and peoplemdash causes fateful divisions as much with the external envi-ronment as with the self The basic question about the Odyssey of Mikis Theodor-akis is then under which presuppositions does his nostos become possible

b The reconstruction of the lost prototype

In setting the Odyssey to music Theodorakis claims his spiritual locality in Patrasat the age of twelve years old The reconnection with childhood sixty-nine yearslater (1937ndash2006) attains the significance of the highest challenge as long as thesigns of familiarity which unite him with the starting-point and erase the lossesof the journey must be recognizedsup2⁷ Overcoming the inertia of nostalgia the at-tainment of nostos in the Odyssey manages to bridge the distance between thepresent and the pastsup2⁸ The transparency of feelings and the deferential congru-ence of music with the poetic word are two distinct elements which fascinate usso that we can say that the lsquotruersquo Ithaca is reached by the person who has builthimself on the mythology of childhood and who never lost faith in the aestheticworld throughout his life In Theodorakisrsquo Odyssey I would say that what occursis what Elytis writes in Εν λευκώ (Carte Blanche)

The way to speak about the past without becoming suspected of nostalgia has not yet beenfound Nevertheless it is one thing to load time and to carry it together with your wrinkles andanother to circulate within it backwards-forwards with the easiness that only poetry allowsyousup2⁹

The poetry of Kartelias with its expressive austerity and emotional innocencebecomes the vehicle for Theodorakisrsquo reconnection with his youthful inspirationIn other words poetry creates the premises for the performing of nostos Besides

For his arduous process of composition especially after the age of seventy see the press-con-ference on the Odyssey (Part ) see above n An opposite example could be the lsquoReturn of the Emigrantrsquo by Giorgos Seferis (Deck Diary A) who upon returning to his homeland feels the greatest loss of the past because he can-not harmonize the signs of the present in his memory Elytis

ndash


Theodorakis started as a songwriter with the members of his own family as hisaudience

It is not well-known that I started as a songwriter Besides this was the only thing that wecould do in the provinces We did not have a piano we did not have school orchestras weonly sang So at the age of twelve (this is the reason for this photograph it is exactly in Patraswhen I was twelve) I compose my first songsup3⁰

The composerrsquos first song is entitled lsquoThe Boatrsquo and was written in 1937sup3sup1 Theconnection to the Odyssey is an emotional stylistic and semiological associa-tion as in this most recent song-cycle the return to the harbour and the deliver-ance from the early memories are achieved It is worth referring to Klironomosrsquopainting entitled Patras (Figure 2) in which the young Mikisrsquo room is depicted

with his first violin on the left side of his desk and his first handwritten scoreof the aforementioned song hanging on the wall above the lampsup3sup2

Theodorakis press-conference on the Odyssey (Part see above n ) Theodorakis Theodorakis Klironomos

Figure 2 Nikolas Klironomos Patras work VII mixed techniques on canvas paper and card-board 100 x 180 cm 2005ndash2006 Published by permission of Nikolas Klironomos

424 Hara Thliveri

Setting Odyssey to music evokes the preparatory phase of the composer be-tween 1937 and 1943sup3sup3 when he started to set to music poems of the leadingGreek poets found in school text-books Dimitris Karvounis who conductedthe choral teaching of forty youthful songs of Theodorakis points out that inthese songs lsquothere is a finished compositional proposal with a morphologicalbalance an aesthetic and perfectly artistic resultrsquosup3⁴

The exceptional value of the first songs is that they constitute the lsquocore of themusical self rsquosup3⁵ of Theodorakis representing also his psychological need to ex-press himself during the lonely years of family travels In sum the Odyssey en-capsulates an analogous need of Theodorakis to recognize his childhood dreamfor reasons which as we shall see are not far distant from those of his youth Inthis manner the ring-composition of the Homeric journey is displayed in thatthe start becomes the end and the end forms a new beginning

c The anti-journey of utopia

The poet Kostas Kartelias is another version of the wandering Odysseus wholeaves his birthplace in Athens during his childhood and establishes himselfwith his father in Euboea

I would say that loneliness characterizes my childhood The loneliness of few words My sib-lings and cousins whom I loved and used to talk to had left for Athens to study Conversa-tions and life in the village were very poor Imagination was insufficient and dangerous indaily life I wanted to leave hellipsup3⁶

And here the return to Ithaca is reconstructed on an inner field which reveals theharmony of the individual with himself after a struggle and the liberation from ex-ternal circumstances The writing of Kartelias breathes warmth and unpretentiousfamiliarity and manages to approach man as a suffering sensuous being

In the poem lsquoBeside the Searsquosup3⁷ Ithaca becomes synonymous with the very centreof existence lsquothe depths of my soulrsquo which takes on perspective and lsquohorizonrsquothrough the fulfillment of feelings The Cavafy-like didacticism does not apply

Cf Theodorakis httpintmikis-theodorakisnetindexphparticlearchive Koutoulas ndash Karvounis cf Theodorakis Τheodorakis Cf Theodorakis First Songs Intuition (CD) httpwwwcumagrcontentview see also Kartelias Cf translation by Holst-Warhaft


Laistrygonians Cyclopsangry Poseidonmdashdonrsquot be afraid of themsup3⁸

Odysseus speaking in the first person admits that the only way to find solaceescaping lsquothe fury of Poseidonrsquo and lsquothe anger of the windsrsquo is through loveThe lsquofire in my breastrsquo as he writes is lsquoa sign of return to an Ithaca that Imust return to on my lifersquos long journeyrsquo

In lsquoThe Song of the Companionsrsquo the intrinsic human powers engender atype of poetic nostos towards an Ithaca perceived as lsquothe open searsquo challengingus to lsquojourney into dangerrsquo lsquoGreetings sacred dangerrsquo Sikelianos writes similarlyin lsquoThe Song of the Argonautsrsquo while subsequently

Silent virgin peace in which journey you will immerse usnow where our effort blossomed wingssup3⁹

In these circumstances eros is a powerful impetus of a route which leads againstany prevailing restraint and manipulation As a result of this process the poeticnostos manages to raise life to a more genuine non-materialistic level in whichimagination and perceptible understanding play a primary role The followingexcerpt is from the lsquoThe Song of the Companionsrsquo

The world alwaysfinds new rulersand we lonely poetswill remain

Being consistent with this outlook Theodorakis records how solitude (as a resultof the constant childhood moves) set him on the road to music as a kind of de-fence against external circumstances

My pathological absorption in and pursuit of music which happened [hellip] in 1938ndash39 at Pyr-gos in Elis had as its basis a psychological motivation a personal answer of my ownmdash a kindof escape but also of liberation from the imaginary walls which I had raised around me re-fusing even to stroll in the community of people⁴⁰

The progress towards the poetic nostos is the anti-journey within the journey andthe self-conscious placing against all conventionalism of life It concerns also the

Keeley Sherrard (lsquoIthacarsquo by C Cavafy) Sikelianos

extract translated by Hara Thliveri Theodorakis ndash

426 Hara Thliveri

dynamics towards utopia the search for the ideal the metaphysical passage tofreedom which surpasses adversities Theodorakis writes

I was pleased when in 1947 and 1948 they lsquotravelledrsquo us on their say-so so as to send us intoexile On the beach my parents were wailing and even though I was bound with handcuffs Iwas trying with difficulty to hide the wave of joy flaring up within me because soon we wouldset sail aiming at piercing the horizon ndash the journey⁴sup1

This liberating vision was the fundamental ideological motivation for Theodor-akis all his life during his youth as well as later through his personal stancein political and social struggles He himself admits that

Facing problems ndashsocial and nationalndash became at least on my part in one way dream-likeideological and not at all realistic⁴sup2

d Return to the first self

In 1943 in a period of spiritual searching during his stay in Tripolis Theodorakismoulds his theory of Universal Harmony⁴sup3 which conveys his existential strivingfor the detection of the bonds of man with the cosmos and the lsquopursuit of the Idealrsquo

that is of the significant centre which is found very deep within us and at the same time faraway because it is the law of the Cosmos of the Beginning and the End⁴⁴

Theodorakisrsquo conception of Universal Harmony which is extended to the abilityof art to reproduce the notional links within the cosmic environment⁴⁵ reflectsin my opinion a mental kinship with the views of Angelos Sikelianos who al-ready in lsquoThe Visionaryrsquo (lsquoAlafroiskiotosrsquo 1909) bases the theory of the returnto the first self

Theodorakis cf Theodorakis ndash lsquoa journey to the light aiming at theinfinitersquo which inspired the title of this article Τheodorakis For an overview of Universal Harmony see Theodorakis ff Theodorakis ndash Lazaridou-Elmaloglou (Part I) ff Mouyis ndash Theodorakis Theodorakis cf Mouyis lsquoArt was the only power that could create with-in us a microcosm in perfect parallel with the Cosmos It could transfer the Laws that define Uni-versal Harmony inside usrsquo


At this outset my entire Being is situated from the beginning biologically unbreakable as theprincipal core of a clear experience of the cosmic consciousness of life⁴⁶

Sikelianos and Theodorakis reinforce the nostalgia for the attainment of the oneintrinsic centre which constitutes the sole umbilical bond of man with the uni-verse They both regard the youthful years as enabling the individual to become areceiver of cosmic pulse through poetics and senses In the lsquoHymn of the GreatNostosrsquo of Sikelianos the first self is the biological unity revealing the indisput-able bond of man with the universe

And as the armed Eros descends before methe depths of heavenwithout my seeking it I leap and dance in turnwith my mindrsquos armοur⁴⁷

For the young Theodorakis the linking of man with the cosmos occurs throughmusic as music transfers to man the Law of the Universe which happens alsoto be the Law of Total Creation⁴⁸ The composer highlights the influence of Pal-amaswho lsquobelieved that rhythm in poetry mdashthe rhythmic stridemdash symbolizes therhythm that governs the Universersquo⁴⁹ In another more metaphysical manner Si-kelianos considers that

Τhe oral Poetic World [hellip] represents [hellip] the fundamental tone of the deep biological and psy-chological Unity of the Universe and of man with the Universe and man⁵⁰

Here I argue that the aforementioned views of Sikelianos and Theodorakis dem-onstrate the greatest capacity of the poetic nostos to attain hyper-realistic percep-tion within the bounds of human life They both consider the period of youth tobring out the strongest spiritual powers of man As Theodorakis says

Perhaps the composer at that time between the ages of 12 and 16 is more genuine He speaksmore with himself with the Universe with his inspiration⁵sup1

Sikelianos

Sikelianos extract translated by Hara Thliveri

Theodorakis ndash see also Theodorakis Theodorakis ndash Sikelianos See Koutoulas

428 Hara Thliveri

Consequently the return of Theodorakis through his Odyssey to his first self asfulfilment of his poetic nostos renders the power of man to capture the catholicessence of life the essence that is which joins the spiritual experience with theapparent world In The Visionary of Sikelianos the young Odysseus is met sleep-ing on some seashore of his homeland after his return⁵sup2 In this way through thehypnosis of the mind and the awakening of the senses the poet lays the groundfor the opening of his poetic inspiration⁵sup3

The metaphysics of the senses likewise play a role in the poetry of KarteliasIn lsquoThe Song of the Sirensrsquo⁵⁴ lsquothe wind blows a song that seems endlessrsquo and thesound of the sea is fragmented into lsquoa thousand voicesrsquo Within a boundless seasetting there is lsquono mast to be tied to and no ropersquo The ties with the materialworld are halted and the dilemma of Odysseus is not how to avoid lsquoso muchmusicrsquo but which of all to choose The Sirens in contrast to the fearsome Homer-ic monsters we know represent the enchanting call of the art leading beyond theborders of the world of experience

When the ocean starts singingtherersquos so much music to beara thousand voices so you donrsquot knowhow to choose and therersquos no mast to be tied toand no ropeIrsquoll soar on my wingsthat Irsquoll spreadover the strange islands of paradise

The conception of this moving boat refers to a kind of ritual mystery-process inwhich the artist (as a mediator himself between the earth and the universe) lib-erates his inspiration by soaring on his wings The repetition at the end lsquountieyour hair so I can see yoursquo shows that this transforming mdashmore or less eroticmdash power of art towards freedom is the only path to the salvation of man offeringpeople an escape from lsquothe endless desertrsquo

Sikelianos (lsquoReturnrsquo) translated in ΚeeleySherrard Anagnostopoulos

ndash Ekdawi ndash esp The return of Odysseus to Lefkada implies a sense οf autochthony in view of the origin ofSikelianos cf Ricks Holst-Warhaft


Untie your hair so I can see you know youin the blind alleys of the worldin the endless desert of the worldUntie your hair so I can come and speak to youElsewhere Theodorakis refers to a lsquomysterious calling an erotic expectationrsquo

For me this heartrsquos longing this leap of the heart which I felt each time I crossed the seaby boat is exactly the same that I feel each time I decide to write a piece A mysterious callingan erotic expectation of the elusive⁵⁵

e The parameter of national awareness

According to Theodorakis the poem lsquoIn the Underworldrsquo has lsquohistorical social andultimately autobiographical contentrsquo and for this reason he chose to sing ithimself⁵⁶ The beloved dead the dead fellow-combatants themselves also spectresof an invisible world are the shades which Odysseus meets in Hades To keep nostosalive one must endure remembering In this waywith the feelings brightly burninghe can maintain his lyrical humidity so as not to be alienated by lsquosocietyrsquos filthrsquoOblivion kills the living the dead and makes nations disappear

Born in 1925 of Cretan descent⁵⁷ Mikis Theodorakis belongs to a generationwhich was scarred by the experiences of the Second World War the Occupationthe National Resistance against the Germans (1941ndash44) and the Civil War (1946ndash49) Maintaining throughout his life the patriotic ideals of the National LiberationFront (EAM)⁵⁸ Theodorakis reaches manhood in a period in which Greece claimsassociation with the achievements of 1821 and distances itself from the national de-feat of the Asia Minor Catastrophe (1922) Theodorakis then brings back the topog-raphy of the Odyssey from the shores of Asia Minor⁵⁹ and his birthplace in Chios tothe Eptanisa and the so-called lsquoOld Greecersquo From his first hearing lsquothe practisedchoirs or the bandsrsquo⁶⁰ in Argostoli and his first setting to music of poems of Solo-mosValaoritis Palamas and Drosinis in Patras Pyrgos and Tripolis (see also Figure2) Theodorakis reunites the scattered elements of Hellenism and lays the founda-

Lazaridou-Elmaloglou Addendum ΙΙ Theodorakis press-conference on the Odyssey (Part see above n ) For a recent overview of the biography of Theodorakis see Mouyis ndash Hamilakis ndash The composerrsquos parents and motherrsquos family were victims of the Asia Minor Catastrophe of Cf the antiheroic prototype of Odysseus in Seferis Ricks ndash Theodorakis ldquoFrom Argostoli when I heard the practised choirs or the bands thatis melody with harmony which in the end produced the Greek Art Song I felt an inexplicableattractionhelliprdquo

430 Hara Thliveri

tion for the reunification of the national body in other words he lays the founda-tion for the completeness and recollection of national nostos

But what are the popular connotations of nostos today in the second decadeof the 21st century Is there a common topos of return and how does nostos nur-ture national imagination⁶sup1 The received cultural acquisitions show but a muse-um character unless they inspire fruitfully the present As befits the circumstan-ces of personal awakening on a collective level a nation owes it to itself to resistthe declining memory of its past and to recognize its own familiar traces throughthe course of time In this way the emancipation of the literary prototypesmdashsuchas the Homeric onesmdash aligns the present with the past and brings out the con-temporary mythical heroes⁶sup2

A first answer to the above questions is provided by the composer In 2008 ayear after the premiere of the Odyssey of Theodorakis a dynamic contributionwas made by the exhibition of the painter Yannis Psychopedis entitled Nostosat the Cycladic Museum of Art in Athens In the exhibition a critical approachto modern Greek physiognomy was imprinted by contemplating the interrelationof the present with the recent historic past

Nostos the homeward journey of Odysseus from Troy exhibits Psychopedisrsquo intellectual brav-ado and obsession with constantly balancing on a tightrope with his eyes turning to the time-less forms of the art of the ancient Greek civilization or immersing himself in the contempla-tion of contemporary reality⁶sup3

In their conception the Odyssey of Theodorakis and the Nostos of Psychopedisrepresent two different receptions the reception of the first as said looks for-ward to utopia while that of the latter is dominated by a realistic criticalmood insisting on the memories of a mutilated past which seeks confirmationIn the Fragmented Memory⁶⁴ the cutting of the ancient statue stresses the weak-ness of our epoch to reformulate archetypal forms being also suggestive of themisleading effect of memory within time Additionally in the Lower LimbsndashHis-tory Lesson (Figure 3)⁶⁵ one understands that the greater the distance in time thegreater the alienation the harder the dialogue of the extremes and the familiarityof the allusions among themselves To conclude the nostos of Psychopedis is un-

For national imagination as the lsquonostalgia for the wholersquo see Hamilakis ndash Theodorakis Takis Mavrotas in Psychopedis Psychopedis Psychopedis (Plate)


Figure 3 Yannis Psychopedis Lower LimbsndashHistory Lesson 40 x 52 x 50 cm 1996 Reproducedby permission of Yannis Psychopedis

432 Hara Thliveri

fulfilled it involves a nightmarish dialectical discourse with the present whichunfortunately does not ensure a further promising co-existence

The last song of the Odyssey entitled lsquoWithout Identityrsquo adds new elementswhich are brought together in the realism of Psychopedis and in the fluid atmos-phere of the time In contrast with the previous thirteen poems Odysseus is hereportrayed as a wanderer within a faceless urban environment Nothing recalls theexcitement of travelling and the natural setting of lsquoΤhe Song of the Companionsrsquoor lsquoThe Song of the Sirensrsquo Odysseus introduces himself as lsquoNobodyrsquo an unknownperson who exists lsquoin the crowd in a city I do not knowrsquo In Theodorakisrsquo eyes themodern era marks an equivalent period of isolation Alienation is a new circum-stance of globalization and the devaluation of national ideals Thirty-seven yearsafter he set to music the lsquoSpiritual Marchrsquo (lsquoPneumatiko Emvatiriorsquo) of Sikelianos dur-ing his exile in Zatouna the lsquoaccomplishedrsquo Greece seems to have lost its heirs It isa period of degradation which becomes apparent as the composer observes in thedivision between the popular and art elements recurring in these days after the greatadvances of the decades after 1960⁶⁶ He also confesses

I stopped feeling the presence of others around me Sometimes I have the impression that Iam alone banished in a waste land [hellip] So whom do I write about About those whodonrsquot see and about those who donrsquot listen to me⁶⁷

f A personal performing topos

The Odyssey of Mikis Theodorakis prescribes the nostos to a personal performingtopos As lsquoa journey into dangerrsquo the Homeric return must end with the target ofself-realization ie the state of affirmation which leads to the bonds with child-hood For this attainment forgetfulness must be overcome however difficult thecircumstances Odysseus cannot exist as Nobody lsquowithout identity and nameamong peoplersquo The meeting-point of Kartelias and Theodorakis is poetrywhere poetry is regarded as the disposition of elevating life to a more self-know-ing level Theodorakis asserts

The lsquopersonrsquo that is ourselves must ultimately live the idea that Ithaca does not exist and thathe must be grasped by his own pathos and his own sentiments in order to stay on the surfaceof the rough sea which is life⁶⁸

Cf Theodorakisrsquo views on the predominant music scene Theodorakis ndash ndash Theodorakis From the leaflet included with the CD of the Odyssey Legend Recordings


At the end of this journey Ithaca is not lsquopoorrsquo it makes up for the empirical losses ofmemory Music comes to socialize the person and the poet-composer seeks lsquoto comeand speak to yoursquo The hieratic fervent voice of Maria Farandouri anchors the lyri-cism which never wavers The melody albeit nostalgic does not expose us to mel-ancholy There is a progressive climax towards an emotional profusion and a cycli-cal retrieval of feelings Ultimately the music of the Odyssey is liberating It is notthe memory-trauma but the memory-idea through the art-music The latter unitesthe perceptive dimension with the ostensible world Theodorakisrsquo Odyssey is trans-formed into a musical iconotopiaThe composer performs what he sees when he sitson a lsquofantastic hammockrsquo⁶⁹ at the edge of the universe There are no Homeric mon-sters but only the immersion in the world of music and the senses Τhe search oflsquothe depths of my soulrsquo becomes the prospect of man rejoining with his outward en-vironment in a dramatic attempt to amplify human limits And in this way thehuman course is tamed within the bounds of cosmos

Overcoming fortune is the destiny of heroes Each one who manages to keepthe measure of oneself and not to fall into the over- or under-estimation of timeis also an Odysseus Τhe journey of Theodorakis-lsquoOdysseusrsquo is the placement ofman in the universe For this journey there is an axiom to learn that the child-hood home is not just a place but lsquothose who love usrsquo⁷⁰

Theodorakis Theodorakis lsquoMy homeland was my house My parents Those who loved usrsquo

434 Hara Thliveri

Bibliography

Accorinti D Chuvin P (eds) (2003) Des Geacuteants agrave Dionysos AlessandriaAcosta-Hughes B Kosmetatou E Baumbach M (eds) (2004) Labored in Papyrus Leaves

Perspectives on an Epigram Collection Attributed to Posidippus (PMilVoglVIII 309)Washington Cambridge (Mass)

Adams JN (1982) The Latin Sexual Vocabulary BaltimoreAdkins AWH (1960) Merit and Responsibility A Study in Greek Values Oxfordmdash (1971) ldquoHomeric Values and Homeric Societyrdquo JHS 91 1ndash14mdash (1972a) Moral Values and Political Behaviour in Ancient Greece Londonmdash (1972b) ldquoTruth ΚΟΣΜΟΣ and APETH in the Homeric Poemsrdquo CQ 22 5ndash18Aeacutelion R (1983) Euripide heacuteritier drsquo Eschyle Vols I-II ParisAgosti G (2003) Nonno di Panopoli Parafrasi del Vangelo di San Giovanni Canto Quinto

Florencemdash (2005) ldquoInterpretazione Omerica e creazione poetica nella tarda Antichitagraverdquo in A Kolde

A Lukinovich AL Rey (eds) 19ndash32Ahl F (1986) Trojan Women by Lucius Annaeus Seneca IthacaAlbeacuteregraves RM (1957) Estheacutetique et morale chez Jean Giraudoux NizetAlexandrou M (2016) ldquoMythological Narratives in Hipponaxrdquo in C Carey L Swift (eds)

forthcomingAlexandrou M Carey C Drsquo Alessio G (eds) (forthcoming) Song Regained Working with

Greek Poetic Fragments BerlinAlexopoulou M (2006) ldquoNostos and the Impossibility of a lsquoReturn to the Samersquo From Homer

to Seferisrdquo New Voices in Classical Reception Studies Issue 1 1ndash9mdash (2009) The Theme of Returning Home in Ancient Greek LiteratureThe Nostos of the Epic

Hero LewistonAllan W (2000) The Andromache and Euripidean Tragedy OxfordAllen A (2007) ldquoBriseis in Homer Ovid and Troyrdquo in MM Winkler (ed) 148ndash62Allen R E (1998) The Dialogues of Plato Vol III New HavenAllen T (1899) ldquoLudwichrsquos Homervulgatardquo CR 13 39ndash41mdash (1912) Homeri Opera Vol V OxfordAlvares J (2002) ldquoLove Loss and Learning in Chaereas and Callirhoerdquo CW 95 107ndash15Anagnostopoulos J (1995) ldquoAn Introduction to the Poetry and the Poetics of Angelos

Sikelianosrdquo Kotinos to Angelos Sikelianos (Κότινος στον άγγελο Σικελιανό) TetradiaEuthinis 11 118ndash36

Annas J (1981) An Introduction to Platorsquos Republic Oxfordmdash (1982) ldquoPlato on the Triviality of Literaturerdquo in JME Moravcsik P Temko (eds)

1ndash28Anton J (ed) (2002) 70 Years since the First Delphic Festivals Ancient Drama in Delphi from

Angelos Sikelianos till Today (70 Χρόνια από τις πρώτες Δελφικές Εορτές Το αρχαίοδράμα στους Δελφούς από τον άγγελο Σικελιανό ως τις μέρες μας) European CulturalCentre of Delphi Conference Proceedings (Delphi 16ndash20 July 1997) Delphi

Anton JP Preus A (eds) (1989) Essays in Ancient Greek Philosophy III Plato New YorkArafat KW (1996) Pausaniasrsquo Greece Ancient Artists and Roman Rulers Cambridge

Archimandritis G (2011) Μikis Theodorakis My Life (Μίκης Θεοδωράκης Η ζωή μου)Athens

Armstrong R (2006) ldquoThe Aeneid Inheritance and Empirerdquo in MJ Clarke BGF CurrieROAM Lyne (eds) 131ndash57

Arnold B (1994ndash95) ldquoThe Literary Experience of Vergilrsquos Fourth Ecloguerdquo CJ 902 143ndash60Arthur Katz MB (1981) ldquoThe Divided World of Iliad VIrdquo in HP Foley (ed) 19ndash44Ashmole B Yalouris N (1967) Olympia The Sculpture of the Temple of Zeus LondonAssael J (2004) ldquoLa resurrection drsquoAlcesterdquo REG 117 37ndash58Athanassaki LNikolaides ASpatharas D (eds) (2014) Private Life and Public Speech in

Greek Antiquity and Enlightenment Studies in Honour of Ioanna Yatromanolaki(Ιδιωτικός βίος και Δημόσιος Λόγος στην Ελληνική Αρχαιότητα και στον ΔιαφωτισμόΜελέτες αφιερωμένες στην Ιωάννα Γιατρομανωλάκη) Herakleion

Atwood M (2007) The Penelopiad The Play LondonAustin C Bastianini G (2002) Posidippi Pellaei quae supersunt omnia MilanAustin N (1994) Helen of Troy and her Shameless Phantom Ithacamdash (2007) ldquoThe Helen of the Iliadrdquo in H Bloom (ed) (2007a) 33ndash54Austin RG (ed) (1977) P Vergili Maronis Aeneidos liber sextus OxfordAyres L (ed) (1995) The Passionate Intellect Essays on the Transformation of Classical

Traditions Presented to Professor I G Kidd New BrunswickBailey C (ed) (1936) Greek Poetry and Life Essays Presented to G Murray OxfordBaker RJ (1968) ldquoMiles annosus The Military Motif in Propertiusrdquo Latomus 27 322ndash49Baker RJ (2000) Propertius I WarminsterBakogianni A (2008) ldquoAll is Well that Ends Tragically Filming Greek Tragedy in Modern

Greecerdquo BICS 51 119ndash67mdash (2009) ldquoVoices of Resistance Michael Cacoyannisrsquo The Trojan Women (1971)rdquo BICS 52

45ndash68mdash (2011) Electra Ancient and Modern Aspects of the Tragic Heroinersquos Reception Londonmdash (2013a) ldquoAnnihilating Clytemnestra The Severing of the Mother-Daughter Bond in

Michael Cacoyannisrsquo Iphigenia (1977)rdquo in KP Nikoloutsos (ed) 207ndash33mdash (2013b) ldquoWho Rules this Nation (Ποιός κυβερνά αυτόν τον τόπο) Political Intrigue and

the Struggle for Power in Michael Cacoyannisrsquo Iphigenia (1977)rdquo in A Bakogianni (ed)I 225ndash49

mdash (2013c) ldquoIntroduction In Dialogue with the Pastrdquo in A Bakogianni (ed) I 1ndash9mdash (ed) (2013) Dialogues with the Past Classical Reception Theory and Practice Vols I-II

(BICS Suppl 126) LondonBakola Ε Prauscello L Telograve M (eds) (2013) Greek Comedy and the Discourse of Genres

CambridgeBalaban O (2011) ldquoThe Moral Intellectualism of Platorsquos Socrates The Case of Hippias

Minorrdquo Bochumer Philosophiches Jahrbuch fuumlr Antike und Mittelalter 131 1ndash14Balensiefen L (2005) ldquoPolyphem-Grotten und Skylla-Gewaumlsser Schauplaumltze der Odyssee in

roumlmischen Villenrdquo in A Luther (ed) 9ndash31Ballif M (2001) Seduction Sophistry and the Woman with the Rhetorical Figure IllinoisBalot R (2004) ldquoCourage in the Democratic Polisrdquo CQ 54 406ndash23Banaševic N (1964) ldquoRanija I novija nauka I Vukovi pogledi na narodnu epikurdquo Prilozi

303ndash4Baragwanath E (2008) Motivation and Narrative in Herodotus Oxford

436 Bibliography

Barchiesi A (2001) Speaking Volumes Narrative and Intertext in Ovid and Other Latin Poets(ed and trans M Fox and S Marchesi) London

mdash (1984a) La traccia del modello effetti omerici nella narrazione virgiliana Pisamdash (1984b) ldquoCiclopirdquo in Enciclopedia Virgiliana I Rome 778ndash79mdash (1999) ldquoRepresentations of Suffering and Interpretation in the Aeneidrdquo in P Hardie

(ed) 324ndash44Bardel R (2005) ldquoSpectral Traces Ghosts in Tragic Fragmentsrdquo in F McHardy J Robson

D Harvey (eds) 83ndash112Barfield R (2011) The Ancient Quarrel Between Philosophy and Poetry CambridgeBarlow SA (1971) The Imagery of Euripides Londonmdash (1986) Euripides Trojan Women WarminsterBarnes J (1982) The Presocratic Philosophers The Arguments of the Philosophers London

Boston Melbourne HenleyBarrett WS (1964) Euripides Hippolytos OxfordBarsby J (19792) Ovid Amores I OxfordBartels A (2004) Vergleichende Studien zur Erzaumlhlkunst des roumlmischen Epyllion GoumlttingenBartol K (1993) Greek Elegy and Iambus Studies in Ancient Literary Sources PoznańBassi K (2003) ldquoThe Semantics of Manliness in Ancient Greecerdquo in RM Rosen I Sluiter

(eds) 25ndash58Basta Donzelli G (1986) ldquoLa Colpa di Elena Gorgia ed Euripide a confrontordquo in L

Montoneri F Romano (eds) 389ndash409Baumbach M Petrovic A Petrovic I (eds) (2010) Archaic and Classical Greek Epigram

CambridgeBeaton R (1999) An Introduction to Modern Greek Literature OxfordBeisinger M Tylus J Wofford S (eds) (1999) Epic Traditions in the Contemporary World

The Poetics of Community Berkeley Los AngelesBelfiore E (1985) ldquoLies Unlike the Truth Plato on Hesiod Theogony 27rdquo TAPhA 115 47ndash57mdash (2006) ldquoA Theory of Imitation in Platorsquos Republicrdquo in A Laird (ed) 87ndash114Bellido JA (1989) ldquoEl motivo literario de la militia amoris y su influencia en Ovidiordquo EClaacutes

31 21ndash32Benakis L (2012) Ἰαμβλίχου Προτρεπτικὸς ἐπὶ φιλοσοφίαν AthensBenardete S (1963) ldquoSome Misquotations of Homer in Platordquo Phronesis 8 173ndash78Bennett S (1990) Theatre Audiences A Theory of Production and Reception LondonBenson HH (ed) (2006) A Companion to Plato ChichesterBen-Zersquoev A (2003) ldquoAristotle on Emotions towards the Fortune of Othersrdquo in D Konstan

NK Rutter (eds) 99ndash121Berg W (1974) Early Virgil LondonBergren A (1983) ldquoLanguage and the Female in Early Greek Thoughtrdquo Arethusa 16 69ndash95Berman KE (1972) ldquoSome Propertian imitations in Ovidrsquos Amoresrdquo CPh 67 170ndash77mdash (1975) ldquoOvid Propertius and the Elegiac Genre Some Imitations in the Amoresrdquo RSC

23 14ndash22Bernabeacute A (19962) Poetarum Epicorum Graecorum Testimonia et Fragmenta Pars I

Stuttgart LeipzigBerthelot A (1992) Andromaque de Racine ParisBerthet JF (1980) ldquoProperce et Homegravererdquo in A Thill (ed)141ndash53Betts G (1965) ldquoThe Silence of Alcestisrdquo Mnem 18 66ndash67

Bibliography 437

Betts JH Hooker JT Green JR (eds) (1986) Studies in Honour of TBL Webster VolsI-II Bristol

Bieler L (19351936) Theios Anēr Das Bild des lsquolsquogoumlttlichen Menschenrsquorsquo in Spaumltantike undFruumlhchristentum Darmstadt

Billault A (1996) ldquoCharacterization in the Ancient Novelrdquo in G Schmeling (ed) 115ndash29Bing P (20022003) ldquoPosidippus and the Admiral Kallikrates of Samos in the Epigrams of

the Milan Papyrus (PMilVoglVIII309)rdquo GRBS 43 243ndash66mdash (2009) The Scroll and the Marble Studies in Reading and Reception in Hellenistic

Poetry Ann ArborBing P Bruss JS (eds) (2007) Brillrsquos Companion to Hellenistic Epigram Leiden BostonBinns JW (ed) (1973) Ovid London BostonBishop P (ed) (2004) Nietzsche and Antiquity His Reaction and Response to the Classical

Tradition New YorkBittlestone R Diggle J Underhill J (2005) Odysseus Unbound The Search for Homerrsquos

Ithaca CambridgeBizer M (2011) Homer and the Politics of Authority in Renaissance France OxfordBlondell R (2002) The Play of Character in Platorsquos Dialogues Cambridgemdash (2009) ldquoThird Cheerleader from the Leftrsquo from Homerrsquos Helen to Helen of Troyrdquo CRJ 11

4ndash22Bloom H (ed) (2007a) Homerrsquos The Iliad (updated edition) New Yorkmdash (ed) (2007b) Homer (updated edition) New YorkBlundell MW (1992) ldquoCharacter and Meaning in Platorsquos Hippias Minorrdquo in JC Klagge

ND Smith (eds) 131ndash72Boardman J (1985) Greek Sculpture The Classical Period LondonBobas C (ed) (2009) Drsquoune frontiegravere agrave lrsquoautre Mouvements de fuites mouvements

discontinus dans le monde Neacuteo ndash Helleacutenique AthensBody J (1986) Jean Giraudoux la leacutegende et le secret ParisBoedeker D (2003) ldquoPedestrian Fatalities The Prosaics of Deathrdquo in P Derow R Parker

(eds) 17ndash36Bogner H (1934) ldquoDie Religion des Nonnos von Panopolisrdquo Phil 89 320ndash33Bonazza S (1988) ldquoVuk Stefanović Karadžić und der Austroslavismusrdquo Europa Orientalis 7

361ndash71Booth J (1991) Ovid Amores II WarminsterBooth J Maltby R (eds) (2006) Whatrsquos in a Name The Significance of Proper Names in

Classical Latin Literature WalesBorg B (2010) ldquoEpigrams in Archaic Art the lsquoChest of Kypselosrsquordquo in M Baumbach A

Petrovic I Petrovic (eds) 81ndash99Bossi F (1986) Studi sul Margite FerraraBosworth A B (2000) ldquoThe Historical Context of Thucydidesrsquo Funeral Orationrdquo JHS 120

1ndash16Bouzakis M Papavasiliou E (eds) (2005) Μikis Theodorakis The Man the Artist the

Musician the Politician the Cretan and the Ecumenical (Mίκης Θεοδωράκης Oάνθρωπος ο δημιουργός ο μουσικός ο πολιτικός ο Κρητικός και ο οικουμενικός)Conference Proceedings (Chania 29ndash31 July 2005) Chania

Bowie AM (1993) Aristophanes Myth Ritual and Comedy Cambridgemdash (2007) Herodotus Histories Book VIII Cambridge

438 Bibliography

Bowie EL (1986) ldquoEarly Greek Elegy Symposium and Public Festivalrdquo JHS 106 13ndash35mdash (2001) ldquoEarly Greek Iambic Poetry The Importance of Narrativerdquo in A Cavarzere A

Aloni A Barchiesi (eds) 1ndash27mdash (2002) ldquoIonian ἴαμβος and Attic κωμῳδία Father and Daughter or Just Cousinsrdquo in A

Willi (ed) 33ndash50mdash (2010) ldquoEpigram as Narrationrdquo in M Baumbach A Petrovic I Petrovic (eds) 313ndash77Bowra CM (1961) Greek Lyric Poetry From Alcman to Simonides OxfordBoyanceacute P (1937) Le culte des Muses chez les philosophes grecques eacutetudes drsquo histoire et

de psychologie religieuse ParisBoyd BW (1995) ldquoNon enarrabile textum Ecphrastic Trespass and Narrative Ambiguity in

the Aeneidrdquo Vergilius 41 71ndash90mdash (1997) Ovidrsquos Literary Loves Influence and Innovation in the Amores Ann ArborBoys-Stones G Haubold J (eds) (2010) Plato and Hesiod OxfordBradley K Cartledge P (eds) (2011) The Cambridge World History of Slavery Vol I The

Ancient Near East and Mediterranean World to AD 500 CambridgeBrandt P (1911) POvidi Nasonis Amorum Libri Tres LeipzigBrandwood L (1976) A Word Index to Plato LeedsBraswell BK (1988) A Commentary on the Fourth Pythian Ode of Pindar Berlin New YorkBreitenberger B (2007) Aphrodite and Eros Τhe Development of Erotic Mythology in Early

Greek Poetry and Cult New York LondonBremer JM Radt SL Ruigh CJ (eds) (1976) Miscellanea Tragica in Honorem JC

Kamerbeek AmsterdamBremer JM Van den Hout ThPJ Peters R (eds) (1994) Hidden Futures Death and

Immortality in Ancient Egypt Anatolia the Classical Biblical and Arabic-Islamic WorldAmsterdam

Bremmer JN (1983) The Early Greek Concept of the Soul Princetonmdash (1994) ldquoThe Soul Death and the Afterlife in Early and Classical Greecerdquo in J M

Bremer ThPJ van den Hout R Peters (eds) 91ndash106Broadie S (1991) Ethics with Aristotle New YorkBrockett O (1995) History of the Τheatre BostonBrockliss W Chaudhuri P Haimson Lushkov A Wasdin K (2012) (eds) Reception and

the Classics An Interdisciplinary Approach to the Classical Tradition CambridgeBrockliss W Chaudhuri P Haimson Lushkov A Wasdin K (2012) ldquoIntroductionrdquo in W

Brockliss P Chaudhuri A Haimson Lushkov K Wasdin (eds) 1ndash16Brook T (1986) ldquoReview of Jonathan D Spence The Memory Palace of Matteo Ricci (1984)rdquo

The Journal of Asian Studies 454 831ndash33Brosius M (2000) The Persian Empire from Cyrus II to Artaxerxes II LACTOR 16 LondonBrown CG (1988) ldquoHipponax and Iamberdquo Hermes 116 478ndash81mdash (1997) ldquoIambosrdquo in DE Gerber (ed) 11ndash88Bryant JM (1996) Moral Codes and Social Structure in Ancient Greece New YorkBuchheit V (1962) Studien zum Corpus Priapeorum MunichBudelmann F Michelakis P (eds) (2001) Homer Tragedy and Beyond Essays in Honour of

PE Easterling LondonBudelmann F (ed) (2009) The Cambridge Companion to Greek Lyric CambridgeBuffiegravere F (1952) Les mythes drsquo Homegravere et la penseacutee grecque ParisBulman P (1992) Phthonos in Pindar Berkeley Los Angeles

Bibliography 439

Bundy EL (1962) Studia Pindarica BerkeleyBurgess J (2001) The Tradition of the Trojan War in Homer and the Epic Cycle Baltimore

LondonBurgoyne R (2011a) ldquoIntroductionrdquo in R Burgoyne (ed) 1ndash16mdash (2011b) ldquoBare Life and Sovereignty in Gladiatorrdquo in R Burgoyne (ed) 82ndash97mdash (ed) (2011) The Epic Film in World Culture New YorkBurkert W (1962) ldquoΓόης zum griechischen lsquoSchamanismusrsquordquo RhM 105 36ndash55mdash (1972) ldquoDie Leistung eines Kreophylos Kreophyleer Homeriden und die archaische

Heraklesepikrdquo MH 29 74ndash85mdash (1985) Greek Religion (trans J Raffan) OxfordBurn AR (19842) Persia and the Greeks The Defense of the West 548ndash478 BC LondonBurnet J (1900) The Ethics of Aristotle LondonBurnett AP (1971) Catastrophe Survived Euripidesrsquo Plays of Mixed Reversal Oxfordmdash (2008) Pindar BristolBurnyeat MF (1971) ldquoVirtues in Actionrdquo in G Vlastos (ed) 209ndash34Cadell H (1998) ldquoAgrave quelle date Arsinoeacute II Phildelphe est-elle deacuteceacutedeacuteersquo in H Malaerts

(ed) 1ndash3Cahoon L (1988) ldquoThe Bed as Battlefield Erotic Conquest and Military Metaphor in Ovidrsquos

Amoresrdquo TAPhA 118 293ndash307Cairns D L (1993) Aidōs The Psychology and Ethics of Honour and Shame in Ancient Greek

Literature OxfordCairns F (1984) ldquoThe Etymology of Militia in Roman Elegyrdquo in L GilRM Aguilar (eds)

211ndash21mdash (2006a) Sextus Propertius The Augustan elegist Cambridgemdash (2006b) ldquoPropertius and the Origins of Latin Love-elegyrdquo in H-C Guumlnther (ed)

69ndash95Caizzi F (1966) Antisthenis Fragmenta MilanCalame Cl (2004) ldquoDeictic Ambiguity and Auto-Referentiality Some Examplesrdquo in N Felson

(ed) 415ndash43Calboli G (ed) (1969) Cornifici rhetorica ad C Herennium BolognaCalder W (1970) Originality in Senecarsquos Troades ChicagoCallebat L (2012) Priapeacutees ParisCallen King K (1987) Achilles Paradigms of the War Hero from Homer to the Middle Ages

Berkeley Los AngelesCampbell D A (2001) Greek Lyric III Stesichorus Ibycus Simonides and Others

Cambridge (Mass) Londonmdash (2002) Greek Lyric I Sappho and Alcaeus Cambridge (Mass) LondonCampbell M (1981) A Commentary on Quintus Smyrnaeusrsquo Posthomerica XII LeidenCanavero D (2004) ldquoRipresa ed evoluzione Andromaca ed Ecuba nelle Troiane di Euripiderdquo

in G Zanetto D Canavero A Capra A Sgobbi (eds) 171ndash85Caplan H (1954) Rhetorica ad Herennium LondonCaprara M (1999) ldquoNonno e gli Ebrei Note a Par IV 88ndash121rdquo SIFC 17 195ndash215Carey C (1991) ldquoThe Victory Ode in Performance The Case for the Chorusrdquo CPh 86

192ndash200mdash (1995) ldquoPindar and the Victory Oderdquo in L Ayres (ed) 85ndash103mdash (2000) Aeschines Austin

440 Bibliography

mdash (2005) ldquoPropaganda and Competition in Athenian Oratoryrdquo in KAE Enenkel ILPfeijffer (eds) 65ndash100

mdash (2007a) ldquoEpideictic Oratoryrdquo in I Worthington (ed) 236ndash52mdash (2007b) Lysiae Orationes cum Fragmentis Oxfordmdash (2008) ldquoHipponax Narratorrdquo Acta Antiqua Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 48

89ndash102mdash (2009) ldquoIambosrdquo in F Budelmann (ed) 149ndash67mdash (forthcoming) ldquoEmbedded Fragmentsrdquo in M Alexandrou C Carey G Drsquo Alessio (eds)Carey C Swift L (eds) (2016) Iambus and Elegy OxfordCarney E (2006) Olympias Mother of Alexander the Great LondonCarruthers M (1990) The Book of Memory CambridgeCarruthers M Ziolkowski J (2002) The Medieval Craft of Memory An Anthology of Texts

and Pictures PhiladelphiaCarter L B (1986) The Quiet Athenian OxfordCartledge P Harvey F (eds) (1990) Crux Essays presented to GEM de Ste Croix on his

75th Birthday ExeterCavarzere A Aloni A Barchiesi A(eds) (2001) Iambic Ideas Essays on a Poetic Tradition

from Archaic Greece to the Late Roman Empire LanhamChantler A Dente C (eds) (2009) Translation Practices through Language to Culture

Amsterdam New YorkChantraine P (1942) Grammaire Homeacuterique Vol I Parismdash (1968ndash1980) Dictionnaire eacutetymologique de la langue grecque ParisCharalabopoulos NG (2012) Platonic Drama and its Ancient Reception CambridgeCharalambidis G (1971) ldquoPress Reviewrdquo Vradyni 9 Oct 1971Charalambidis G (1972) Penelopersquos 300 AthensChasapi-Christodoulou E (2002) Greek Mythology in Modern Greek Drama From Cretan

Theatre to the End of the 20th Century (Η ελληνική μυθολογία στο νεοελληνικό δράμαΑπό την εποχή του Κρητικού Θεάτρου έως το τέλος του 20ού αιώνα) Vols I-IIThessaloniki

Chatzipantazis Th (1984) Karaghiozisrsquo Invasion in Athens in 1890 (H εισβολή τουΚαραγκιόζη στην Αθήνα του 1890) Athens

mdash (2003) Greek Comedy and its Models in the 19th century (Η ελληνική κωμωδία και ταπρότυπά της στον 19ο αιώνα) Herakleion

Chiasson CC (2009) ldquoRedefining Homeric Heroism in Wolfgang Petersenrsquos Troyrdquo in KMyrsiades (ed) 186ndash207

Christiansen B Thaler U (eds) (2013) Ansehenssache Formen von Prestige in Kulturendes Altertums Munich

Christodoulou D (1966) Hotel Circe AthensClarke M (2004) ldquoManhood and Heroismrdquo in RL Fowler (ed) 74ndash90Clarke MJ Currie BGF Lyne ROAM (eds) (2006) Epic Interactions Perspectives on

Homer Virgil and the Epic Tradition Presented to Jasper Griffin by Former Pupils OxfordClarke W (1978) ldquoAchilles and Patroclus in Loverdquo Hermes 106 381ndash96Clausen W (1994) Virgil Eclogues OxfordClauss JJ Cuypers M (eds) (2010) A Companion to Hellenistic Literature OxfordClay D (1988) ldquoThe Archaeology of the Temple to Juno in Carthagerdquo CPh 83 195ndash205

Bibliography 441

mdash (2000) Platonic Questions Dialogues with the Silent Philosopher University ParkPennsylvania

mdash (2004) Archilochos Heros The Cult of Poets in the Greek Polis Cambridge (Mass)Coleman R (1977) Vergil Eclogues CambridgeCollard C Cropp M J Gibert J (2004) Euripides Selected Fragmentary Plays Vol II

OxfordCollard C Cropp MJ (2008) Euripides Fragments Vols I-II Cambridge (Mass) LondonCombellack F M (1965) ldquoSome Formulaic Illogicalities in Homerrdquo TAPhA 96 41ndash56Conacher DJ (1967) Euripidean Drama Myth Theme and Structure Torontomdash (1998) Euripides and the Sophists LondonConnors C (1991) ldquoSimultaneous Hunting and Herding at Ciris 297ndash300rdquo CQ 41 556ndash59Consigny S (2001) Gorgias Sophist and Artist South CarolinaCook E (2001) Achilles LondonCooper J M (ed) (1997) Plato Complete Works IndianapolisCormack M (2006) Platorsquos Stepping Stones Degrees of Moral Virtue LondonCornford FM (1941) Plato Republic OxfordCouprie A (1996) Racine Andromaque reacutesumeacute personnages thegravemes ParisCousin C (2005) ldquoLa Neacutekuia homeacuterique et les fragments des Evocateurs drsquoacircmes drsquoEschylerdquo

Gaia 9 137ndash52Cousland JRC Hume JR (eds) (2009) The Play of Texts and Fragments Essays in Honour

of Martin Cropp LeidenCova PV (1984) ldquoAchemeniderdquo in Enciclopedia Virgiliana I Rome 22ndash23Coventry L (1989) ldquoPhilosophy and Rhetoric in the Menexenusrdquo JHS 109 4ndash10Crawley R Wick TE (1982) Thucydides The Peloponnesian War New YorkCreed LJ (1973) ldquoMoral Values in the Age of Thucydidesrdquo CQ 23 213ndash31Croally NT (1994) Euripidean Polemic The Trojan Women and the Function of Tragedy

CambridgeCropp MJ Lee KH Sansone D (eds) (1999ndash2000) Euripides and Tragic Theatre in the

Late Fifth Century UrbanaCucchiarelli A (2012) Le Bucoliche RomaDal Zotto A (1903) La Ciris e le sue fonti greche FeltreDalby A (1995) ldquoThe Iliad the Odyssey and their Audiencesrdquo CQ 452 269ndash79Danek G (1998) Epos und Zitat Studien zu den Quellen der Odyssee ViennaDaskalopoulos D (2009) ldquoAllusions to the Fortune of Odysseus in Modern Greek Poetryrdquo in

Th Pylarinos (ed) 71ndash77Davidson J (1999ndash2000) ldquoEuripides Homer and Sophoclesrdquo in MJ Cropp KH Lee D

Sansone (eds) 117ndash28mdash (2001) ldquoHomer and Euripidesrsquo Troadesrdquo BICS 45 65ndash79mdash (2012) ldquoThe Homer of Tragedy Epic Sources and Models in Sophoclesrdquo in A

Markantonatos (ed) 245ndash62Davies M (1991) Sophocles Trachiniae OxfordDavis G (2008) ldquoReframing the Homeric Images of the Odyssey in the Art of Derek Walcott

and Romare Beardenrdquo in L Hardwick C Stray (eds) 401ndash14Davreux J (1942) La leacutegende de la propheacutetesse Cassandre LiegravegeDay JW (1989) ldquoRituals in Stone Early Greek Grave Epigrams and Monumentsrdquo JHS 109

16ndash28

442 Bibliography

Day LK (2008) lsquoBitch that I amrsquo An Examination of Womenrsquos Self-Deprecation in Homer andVirgil Diss Arkansas

De Gianni D (2010) ldquoLa nutrice di Scilla e la nutrice di Fedra ispirazioni euripidee nellaCirisrdquo Vichiana 12 36ndash45

De Jong IJF (1997) ldquoHomer and Narratologyrdquo in I Morris B Powell (eds) 305ndash25De Jong IJF Bowie A Nuumlnlist R (eds) (2004) Narrators Narratees and Narratives in

Ancient Greek Literature LeidenDe Romilly J (1976) ldquoLrsquoexcuse de lrsquoinvincible amour dans la trageacutedie grecquerdquo in JM

Bremer SL Radt CJ Ruigh (eds) 309ndash21mdash (1986) La moderniteacute drsquoEuripide Parismdash (1995) Trageacutedies grecques au fil des ans ParisDe Stefani C (2002) Nonno di Panopoli Parafrasi del Vangelo di s Giovanni canto I

BolognaDe Vet T (1996) ldquoThe Joint Role of Orality and Literacy in the Composition Transmission

and Performance of the Homeric Texts A Comparative Viewrdquo TAPhA 126 43ndash76mdash (2005) ldquoParry in Paris Structuralism Historical Linguistics and the Oral Theoryrdquo

ClAnt 242 257ndash84mdash (2008) ldquoContext and the Emerging Story Improvised Performance in Oral and Literate

Societiesrdquo Oral Tradition 231 159ndash79Deacuteceacuteleacute M (2005) Le mythe grec et sa mythopoΐegravese dans Andromaque et Iphigeacutenie de

Racine Diss AthensDefaux G (1977) ldquoCulpabiliteacute et expiation dans lrsquoAndromaque de Racinerdquo Romanic Review

Janvier 1977 22ndash31Deforge B (1986) Eschyle poegravete cosmique ParisDegani E (1984) Studi su Ipponatte Barimdash (1991) Testimonia et fragmenta StuttgartDegani E Burzacchini G Nicolosi A (2007) Ipponatte Frammenti BolognaDelatte A (1915) Eacutetudes sur la litteacuterature pythagoricienne ParisDelebecque E (1951) Euripide et la guerre du Peacuteloponnegravese ParisDeleuze G (1968) Diffeacuterence et Reacutepeacutetition Parismdash (1986) Cinema 1 The Movement Image LondonDenniston JD (19542) The Greek Particles OxfordDentith S (2000) Parody The New Critical Idiom LondonDeremetz A (1999) ldquoVisages des genres dans lrsquoeacuteleacutegie ovidienne Amores 11 et 31rdquo in J

Fabre-Serris A Deremetz (eds) 71ndash84Derow P Parker R (eds) (2003) Herodotus and his World Essays for a Conference in

Memory of George Forrest OxfordDesch W (1985) ldquoDie Hauptgestalten in Euripideslsquo Troerinnenrdquo GB 12 65ndash100Deslauriers M (2003) ldquoAristotle on andreia Divine and Sub-Human Virtuesrdquo in R M

Rosen I Sluiter (eds) 187ndash211Destreacutee P Herrmann FG (eds) (2011) Plato and the Poets Leiden BostonDetienne M (1962) Homegravere Hesiode et Pythagore Collectio Latomus 57 BrusselsDewald C Marincola J (eds) (2006) The Cambridge Companion to Herodotus CambridgeDi Giuseppe L (2012) Euripide Alessandro LecceDi Luzio A (1969) ldquoI papyri omerici drsquo epoca tolemaica e la constituzione del testo dellrsquo

epica arcaicardquo RCCM 11 3ndash152

Bibliography 443

Dickey E (2007) Ancient Greek Scholarship A Guide to Finding Reading andUnderstanding Scholia Commentaries Lexica and Grammatical Treatises Oxford NewYork

Dillon J (2010) ldquoIamblichus of Chalcis and his Schoolrdquo in LP Gerson (ed) I 359ndash74Dimock WC (2008) ldquoAfter Troy Homer Euripides Total Warrdquo in R Felski (ed) 66ndash81Dimou A (2006) Dramatic Works Vols I-II Athens (άπαντα Τα Θεατρικά Aθήνα)Dingel J (1967) Das Requisit in der griechischen Tragoumldie Diss TuumlbingenDinter M (2005) ldquoEpic and Epigram ndash Minor Heroes in Virgilrsquos Aeneidrdquo CQ 55 153ndash69Dios J M L de (2008) Esquilo Fragmentos Testimonios MadridDodds ER (1951) The Greeks and the Irrational Berkeley Los AngelesDodson DS (2009) Reading Dreams An Audience-Critical Approach to the Dreams in the

Gospel of Matthew LondonDolccedil M (1984) Elegies a Mecenas lrsquoAgroacute Minuacutecies lrsquoAlmadroc uacuteltims poemes BarcelonaDolfi E (1984) ldquoSu I Cretesi di Euripide Passione e Responsabilitagraverdquo Prometheus 10

121ndash38Dornseiff F (1921) Pindar LeipzigDover KJ (1968) Aristophanes Clouds Oxfordmdash (1972) Aristophanic Comedy Berkeley Los Angelesmdash (1974) Greek Popular Morality in the Time of Plato and Aristotle Berkeley Los Angelesmdash (1978) Greek Homosexuality Londonmdash (1988) ldquoGreek Homosexuality and Initiationrdquo in KJ Dover (ed) II 115ndash34mdash (ed) (1987ndash88) The Greeks and their Legacy Vols I-II Oxfordmdash (1993) Aristophanes Frogs OxfordDoxas Α ldquoPenelopersquos 300rdquo Eleftheros Kosmos 14 Oct 1971Drachmann AB (1903ndash27) Scholia Vetera in Pindari Carmina Vols I-III LeipzigDu Quesnay I M Le M (1973) ldquoThe Amoresrdquo in JW Binns (ed) 1ndash48Dubischar M (2001) Die Agonszenen bei Euripides StuttgartDueacute C (2001) ldquoAchillesrsquo Golden Amphora in Aeschinesrsquo Against Timarchus and the Afterlife

of Oral Traditionrdquo CPh 96 33ndash47mdash (2006) The Captive Womanrsquos Lament in Greek Tragedy AustinDueacute C Ebbott M (2010) Iliad 10 and the Poetics of Ambush A Multitext Edition with Essays

and Commentary Washington DCDunbar N (1995) Aristophanes Birds OxfordDunn F (1996) Tragedyrsquos End Closure and Innovation in Euripidean Drama New York

OxfordDurand G (1987) Le mythe et le mythique ParisDyson M (1988) ldquoPoetic Imitation in Platorsquos Republic 3rdquo Antichthon 22 42ndash53Easterling PE (ed) (1997) The Cambridge Companion to Greek Tragedy Cambridgemdash (1997a) ldquoConstructing the Heroicrdquo in C Pelling (ed) 21ndash37mdash (1997b) ldquoForm and Performancerdquo in PE Easterling (ed) 151ndash77mdash (1999) ldquoActors and Voices Reading between the Lines in Aeschines and Demosthenesrdquo

in S Goldhill R Osborne (eds) 154ndash66Easterling PE Hall E (eds) (2002) Greek and Roman Actors Aspects of an Ancient

Profession CambridgeEdmondson J Keith A (eds) (2008) Roman Dress and the Fabrics of Roman Culture

Toronto

444 Bibliography

Edmundson M (1995) Literature Against Philosophy Plato to Derrida A Defence of PoetryCambridge

Edwards AT (1993) ldquoHomerrsquos Ethical Geography Country and City in the Odysseyrdquo TAPhA123 27ndash78

Edwards M (1991) The Iliad A Commentary (General Editor GS Kirk) Vol V Books 17ndash20Cambridge

Efstathiou A (2014) ldquoΤο ιδιωτικό και το δημόσιο στη δοκιμασία ρητόρων στην Αθήνα τωνκλασικών χρόνωνrdquo in L Athanassaki A Nikolaides D Spatharas (eds) 231ndash54

Egan RB (1996) ldquoCorydonrsquos Winning Words in Ecl 7rdquo Phoenix 50 233ndash39Egli F (2003) Euripides im Kontext zeitgenoumlssischer intellektueller Stroumlmungen Munich

LeipzigEisenstein SM (1991) Selected Works Vol II Towards a Theory of Montage (ed M Glenny

and R Taylor trans M Glenny) LondonEitrem S (1922) ldquoKyklopenrdquo in RE XI 2 Stuttgart 2328ndash47Ekdawi S (2002) ldquoThe Myth of Eternal Returnrdquo in J Anton (ed) 115ndash24Elderkin GW (1941) ldquoThe Akanthos Column at Delphirdquo Hesperia 104 373ndash80Elliger W (1975) Die Darstellung der Landschaft in der griechischen Dichtung Berlin New

YorkElliot R (1969) Mythe et leacutegende dans le theacuteacirctre de Racine ParisElmer DF (2009) ldquoPresentation Formulas in South Slavic Epic Songrdquo Oral Tradition 241

41ndash59Elsner J (1995) Art and the Roman Viewer The Transformation of Art from the Pagan World

to Christianity CambridgeElytis O (20066) Carte Blanche (Εν λευκώ) AthensEmlyn-Jones C (2008) ldquoPoets on Socratesrsquo Stage Platorsquos Reception of Dramatic Artrdquo in L

Hardwick C Stray (eds) 38ndash49Emlyn-Jones C Hardwick L Purkis J (eds) (1992) Homer Readings and Images LondonEnenkel KAE Pfeijffer IL (eds) (2005) The Manipulative Mode Political Propaganda in

Antiquity LeidenErler M Kramer B Hagedorn D Huumlbner R (eds) (1980) Koumllner Papyri (PKoumlln) 3

OpladenEvangelidis D (1935) ldquoἨπειρωτικαὶ ἔρευναι Ι Ἡ ἀνασκαφὴ τῆς Δωδώνης ΙΙ Aνασκαφὴ παρὰ

τὸ Ραδοτόβιrdquo Ἠπειρωτικὰ Χρονικά 10 193ndash264Faber R (2008) ldquoThe Woven Garment as Literary Metaphor The Peplos in Ciris 9ndash41rdquo in J

Edmondson A Keith (eds) 205ndash16Fabre-Serris J Deremetz A (eds) (1999) Eacuteleacutegie et eacutepopeacutee dans la poeacutesie Ovidienne

(Heacuteroiumldes et Amours) En hommage Simone Viarre LilleFairclough HR Goold GP (1999) Virgil Vol I Eclogues Georgics Aeneid 1ndash6 (1st ed by

HR Fairclough London 1916 revised by GP Goold) Cambridge (Mass) LondonFairclough HR Goold GP (2000) Virgil Vol II Aeneid VII-XII Appendix Vergiliana (1st ed

by HR Fairclough London 1918 revised by GP Goold) Cambridge (Mass) LondonFalcetto R (2002) Il Palamede di Euripide AlessandriaFantham E (2011) Roman Readings Roman Response to Greek Literature from Plautus to

Statius and Quintilian Berlin New YorkFantuzzi M Hunter RL (2004) Tradition and Innovation in Hellenistic Poetry Cambridge

Bibliography 445

Fantuzzi M (2005) ldquoPosidippus at Court The Contribution of the Ἱππικά of P MilVogl VIII309 to the Ideology of Ptolemaic Kingshiprdquo in K Gutzwiller (ed) 249ndash68

Fantuzzi M Tsagalis C (eds) (2015) The Greek Epic Cycle and its Ancient Reception ACompanion Cambridge

Faraone CA (1991) ldquoBinding and Burying the Forces of Evil The Defensive Use of lsquoVoodooDollsrsquo in Ancient Greecerdquo ClAnt 10 165ndash205

mdash (2002) The Rise and Fall of the Afterlife London New YorkFarrell J (2004) ldquoRoman Homerrdquo in R L Fowler (ed) 254ndash71Fedeli P (1980) Properzio Il primo libro delle elegie Florencemdash (2005) Properzio Elegie Libro II CambridgeFelski R (ed) (2008) Rethinking Tragedy BaltimoreFelson N (ed) (2004) The Poetics of Deixis in Alcman Pindar and Other Lyric Arethusa

Special Edition 37 no 3Ferrari GRF (1989) ldquoPlato and Poetryrdquo in G A Kennedy (ed) 92ndash148mdash (ed) (2007) The Cambridge Companion to Platorsquos Republic CambridgeFerri R (ed) (2011) The Latin of Roman Lexicography Pisa RomeFinkelberg M (2007) ldquoHomer as a Foundation-Textrdquo in H Bloom (ed) (2007b) 169ndash88mdash (ed) (2011) The Homer Encyclopedia Malden OxfordFisher N (2001) Aeschines Against Timarchos OxfordFlores E (1988) ldquoPolifemordquo in Enciclopedia Virgiliana IV Rome 164ndash66Floridi L (2014) Lucillio Epigrammi Berlin BostonFoer J (2011) ldquoSecrets of a Mind Gamerrdquo The New York Times Sunday Magazine 2222011Foley HP (ed) (1981) Reflections of Women in Antiquity New York LondonFoley JM (2002) How to Read an Oral Poem Urbana Chicagomdash (ed) (2005) A Companion to Ancient Epic Malden OxfordFord A (1999) ldquoReading Homer from the Rostrum Poems and Laws in Aeschinesrsquo Against

Timarchusrdquo in S Goldhill R Osborne (eds) 231ndash56Foster DH (2010) Wagnerrsquos Ring Cycle and the Greeks CambridgeFouchard A (1997) Aristocratie et Deacutemocratie ParisFowler D (1992) ldquoNarrate and Describe The Problem of Ekphrasisrdquo JRS 82 24ndash34

(reprinted in D Fowler Roman Constructions Readings in Postmodern Latin Oxford2000 64ndash85)

mdash (2002) Lucretius on Atomic Motion A Commentary on De rerum natura 21332 OxfordFowler RL (1987) The Nature of Early Greek Lyric Three Preliminary Studies Torontomdash (1990) ldquoTwo More New Verses of Hipponax (and a Spurium of Philoxenus)rdquo ICS 15

1ndash22mdash (2004) ldquoThe Homeric Questionrdquo in RL Fowler (ed) 220ndash32mdash (ed) (2004) The Cambridge Companion to Homer Cambridgemdash (2006) ldquoHerodotus and his Prose Predecessorsrdquo in C Dewald J Marincola (eds)

29ndash45Foxhall L Gehrke H-J Luraghi N (eds) (2010) Intentionale Geschichte Spinning Time

StuttgartFraenkel E (1950) Aeschylus Agamemnon Vols I-III OxfordFraser PM (1972) Ptolemaic Alexandria Vols I-III OxfordFrazer JG (19132) Pausaniasrsquo Description of Greece Vols I-VI LondonFriedlaumlnder P (1964) Plato The Dialogues Vol II (trans H Meyerhoff) New York

446 Bibliography

Friedrich P (1978) The Meaning of Aphrodite Chicago LondonFriedrich WH (1953) Euripides und Diphilos MunichFrois Eacute Lesot A (1998) ldquoAnalyse critiquerdquo in J Giraudoux La guerre de Troie nrsquo aura pas

lieu Paris 11ndash65Furbank PN (1992) ldquoOn Reading Homer without knowing any Greekrdquo in

Emlyn-JonesHardwickPurkis (eds) 33ndash46Gadamer HG (1975) Truth and Method (trans G Barden and J Cumming) New YorkGagarin M (1987) ldquoMorality in Homerrdquo CPh 82 285ndash306Gaines R (1982) ldquoQualities of Rhetorical Expression in Philodemusrdquo TAPhA 112 71ndash81Gaisser J (2002) ldquoThe Reception of Classical Texts in the Renaissancerdquo in A J Grieco M

Rocke F Gioffredi Superbi (eds) 387ndash400Gall D (1999) Zur Technik von Anspielung und Zitat in der roumlmischen Dichtung Vergil

Gallus und die Ciris MunichGarin F (1909) ldquoSui romanzi grecirdquo SIFC 17 423ndash60Garner R (1990) From Homer to Tragedy The Art of Allusion in Greek Poetry LondonGarrison D H (1978) Mild Frenzy A Reading of the Hellenistic Love Epigram WiesbadenGartziou-Tatti A(1992) ldquoPacircris-Alexandre dans lrsquoIliaderdquo in A Moreau (ed) 73ndash92mdash (1997) ldquoΧορός και Τελετουργία στις Τρῳάδες του Ευριπίδηrdquo Dodone 26 313ndash34Gatti PL (2010) Pseudo Virgilio Ciris MilanoGellie G (1986) ldquoHelen in the Trojan Womenrdquo in JH Betts JT Hooker JR Green (eds) I

114ndash21Gelzer T (1981) ldquoNeue Koumllner Papyrirdquo MH 38 120ndash24mdash (1985) ldquoΜοῦσα αὐθιγενής Bemerkungen zu einem Typ pindarischer und

bacchylideischer Epinikienrdquo MH 42 95ndash120Genette G (1982) Palimpsestes La Litteacuterature au Second Degreacute ParisGeorgopoulou V (2006) ldquoWomenrsquos Chorus from Juliet to Andromache (Xορός Γυναικών Από

την Ιουλιέττα στην Ανδρομάχη)rdquo in Α Dimou Dramatic Works (άπαντα Τα Θεατρικά)Vol I Athens 362ndash66

mdash (2009) ldquoExcesses and Variations of Love in the Dramaturgy of Akis Dimou (Υπερβάσειςκαι παρεκκλίσεις του έρωτα στο θεατρικό έργο του άκη Δήμου)rdquo in C Bobas (ed)537ndash45

Georgousopoulos K (1984) (review of 1971) ldquoPenelopersquos 300rdquo in Keys and Codes ofTheatre (Κλειδιά και Κώδικες Θεάτρου) Athens II 13ndash17

Gerber D (1987) ldquoPindarrsquos Olympian Four A Commentaryrdquo QUCC ns 25 7ndash24Gerber DE (ed) (1984) Greek Poetry and Philosophy Studies in Honour of Leonard

Woodbury Chicomdash (ed) (1997) A Companion to the Greek Lyric Poets Leidenmdash (1999) Greek Iambic Poetry From the Seventh to the Fifth Centuries BC Cambridge

(Mass)Gerson LP (ed) (2010) The Cambridge History of Philosophy in Late Antiquity Vols I-II

CambridgeGeymonat M (1993) ldquoCallimachus at the End of Aeneasrsquo Narrationrdquo HSPC 95 323ndash31Giangrande G (1968) ldquoSympotic Literature and Epigramrdquo LrsquoEacutepigramme Grecque (Entr Fond

Hardt 14) 91ndash178Giannaris G (1972) Mikis Theodorakis Music and Social Change New York

Bibliography 447

Gibert J (2009) ldquoEuripidesrsquo Antiope and the Quiet Liferdquo in JRC Cousland J R Hume(eds) 23ndash34

Gibson RK (2007) Excess and Restraint Propertius Horace and Ovidrsquos Ars Amatoria (BICSSuppl 89) London

Gil L Aguilar RM (eds) (1984) Apophoreta Philologica Emmanueli Fernandez-Galiano aSodalibus Oblata Madrid

Gill C (1993) ldquoPlato on Falsehoodmdashnot Fictionrdquo in C Gill P Wiseman (eds) 38ndash87Gill C Wiseman P (eds) (1993) Lies and Fiction in the Ancient World ExeterGiraudoux J (1998) La guerre de Troie nrsquoaura pas lieu ParisGlenn J (1972) ldquoVirgilrsquos Polyphemusrdquo GampR 191 47ndash59Godley AD (1920ndash25) Herodotus The Persian Wars Vols I-IV LondonGoff B (2009) Euripides Trojan Women LondonGoldhill S (1991) The Poetrsquos Voice Essays on Poetics and Greek Literature Cambridgemdash (1997) ldquoThe Language of Tragedy Rhetoric and Communicationrdquo in PE Easterling

(ed) 127ndash50mdash (2001) (ed) Being Greek under Rome Cultural Identity the Second Sophistic and the

Development of Empire Cambridgemdash (2010) ldquoCultural History and Aesthetics Why Kant is no place to start Reception

Studiesrdquo in E Hall S Harrop (eds) 56ndash70Goldhill S Osborne R (eds) (1999) Performance Culture and Athenian Democracy

CambridgeGoldhill S von Reden S (1999) ldquoPlato and the Performance of Dialoguerdquo in S Goldhill R

Osborne (eds) 257ndash89Goodkin RE (1989) Autour de Racine Studies in Intertextuality YaleGoossens R (1962) Euripide et Athegravenes BrusselsGould J (1980) ldquoLaw Custom and Myth Aspects of the Social Position of Women in

Classical Athensrdquo JHS 100 38ndash59Gould T (1964) ldquoPlatorsquos Hostility to Artrdquo Arion 2 70ndash91mdash (1990) The Ancient Quarrel between Poetry and Philosophy PrincetonGow ASF (19522) Theocritus CambridgeGow ASF Scholfield AF (1953) Poems and Poetical Fragments Nicander of Colophon

CambridgeGow ASF Page D L (1965) The Greek Anthology Hellenistic Epigrams Vols I-II

CambridgeGrafton A (1981) ldquoProlegomena to Friedrich August Wolfrdquo Journal of the Warburg and

Courtauld Institutes 44 101ndash29Grammatas Th (1994) From Tragedy to Drama Essays of Comparative Theatrology (Από την

τραγωδία στο δράμα Μελέτες συγκριτικής θεατρολογίας) AthensGrant A (1885) The Ethics of Aristotle LondonGraziosi B (2002) Inventing Homer The Early Reception of Epic Cambridgemdash (2007) ldquoHomer in Albania Oral Epic and the Geography of Literaturerdquo in B Graziosi

E Greenwood (eds) 120ndash42mdash (2008a) ldquoThe Ancient Reception of Homerrdquo in L Hardwick C Stray (eds) 26ndash37mdash (2008b) ldquoReview of R Bittlestone J Diggle J Underhill Odysseus Unbound the

Search for Homerrsquos Ithacardquo JHS 128 178ndash80

448 Bibliography

mdash (2010) ldquoHesiod in Classical Athens Rhapsodes Orators and Platonic Discourserdquo in GBoys-Stones J Haubold (eds) 111ndash32

Graziosi B Greenwood E (eds) (2007) Homer in the Twentieth Century Between WorldLiterature and the Western Canon Oxford

Graziosi B Haubold J (2003) ldquoHomeric Masculinity ΗΝΟΡΕΗ and ΑΓΗΝΟΡΙΗrdquo JHS 12360ndash76

Graziosi B Haubold J (2009) ldquoGreek Lyric and Early Greek Literary Historyrdquo in FBudelmann (ed) 95ndash113

Graziosi B Haubold J (2010) Homer Iliad Book 6 CambridgeGreenwood E (2007) ldquoLoguersquos Tele-Vision Homer from a Distancerdquo in B Graziosi E

Greenwood (eds) 145ndash76Greenwood LHG (1961) Aspects of Euripidean Tragedy LondonGregory J (1991) Euripides and the Instruction of the Athenians Ann Arbormdash (ed) (2005) A Companion to Greek TragedyOxford Malden VictoriaGrenfell BP Hunt AS (1897) Greek Papyri Series II OxfordGrethlein J (2006) Das Geschichtsbild der Ilias Goumlttingenmdash (2008) ldquoMemory and Material Objects in the Iliad and the Odysseyrdquo JHS 128 27ndash51Grieco AJ Rocke M Gioffredi Superbi F (eds) (2002) The Italian Renaissance in the

Twentieth Century FlorenceGriffin J (1977) ldquoThe Epic Cycle and the Uniqueness of Homerrdquo JHS 97 39ndash53mdash (1992) ldquoTheocritus the Iliad and the Eastrdquo AJPh 113 189ndash211mdash (1998) ldquoThe Social Function of Attic Tragedyrdquo CQ 48 39ndash61Griffith M (1999) Sophocles Antigone CambridgeGriswold C L (2012) ldquoPlato on Rhetoric and Poetryrdquo in The Stanford Encyclopedia of

Philosophy (Spring 2012 Edition)Griswold Jr C L (1985) ldquoPlatorsquos Metaphilosophy Why Plato Wrote Dialoguesrdquo in D

OrsquoMeara (ed) 143ndash67Grube GMA (1992) Plato Republic (revised by CDC Reeve) Indianapolis CambridgeGrzybeck E (1990) Du calendrier maceacutedonien au calendrier ptoleacutemaique problegravemes de

chronologie helleacutenistique BaselGuettel-Cole S (2007) ldquoFinding Dionysusrdquo in D Ogden (ed) 327ndash41Guichard LA (2004) Asclepiacuteades de Samos Epigramas y fragmentos BernGuidorizzi G (2000) Igino Miti MilanGuumlnther HC (ed) (2006) Brillrsquos Companion to Propertius LeidenGuthrie WKC (1962ndash1981) A History of Greek Philosophy Vols I-VI Cambridgemdash (1971) The Sophists CambridgeGutzwiller KJ (1992) ldquoThe Nautilus the Halcyon and Selenaia Callimachusrsquos Epigram 5Pf

= 14G-Prdquo ClAnt 11 194ndash209mdash (1997) ldquoThe Poetics of Editing in Meleagerrsquos Garlandrdquo TAPhA 127 169ndash200mdash (1998) Poetic Garlands Hellenistic Epigrams in Context Berkeley Los Angeles Londonmdash (ed) (2005) The New Posidippus A Hellenistic Poetry Book Oxfordmdash (2010) ldquoHeroic Epitaphs of the Classical Age The Aristotelian Peplos and Beyondrdquo in

M Baumbach A Petrovic I Petrovic (eds) 219ndash49Habicht C (1985) Pausaniasrsquo Guide to Ancient Greece BerkeleyHainsworth B (1993) The Iliad A Commentary (General Editor GS Kirk) Vol III Books

9ndash12 Cambridge

Bibliography 449

Hall E (1995) ldquoLawcourt Dramas The Power of Performance in Greek Forensic OratoryrdquoBICS 40 39ndash58

mdash (2008) The Return of Ulysses A Cultural History of Homerrsquos Odyssey BaltimoreHall E Harrop S (2010) Theorising Performance Greek Drama Cultural History and

Critical Practice London New YorkHall E Macintosh F Wrigley A (eds) (2004) Dionysus since 69 Greek Tragedy at the

Dawn of the Third Millennium OxfordHall S Neale S (2010) Epics Spectacles and Blockbusters A Hollywood History DetroitHalleran M (1982) ldquoAlcestis Reduxrdquo HSCP 86 51ndash53mdash (1985) Stagecraft in Euripides Kent Sydneymdash (1988) ldquoText and Ceremony at the Close of Euripidesrsquo Alcestisrdquo Eranos 86 123ndash29Halliwell S (1996) ldquoPlatorsquos Repudiation of the Tragicrdquo in MS Silk (ed) 332ndash49mdash (1997) ldquoThe Republicrsquos two Critiques of Poetryrdquo in O Houmlffe (ed) 313ndash32mdash (2000) ldquoThe Subjection of Muthos to Logos Platorsquos Citations of thePoetsrdquo CQ 50 94ndash112mdash (2006) ldquoPlato and Aristotle on Denial of Tragedyrdquo in A Laird (ed) 115ndash41Hamilakis Y (2007) The Nation and its Ruins Antiquity Archaeology and National

Imagination in Greece OxfordHammer D (2007) ldquoToward a Political Ethicrdquo in H Bloom (ed) (2007a) 155ndash80Hanink J (2014) Lycurgan Athens and the Making of Classical Tragedy CambridgeHarder M A (2007) ldquoEpigram and the Heritage of Epicrdquo in P BingJS Bruss (eds)

409ndash28Harder MA Regtuit RF Wakker GC (eds) (1998) Genre in Hellenistic Poetry

GroningenHarder MA Regtuit RF Wakker GC (eds) (2006) Beyond the Canon LeuvenHarder MA Regtuit RF Wakker GC (eds) (2012) Gods and Religion in Hellenistic

Poetry LeuvenHardie A (2007) ldquoJuno Hercules and the Muses at Romerdquo AJPh 128 551ndash92Hardie C (1977) ldquoThe Crater of Avernus as a cult-siterdquo in RG Austin (ed) 279ndash86Hardie P (1985) ldquoImago Mundi Cosmological and Ideological Aspects of the Shield of

Achillesrdquo JHS 105 11ndash31mdash (1986) Virgilrsquos Aeneid Cosmos and Imperium Oxfordmdash (ed) (1999) Virgil Critical Assessments of Classical Authors Vol III The Aeneid (trans

R Lauglands) Londonmdash (2009a) Lucretian Receptions History The Sublime Knowledge Cambridgemdash (2009b) ldquoThe Self-Divisions of Scyllardquo Trends in Classics 1 118ndash47Hardwick L (1992) ldquoConvergence and Divergence in Reading Homerrdquo in

Emlyn-JonesHardwickPurkis (eds) 227ndash48mdash (1997) ldquoReception as Simile The Poetics of Reversal in Homer and Derek Walcottrdquo IJCT

33 326ndash38mdash (2002) ldquoClassical Texts in Post-Colonial Literatures Consolation Redress and New

Beginnings in the work of Derek Walcott and Seamus Heaneyrdquo IJCT 92 236ndash56mdash (2003) Reception Studies Oxfordmdash (2009) ldquoPlaying around Cultural Faultlines The Impact of Modern Translations for the

Stage on Perceptions of Ancient Greek Dramardquo in A Chantler C Dente (eds) 167ndash84

450 Bibliography

mdash (2011) ldquoFuzzy Connections Classical Texts and Modern Poetry in Englishrdquo in J ParkerT Matthews (eds) 39ndash60

mdash (2013) ldquoAgainst the lsquoDemocratic Turnrsquo Counter-texts Counter-contextsCounter-argumentsrdquo in L Hardwick S Harrison (eds) 15ndash32

Hardwick L Harrison S (eds) (2013) Classics in the Modern World A Democratic TurnOxford

Hardwick L Stray C (2008) ldquoIntroduction Making Connectionsrdquo in L Hardwick C Stray(eds) 1ndash9

Hardwick L Stray C (eds) (2008) A Companion to Classical Receptions Oxford MaldenHarrison EL (1986) ldquoAchaemenidesrsquo Unfinished Account Vergil Aeneid 3588ndash691rdquo CPh

812 146ndash47Harrison S (2007) Generic Enrichment in Vergil and Horace OxfordHarrison T (2000) Divinity and History The Religion of Herodotus OxfordHartmann A (1917) Untersuchungen uumlber die Sagen vom Tod des Odysseus MunichHarvey F (1990) ldquoDona Ferentes Some Aspects of Bribery in Greek Politicsrdquo in P

Cartledge F Harvey (eds) 76ndash117Haslam M (1997) ldquoHomeric Papyri and Transmission of the Textrdquo in I Morris B Powell

(eds) 55ndash100Haubold J (2000) Homerrsquos People Epic Poetry and Social Formation Cambridgemdash (2007) ldquoHomer after Parry Tradition Reception and the Timeless Textrdquo in B Graziosi

E Greenwood (eds) 27ndash46Haury A (1957) Ciris Edition critique BordeauxHaumlusle H (1979) Einfache und fruumlhe Formen des griechischen Epigramms InnsbruckHavelock E (1963) Preface to Plato OxfordHawkins S (2013) Studies in the Language of Hipponax BremenHeath J (2005) ldquoBlood for the Dead Homeric Ghosts Speak uprdquo Hermes 133 389ndash400Heinze R (1993) Virgilrsquos Epic Technique (trans H and D Harvey and F Robertson with a

preface by A Wlosok) StuttgartHelms J (1966) Character Portrayal in the Romance of Chariton The Hague ParisHenrichs A (1982) ldquoChanging Dionysiac Identitiesrdquo in BF Meyer EP Sanders (eds)

137ndash60mdash (1991) ldquoNamenlosigkeit und Euphemismus Zur Ambivalenz der chthonishen Maumlchte im

attischen Dramardquo in H Hofmann MA Harder (eds) 161ndash201Herrman J (2004) Athenian Funeral Orations Newburyportmdash (2009) Hyperides Funeral Oration OxfordHerrmann Η (2008) Mikis Theodorakis Der Rhythmus der Freiheit BerlinHershkowitz D (1991) ldquoThe Aeneid in Aeneid 3rdquo Vergilius 37 69ndash76Herter H (1934) ldquoTelchinenrdquo in RE V A1 Stuttgart 1979ndash22456Hesk J (1999) ldquoThe Rhetoric of Anti-rhetoric in Athenian Oratoryrdquo in S Goldhill R

Osborne (eds) 201ndash30mdash (2000) Deception and Democracy in Classical Athens CambridgeHeubeck Α (1981) ldquoZwei homerische πεῖραι (ω 205ff ndash B 53ff)rdquo ZAnt 31 73ndash83Heubeck A West S Hainsworth JB (1988) A Commentary on Homerrsquos Odyssey Vol I

OxfordHeubeck A Hoekstra A (1989) A Commentary on Homerrsquos Odyssey Vol II OxfordHeyworth SJ (2007) Cynthia A Companion to the Text of Propertius Oxford

Bibliography 451

mdash (2009) ldquoPropertius and Ovidrdquo in PE Knox (ed) 265ndash78Heyworth SJ Morwood JHW (2011) A Commentary on Propertius Book 3 OxfordHielkema H (1941) Ciris quod carmen traditur Vergilii Diss UtrechtHill J Church Gibson P (eds) (1998) The Oxford Guide to Film Studies Oxford New YorkHinds S (1998) Allusion and Intertext Dynamics of Appropriation in Roman Poetry

CambridgeHintzen-Bohlen B (1995) Die Kulturpolitik des Eubulos und des LykurgDie Denkmaumller-und

Bauprojekte in Athen zwischen 355 und 322 vChr BerlinHirschberger M (2001) ldquoEpos und Tragoumldie Ein Beitrag zur Intertextualitaumlt des griechischen

Romansrdquo WJA 25 157ndash86Hobbs A (2000) Plato and the Hero Courage Manliness and the Impersonal Good

CambridgeHoekstra A (1957) ldquoHeacutesiode et la tradition oralerdquo Mnem 10 193ndash225Hoerber RG (1962) ldquoPlatorsquos Lesser Hippiasrdquo Phronesis 7 121ndash31Houmlffe O (ed) (1997) Platon Politeia BerlinHofmann H Harder MA (eds) (1991) Fragmenta Dramatica GoumlttingenHollis AS (1992) ldquoHellenistic Colouring in Virgilrsquos Aeneidrdquo HSCP 94 269ndash85mdash (1994) ldquoNonnus and Hellenistic Poetryrdquo in N Hopkinson (ed) 43ndash62mdash (1998) ldquoNicander and Lucretiusrdquo PLILS 10 169ndash84mdash (2006) ldquoPropertius and Hellenistic Poetryrdquo in H-C Guumlnther (ed) 97ndash125Houmllscher U (1988) Die Odyssee Epos zwischen Maumlrchen und Roman MunichHolst-Warhaft G (1980) Theodorakis Myth and Politics in Modern Greek Music Londonmdash (2012) ldquoOdyssey by Kostas Kartelias translated by Gail Holst-Warhaftrdquo Per Contra An

International Journal of the Arts Literature and Ideas Spring issue 2httpwwwpercontranetissues23poetryodyssey

Holub RC (20032) Reception Theory A Critical Introduction LondonHope R (1960) Aristotle Metaphysics Ann ArborHopkins D (2010) Conversing With Antiquity OxfordHopkinson N (1984) Callimachus Hymn to Demeter Cambridgemdash (ed) (1994) Studies in the Dionysiaca of Nonnus CambridgeHopman MG (2012) Scylla Myth Metaphor Paradox CambridgeHornblower S (1983) The Greek World 479ndash323 BC Londonmdash (2004) Thucydides and Pindar Historical Narrative and the World of Epinician Poetry

OxfordHorsfall N (2006) Virgil Aeneid 3 A Commentary LeidenHose M (1995) Drama und Gesellschaft StuttgartHousman AE (1902) ldquoRemarks on the Culexrdquo CR 16 339ndash46Howes GE (1895) ldquoHomeric Quotations in Plato and Aristotlerdquo HSCP 6 153ndash237Hunt P (2011) ldquoSlaves in Greek Literary Culturerdquo in K Bradley P Cartledge (eds) 22ndash47Hunter RL (1999) Theocritus A Selection Cambridgemdash (2004) ldquoHomer and Greek Literaturerdquo in RL Fowler (ed) 235ndash53mdash (2010) ldquoLanguage and Interpretation in Greek Epigramrdquo in M Baumbach A Petrovic

I Petrovic (eds) 265ndash88Hurst A Kolde A (2008) Lycophron Alexandra ParisHutton W (2005) Describing Greece Landscape and Literature in the Periegesis of

Pausanias Cambridge

452 Bibliography

Huys M (1986) ldquoThe Plotting Scene in Euripidesrsquo Alexandrosrdquo ZPE 62 9ndash36Ingleheart J (2010) A Commentary on Ovid Tristia Book 2 OxfordIrwin TH (19992) Aristotle Nicomachean Ethics Indianapolismdash (2010) ldquoThe Sense and Reference of Kalon in Aristotlerdquo CPh 105 381ndash96Iser W (1978) The Act of Reading A Theory of Aesthetic Response Baltimore LondonJacob DJ (1993) ldquoDie Stellung des Margites in der Entwicklung der Komoumldierdquo Hell 43

275ndash79mdash (2009) ldquoDie Spiegel der Alkestisrdquo in E Karamalengou E Makrygianni (eds) 179ndash87mdash (2010a) ldquoEuripidesrsquo Alcestis as Closed Dramardquo RFIC 138 14ndash27mdash (2010b) ldquoMilk in the Gold Tablets from Pelinnardquo Trends in Classics 2 64ndash76Jacob M (1929) La vie priveacutee drsquoHeacutelegravene de Troie ParisJacoby F (1945) ldquoAthenian Epigrams from the Persian Warsrdquo Hesperia 14 185ndash211James SL (2003) Learned Girls and Male Persuasion Gender and Reading in Roman Love

Elegy Berkeley Los AngelesJanaway C (1995) Images of Excellence Platorsquos Critique of the Arts Oxfordmdash (2006) ldquoPlato and the Artsrdquo in HH Benson (ed) 388ndash400Janko R (1992) The Iliad A Commentary (General Editor GS Kirk) Vol IV Books 13ndash16

CambridgeJarkho V (1982) ldquoBesprechung von R Scodel The Trojan Trilogy of Euripidesrdquo Gnomon 54

241ndash45Jauss HR (1982) Toward an Aesthetic of Reception (trans T Bahti) MinneapolisJebb RC (19003) Sophocles The Antigone CambridgeJoachim H H (1951) Aristotle The Nicomachean Ethics A Commentary OxfordJocelyn HD (1967) The Tragedies of Ennius CambridgeJones C (2010) New Heroes in Antiquity From Achilles to Antinoos Cambridge (Mass)

LondonJouan F (1966) Euripide et les leacutegendes des Chants Cypriens ParisJouan F van Looy H (1998) Euripide Les fragments Vol I ParisJovanović VM (1954) ldquoO liku Filipa Višnjića I drugih guslara Vukova vremenardquo Zbornik

Matice Srpske za književnost I jezik Novi Sad 2 67ndash96Jowett B (19534) The Dialogues of Plato Vols I-V OxfordJoyce M (2002) ldquoNo One Tells You This Secondary Orality and Hypertextualityrdquo Oral

Tradition 172 325ndash45Kaes A (2009) Shell Shock Cinema Weimar Culture and the Wounds of War PrincetonKagan D (1981) The Peace of Nicias and the Sicilian Expedition IthacaKahane A (2005) Diachronic Dialogues Authority and Continuity in Homer and the Homeric

Tradition LanhamKahn CH (1963) ldquoPlatorsquos Funeral Oration The Motive of the Menexenusrdquo CPh 58 220ndash34mdash (1981) ldquoDid Plato Write Socratic Dialoguesrdquo CQ 31 305ndash20mdash (1998) Plato and the Socratic Dialogue The Philosophical Use of a Literary Form

CambridgeKallendorf C W (2006) ldquoAllusion as Reception Virgil Milton and the Modern Readerrdquo in

C Martindale RF Thomas (eds) 67ndash79mdash (2007) ldquoIntroductionrdquo in CW Kallendorf (ed) 1ndash4mdash (ed) (2007) A Companion to the Classical Tradition Oxford MaldenKambanellis I (1979) ldquoOdysseus Come Homerdquo in Theatre Vol II Athens 213ndash95

Bibliography 453

mdash (1990a) ldquoAuthorrsquos noterdquo in Programme of Odysseus Come Home National TheatreAthens

mdash (1990b) From the Stage and from the Auditorium (Από σκηνής και από πλατείας) Athensmdash (1998) ldquoThe Last Actrdquo in Theatre Vol VII Athens 167ndash241Kambylis A (1965) Die Dichterweihe und ihre Symbolik Untersuchungen zu Hesiodos

Kallimachos Properz und Ennius HeidelbergKamerbeek JC (1958) ldquoMythe et realiteacute dans lrsquooeuvre drsquoEuripiderdquo Entr Ant Clas 6 1ndash41Kannicht R (1988) The Ancient Quarrel Between Philosophy and Poetry Aspects of the

Greek Conception of Literature Canterburymdash (2004) Tragicorum Graecorum Fragmenta Vol V 1ndash2 Euripides GoumlttingenKantzios I (2005) The Trajectory of Archaic Greek Trimeter LeidenKaradžić VS (1842) ldquoPravi uzrok i početak skupljanja našijeh narodnijeh pjesamardquo

Peštansko-budimski skoroteča 2021 118ndash28 (reprinted in Vuk Karadžić Izabrani Spisio jeziku I književnosti priredio B Nikolić Belgrade 1969)

Karalis V (2012) A History of Greek Cinema New York LondonKaramalengou E Makrygianni E (eds) (2009) Aντιφίλησις Studies on Classical Byzantine

and Modern Greek Literature and Culture in Honour of J T A Papademetriou StuttgartKaramanou I (2011) ldquoThe Hektor-Deiphobos Agon in Euripidesrsquo Alexandros (frr 62a-b K

PStras 23422 and 2343)rdquo ZPE 178 35ndash47mdash (2012) ldquoAllocating fr 46a K within the Plot of Euripidesrsquo Alexandros A Reinspection

and Reassessment of PStras 23421rdquo in P Schubert (ed) 399ndash405mdash (2013) ldquoThe Attack Scene in Euripidesrsquo Alexandros and its Reception in Etruscan Artrdquo

in A Bakogianni (ed) Vol II 415ndash31mdash (2015) ldquoTorch Imagery in Euripidesrsquo Alexandros and Trojan Womenrdquo in Balkan Light

2015 Conference Proceedings (Acropolis Museum 16ndash19 September 2015) Athens392ndash97

Kartelias K (2007) Τhe Glass (Tο γυαλί σχέδιον γ) AthensKarvounis D (2005) ldquoMikis Theodorakisrsquo Childrenrsquos Songsrdquo in M Bouzakis E Papavasiliou

(eds) 122ndash29Kaster RA (1988) Guardians of the Language The Grammarian and Society in Late

Antiquity Berkeley Los AngelesKatsouris A (1982) ldquoAeschylusrsquo lsquoOdysseanrsquo Tetralogyrdquo Dioniso 53 47ndash60Kavanagh P (2005) Collected Poems (ed A Quinn) HarmondsworthKazazis JN Rengakos A (eds) (1999) Euphrosyne Studies in Ancient Epic and its Legacy

in Honour of Dimitris N Maronitis StuttgartΚeeley E Sherrard P (1980) Angelos Sikelianos Selected Poems Londonmdash (1995) A Bilingual Collection of Poems by CP Cavafy LondonKeith AM (1994) ldquoElegiac Poetics and Elegiac Puellae in Ovidrsquos Amoresrdquo CW 881 27ndash40Kelly M (ed) (1966) For Service to Classical Studies Essays in Honour of F Letters

Melbourne Canberra SydneyKennedy DF (1993) The Arts of Love Five Studies in the Discourse of Roman Love Elegy

CambridgeKennedy GA (ed) (1989) The Cambridge History of Literary Criticism Vol I Cambridgemdash (1994) A New History of Classical Rhetoric PrincetonKerferd GB (1981) The Sophistic Movement CambridgeKeulen AJ (2001) L Annaeus Seneca Troades Leiden

454 Bibliography

Kindstrand JF (1973) Homer in der zweiten Sophistik UppsalaKinsey TE (1979) ldquoThe Achaemenides Episode in Virgilrsquos Aeneid IIIrdquo Latomus 39 110ndash24Kirk G S (1985) The Iliad A Commentary Vol I Books 1ndash4 CambridgeKlagge JC Smith ND (eds) (1992) Methods of Interpreting Plato and his Dialogue

OxfordKlaras B (1961) ldquoThe Odyssey in a Satirical Trilogy by Skouloudisrdquo Vradyni 2 Nov 1961Klironomos N (2007) His Childhood YearshellipA Journey Paintings inspired by Mikis

Theodorakisrsquo Childhood A Painterrsquos Offer to the Great Composer (Tα παιδικά του χρόνιαhellipένα ταξίδι έργα εμπνευσμένα από τα παιδικά χρόνια του Μίκη Θεοδωράκη προσφοράτου ζωγράφου στο μεγάλο συνθέτη) Athens

Knauer GN (1964) Die Aeneis und Homer Goumlttingenmdash (1981) ldquoVergil and Homerrdquo in H Temporini et al (eds) ANRW XXXI 2 870ndash918Knecht D (1970) Ciris authenticiteacute histoire du texte eacutedition et commentaire critiques

BruggeKnight VH (1995) The Renewal of Epic Responses to Homer in the Argonautica of

Apollonius LeidenKnoche U (1936) ldquoZur Frage der Properzinterpolationrdquo RhM 85 8ndash63Knox PE (ed) (2009) A Companion to Ovid Malden OxfordKoch G (ed) (1986) Studien zur fruumlhchristlichen Kunst III Goumlttinger Orientforschungen 2

GoumlttingenKofidou A (2004) Confluences theacutematiques et techniques chez J Giraudoux et E Ionesco

Diss ThessalonikiKokkinakis G (1961) ldquoOdyssey A Satirical Comedy by Manolis Skouloudisrdquo Acropolis 5

Nov 1961Kolde A Lukinovich A Rey AL (eds) (2005) Κορυφαίῳ ἀνδρί Meacutelanges offerts agrave Andreacute

Hurst GenevaKolker R P (1998) ldquoThe Film Text and Film Formrdquo in J Hill P Church Gibson (eds) 11ndash29Koniaris GL (1973) ldquoAlexander Palamedes Troades SisyphusmdashA Connected Tetralogy A

Connected Trilogy ldquo HSCP 77 85ndash124Konstan D (1985) ldquoPhilia in Euripidesrsquo Electrardquo Phil 129 176ndash85mdash (2003) ldquoBefore Jealousyrdquo in D Konstan NK Rutter (eds) 7ndash28mdash (2006) The Emotions of the Ancient Greeks Toronto LondonKonstan D Rutter NK (eds) (2003) Envy Spite and Jealousy EdinburghKost K (1971) Musaios Hero und Leander BonnKotzia-Panteli P (2002) ldquoForschungsreisen Zu Iamblichusrsquo Protreptikos 40 1ndash11 Pistellirdquo

Phil146 111ndash32Koukoulas L (1961) ldquoOdysseyrdquo Athinaiki 4 Nov 1961Koutoulas A (1998) Theodorakis the Musician (O μουσικός Θεοδωράκης Κείμενα ndash

Εργογραφία ndash Κριτικές 1937ndash1996) AthensKouyoumoutzakis Y (ed) (2007) Universal Harmony Music and Science in Mikis

Theodorakis (Συμπαντική αρμονία μουσική και επιστήμη στον Μίκη Θεοδωράκη)Herakleion

mdash (2007) ldquoMikis Theodorakis The Journeyrdquo in Y Kouyoumoutzakis (ed) 43ndash72Kovacs D (1997) ldquoGods and Men in Euripidesrsquo Trojan Trilogyrdquo Colby Quarterly 33 162ndash76Kracauer S (20042) From Caligari to Hitler A Psychological History of the German Film

Princeton

Bibliography 455

Kramer B (1980) ldquoSchuumlleruumlbung Anapaumlste (Aischylos Psychagogoi)rdquo in M Erler BKramer D Hagedorn R Huumlbner (eds) 11ndash23

Krausse O (1905) De Euripide Aeschyli Instauratore JenaKrischer T (1991) ldquoRezension W Mader Die Psaumis-Oden Pindars (O 4 and O 5)

Innsbruck 1990rdquo AAHG 44 158ndash59mdash (1992) ldquoDie Bogenproberdquo Hermes 120 19ndash25Kronick JG (2006) ldquoThe Ancient Quarrel Revisited Literary Theory and the Return to

Ethicsrdquo Philosophy and Literature 302 436ndash49Kuhrt A (2007) The Persian Empire A Corpus of Sources from the Achaemenid Period Vol

I-II LondonKyriakidis S (2007) Catalogues of Proper Names in Latin Epic Poetry Newcastle upon TyneKyriakou P (2001) ldquoWarrior Vaunts in the Iliadrdquo RhM 144 250ndash76La Penna A (1951) ldquoNote sul linguaggio erotico dellrsquo elegia latinardquo Maia 4 187ndash209mdash (2000) ldquoLrsquoOrdine delle raffigurazioni della guerra Troiana nel tempio di Cartagine

(Aeneid I 469ndash493)rdquo Maia 52 1ndash8Labarbe J (1949) LrsquoHomegravere de Platon LiegravegeLada-Richards I (2002) ldquoThe Subjectivity of Greek Performancerdquo in PE Easterling E Hall

(eds) 395ndash418Laird A (ed) (2006) Oxford Readings in Classical Studies Ancient Literary Criticism OxfordLamberton R (1986) Homer the Theologian Neoplatonist Allegorical Reading and the

Growth of the Epic Tradition Berkeley Los AngelesLamberton R Keaney JJ (eds) (1992) Homerrsquos Ancient Readers The Hermeneutics of

Greek Epicrsquos Earliest Exegetes PrincetonLampert L (2002) ldquoSocratesrsquo Defence of Polytropic Odysseus Lying and Wrong-doing in

Platorsquos Lesser Hippiasrdquo The Review of Politics 642 231ndash60Lange K (2002) Euripides und Homer Untersuchungen zur Homernachwirkung im Elektra

Iphigenie im Taurerland Helena Orestes und Kyklops StuttgartLasserre F Sulliger J (eds) (1976) A Rivier Eacutetudes de litteacuterature grecque GenevaLatacz J Greub T Blome P Wieczorek A (eds) (2008) Homer Der Mythos von Troia in

Dichtung und Kunst MunichLatte K (1935) ldquoDer Thrax des Euphorionrdquo Phil 90 129ndash55Lattimore R (1951) The Iliad of Homer ChicagoLausberg H (1960) Handbuch der literarischen Rhetorik eine Grundlegung der

Literaturwissenschaft Vols I-II MunichLazaridou ndash Elmaloglou I (2004) Μikis Theodorakis His Works in the Period 1937ndash 1960

(Mίκης Θεοδωράκης τo συμφωνικό έργο της περιόδου 1937ndash 1960) Diss AthensLe Sage L (1958) Lrsquooeuvre de Jean Giraudoux University Park PennsylvaniaLeach EW (1966) ldquoNature and Art in Vergilrsquos Second Ecloguerdquo AJPh 87 427ndash45Lear GR (2004) Happy Lives and the Highest Good An Essay on Aristotlersquos Nicomachean

Ethics Princetonmdash (2011) ldquoMimesis and Psychological Change in Republic IIIrdquo in P Destreacutee FG

Herrmann (eds) 195ndash216Lee G (1980) Virgil The Eclogues Londonmdash (1994) Propertius The Poems OxfordLee KH (1976) Euripides Troades London

456 Bibliography

Leeuwen J van (1890) ldquoQuaestiones ad Historiam Scenicam pertinentesrdquo Mnem 1868ndash75

Lehnus L (1975) ldquoUna scena della Ciris (vv 220 ss) Carme e lrsquoEcale di Callimacordquo RIL 109353ndash61

Lenchantin de Gubernatis M (1930) P Vergili Maronis Ciris TorinoLesky A (1925) Alkestis Der Mythus und das Drama ViennaLevin SB (2001) The Ancient Quarrel Between Philosophy and Poetry Revisited Plato and

the Greek Literary Tradition OxfordLeacutevystone D (2005) ldquoLa figure drsquoUlysse chez les Socratiques Socrate polytroposrdquo

Phronesis 50 181ndash214Liddel P (2008) ldquoScholarship and Morality Plutarchrsquos Use of Inscriptionsrdquo Acta of the 7th

International Plutarch Society Congress Rethymno125ndash37Liddel P Low P (eds) (2013) Inscriptions and their Uses in Greek and Latin Literature

OxfordLieberg G (1962) Puella divina die Gestalt der goumlttlichen Geliebten bei Catull im

Zusammenhang der antiken Dichtung AmsterdamLier B (1978) Ad topica carminum amatoriorum symbolae New York LondonLipka M (2001) Language in Vergilrsquos Eclogues Berlin New YorkLivrea E (2000) Nonno di Panopoli Parafrasi del Vangelo di S Giovanni Canto B BolognaLloyd M (1984) ldquoThe Helen Scene in Euripidesrsquo Troadesrdquo CQ 34 303ndash13mdash (1992) The Agon in Euripides Oxfordmdash (1994) Euripides Andromache WarminsterLloyd-Jones H (1981) ldquoNotes on PKoumlln III 125 (Aeschylus Psychagogoi)rdquo ZPE 42 21ndash22mdash (19832) The Justice of Zeus Berkeley Los Angeles Londonmdash (1987) ldquoA Note on Homeric Moralityrdquo CPh 82 307ndash10Lobel E Roberts CH Wegener EP (1952) The Oxyrhynchus Papyri Vol XX LondonLombardo S (2000) Homer Odyssey (introduction by S Murnaghan) IndianapolisLong A A (1997) ldquoMorals and Values in Homerrdquo JHS 90 121ndash39Longley M (2006) Collected Poems LondonLoraux N (1986) The Invention of Athens The Funeral Oration in the Classical City (trans A

Sheridan) Cambridge (Mass) LondonLord AB (20002) The Singer of Tales (re-edited with an introduction by S Mitchell and G

Nagy 1st ed 1960) Cambridge (Mass)Lorenz K (2010) ldquoDialectics at a Standstillrdquo in M Baumbach A Petrovic I Petrovic

(eds) 131ndash48Lowenstam S (1993) ldquoThe Pictures of Junorsquos Temple in the Aeneidrdquo CW 87 37ndash49Lowry E (1991) Thersites A Study in Comic Shame Diss HarvardLuck G (1977) P Ovidius Naso Tristia Vol II Kommentar HeidelbergLudwich Κ (1898) Die Homervulgata als voralexandrinisch erwiesen LeipzigLumpp HM (1963) ldquoDie Arniadas-Inschrift aus Korkyra Homerisches im Epigramm ndash

Epigrammatisches im Homerrdquo Forschungen und Fortschritte 37 212ndash15Luraghi N Foxhall L (2010) ldquoIntroductionrdquo in L Foxhall H-J Gehrke N Luraghi (eds)

9ndash14Luther A (ed) (2005) OdysseendashRezeptionen FrankfurtLyne ROAM (1971) ldquoThe Dating of the Cirisrdquo CQ 21 233ndash53mdash (1978) Ciris A Poem Attributed to Vergil Cambridge

Bibliography 457

mdash (1980) The Latin Love Poets from Catullus to Horace OxfordMaass E (1895) Orpheus MunichMac Goacuteraacutein F (2012ndash13) ldquoApollo and Dionysus in Virgilrdquo Incontri di filologia classica 12

191ndash238Macan RW (1908) Herodotus The Seventh Eighth and Ninth Books LondonMacCoull LSB (2003) ldquoNonnus (and Dioscorus) at the Feast Late Antiquity and Afterrdquo in

D Accorinti P Chuvin (eds) 489ndash500Maciver CA (2012) Quintus Smyrnaeusrsquo Posthomerica Engaging Homer in Late Antiquity

Leiden BostonMackay EA (ed) (1999) Signs of Orality The Oral Tradition and Its Influence in the Greek

and Roman World LeidenMackie H (2003) Graceful Errors Pindar and the Performance of Praise Ann ArborMacKinnon K (1986) Greek Tragedy into Film LondonMader W (1988) Die Psaumis-Oden Pindars (O 4 und O 5) Ein Kommentar InnsbruckMaguire LE (2009) Helen of Troy From Homer to Hollywood Oxford MaldenMahon D (1979) Poems 1962ndash 1978 Oxfordmdash (1990) Selected Poems Londonmdash (2005) Harbour Lights Oldcastle Co MeathΜakris C (2001) Porphyryrsquos De Vita Pythagorica (Πορφύριου Πυθαγόρου βίος) ΑthensMalaerts H (ed) (1998) Le Culte du souverain dans lrsquo Eacutegypte ptoleacutemaϊque au IIIe siegravecle

avant notre egravere LeuvenMaltby R (2002) Tibullus Elegies Cambridgemdash (2006) ldquoMajor Themes and Motifs in Propertiusrsquo Love Poetryrdquo in H-C Guumlnther (ed)

147ndash81mdash (2011) ldquoServius on Stylistic Register in his Virgil Commentariesrdquo in R Ferri (ed)

63ndash74Manolea CP (2004) The Homeric Tradition in Syrianus ThessalonikiMarkantonatos A (ed) (2012) Brillrsquos Companion to Sophocles LeidenMarkantonatos A Tsagalis C (eds) (2008) Ancient Greek Tragedy Theory and Practice

(Αρχαία Ελληνική Τραγωδία Θεωρία και Πράξη) AthensMarkle MM (1976) ldquoSupport of Athenian Intellectuals for Philip A Study of Isocratesrsquo

Philippus and Speusippusrsquo Letter to Philiprdquo JHS 96 80ndash99Marotto A Pozzi D (2005) ldquoLa caduta di Troia e la sua rinascita La documentazione del

restauro dellrsquoedizione italiana del 1911rdquo Cinegrafie 18 103ndash30Marshall B (ed) (1980) Vindex Humanitatis Essays in Honour of JH Bishop ArmidaleMarshall CW (2012) ldquoHomer Helen and the Structure of Euripidesrsquo Trojan Womenrdquo in D

Rosenbloom J Davidson (eds) 31ndash46Martin RP (2005) ldquoEpic as Genrerdquo in JM Foley (ed) 9ndash19Martindale C (1993) Redeeming the Text Latin Poetry and the Hermeneutics of Reception

Cambridgemdash (2006) ldquoIntroduction Thinking through Receptionrdquo in C Martindale RF Thomas

(eds) 1ndash13mdash (2007) ldquoReceptionrdquo in C Kallendorf (ed) 297ndash311mdash (2010) ldquoPerformance Reception Aesthetics or why Reception Studies need Kantrdquo in E

Hall S Harrop (eds) 71ndash84

458 Bibliography

mdash (2013) ldquoReceptionmdasha New Humanism Receptivity Pedagogy the Transhistoricalrdquo CRJ52 169ndash83

Martindale C Thomas RF (eds) (2006) Classics and the Uses of Reception OxfordMalden Victoria

Martinez-Cuadrado J (1986) Ensayo Critico sobre Andromaque de Racine MurciaMarusic J (2011) ldquoPoets and Mimesis in the Republicrdquo in P Destreacutee FG Herrmann (eds)

217ndash40Mason PG (1959) ldquoKassandrardquo JHS 79 80ndash93Masson O (1962) Les fragments du poegravete Hipponax ParisMastronarde DJ (2010) The Art of Euripides Dramatic Technique and Social Context

CambridgeMazzoldi S (2001) Cassandra la vergine e lrsquo indovina Pisa RomeMcClure LK (1999) Spoken Like a Woman Speech and Gender in Athenian Drama

Princetonmdash (2003) Courtesans at Table Gender and Greek Literary Culture in Athenaeus New York

LondonMcDonald M (1983) Euripides in Cinema The Heart Made Visible Philadelphiamdash (2001) ldquoEye of the Camera Eye of the Victim Iphigenia by Euripides and Cacoyannisrdquo

in MM Winkler (ed) 90ndash117mdash (2008) ldquoA New Hope Film as a Teaching Tool for Classicsrdquo in L Hardwick C Stray

(eds) 327ndash41McDonald M Winkler MM (2001) ldquoMichael Cacoyannis and Irene Papas on Greek

Tragedyrdquo in MM Winkler (ed) 72ndash89McHardy F Robson J Harvey D (eds) (2005) Lost Dramas of Classical Athens ExeterMcKeown J C (1987) Ovid Amores Vol I Text and Prolegomena Liverpoolmdash (1989) Ovid Amores Vol II A Commentary on Book One Leedsmdash (1998) Ovid Amores Vol III A Commentary on Book Two LeedsMcLoughlin K (2011) Authoring War The Literary Representation of War from the Iliad to

Iraq CambridgeMelissinos S (1961) ldquoOdysseusrsquo Helmetrdquo in Aristophanic Comedies Strictly for Adults

Athens 1ndash52Melville AD (1990) Ovid The Love Poems OxfordMenegazzi B (1951) ldquoLrsquoAlessandro di Euripiderdquo Dioniso 14 172ndash97Mercier-Campiche M (1954) Le theacuteacirctre de Giraudoux et la condition humaine ParisMeridor R (2000) ldquoCreative Rhetoric in Euripidesrsquo Troadesrdquo CQ 501 16ndash29Mette H J (1963) Der verlorene Aischylos BerlinMeyer BF Sanders EP (eds) (1982) Jewish and Christian Self-Definition III Self Definition

in the Greco-Roman World LondonMeyer E A (1993) ldquoEpitaphs and Citizenship in Classical Athensrdquo JHS 113 99ndash121Michalopoulos AN (2003) ldquoThe Intertextual Fate of a Great Homeric Hero Diomedes in

Vergil (Aen 11252ndash93) and Ovid (Rem 151ndash67)rdquo Acta Ant Hung 43 77ndash86Michel C (2014) Homer und die Tragoumldie zu den Bezuumlgen zwischen Odyssee und

Orestie-Dramen (Aischylos Orestie Sophokles Elektra Euripides Elektra) TuumlbingenMichelakis P (2001) ldquoThe Past as a Foreign Country Greek Tragedy Cinema and the Politics

of Spacerdquo in F Budelmann P Michelakis (eds) 241ndash57mdash (2002) Achilles in Greek Tragedy Cambridge

Bibliography 459

mdash (2004) ldquoGreek Tragedy in Cinema Theatre Politics Historyrdquo in E Hall F MacintoshA Wrigley (eds) 199ndash217

mdash (2006) ldquoReception Performance and the Sacrifice of Iphigeniardquo in C Martindale R FThomas (eds) 219ndash26

mdash (2013) Greek Tragedy on Screen OxfordMichelakis P Wyke M (eds) (2013) The Ancient World in Silent Cinema CambridgeMikalson JD (2005) Ancient Greek Religion Oxford MaldenMiller FJ and Goold G (19842) Ovid Metamorphoses Vols I-II LondonMilobenski E (1964) Der Neid in der griechischen Philosophie LeidenMinchin E (1999) ldquoDescribing and Narrating in Homerrsquos Iliadrdquo in EA Mackay (ed)

49ndash64mdash (2001) Homer and the Resources of Memory Some Applications of Cognitive Theory to

the Iliad and the Odyssey Oxfordmdash (2007) Homeric Voices OxfordMiralles C (1981) ldquoLrsquoiscrizione di Mnesiepes (Arch test 4 Tarditi)rdquo QUCC 38 29ndash46mdash (1988) The Poetry of Hipponax RomeMiralles C Pogravertulas J (1983) Archilochus and the Iambic Poetry RomeMitchell S Nagy G (20002) ldquoIntroduction to the Second Editionrdquo in A B Lord (ed) viindash

xxixMitscherling J (1982) ldquoXenophon and Platordquo CQ 32 468ndash69mdash (2005) ldquoPlatorsquos Misquotation of the Poetsrdquo CQ 55 295ndash98Monoson SS (1998) ldquoRemembering Pericles The Political and Theoretical Import of Platorsquos

Menexenusrdquo Political Theory 26 489ndash513Montiglio S (2011) From Villain to Hero Odysseus in Ancient Thought Ann ArborMontoneri L Romano F (eds) (1986) Gorgia e la sofistica CataniaMoraud Y (1936) ldquoNoticerdquo in Jean Giraudoux La guerre de Troie nrsquoaura pas lieu

Sorbonne 13ndash29Moravcsik JME (1986) ldquoOn Correcting the Poetsrdquo OSAP 4 35ndash47Moravcsik JME Temko P (eds) (1982) Plato on Beauty Wisdom and the Arts TotowaMoreau A (ed) (1992) Lrsquo Initiation Actes du Colloque International de Montpellier 11ndash14

Avril 1991 MontpellierMorgan K (1977) Ovidrsquos Art of Imitation Propertius in the Amores LeidenMorris I Powell B (eds) (1997) A New Companion to Homer LeidenMorrison AD (2007) The Narrator in Archaic Greek and Hellenistic Poetry CambridgeMoss J (2007) ldquoWhat Is Imitative Poetry and Why is It Badrdquo in GRF Ferrari (ed) 415ndash44Mossman J (1995) Wild Justice A Study of Euripidesrsquo Hecuba Oxfordmdash (2005) ldquoWomenrsquos Voicesrdquo in J Gregory (ed) 352ndash65Most GW (2006) Hesiod Theogony Works and Days Testimonia Cambridge (Mass)

Londonmdash (2011) ldquoWhat Ancient Quarrel between Philosophy and Poetryrdquo in P Destreacutee FG

Herrmann (eds) 1ndash20Most GW Norman LF Rabau S (eds) (2009) Reacutevolutions homeacuteriques PisaMouyis A (2010) Mikis Theodorakis Finding Greece in his Music AthensMulhern JJ (1968) ldquoΤρόπος and πολυτροπία in Platorsquos Hippias Minorrdquo Phoenix 22 283ndash88Murdoch I (1977) The Fire and the Sun Why Plato Banished the Artists OxfordMurgatroyd P (1975) ldquoMilitia amoris and the Roman Elegistsrdquo Latomus 34 59ndash75

460 Bibliography

mdash (1980) Tibullus I PietermaritzburgMurray AT Dimock GE (1995) Homer The Odyssey Vols I-II (1st ed by AT Murray

London 1919 revised by GE Dimock) Cambridge (Mass) LondonMurray AT Wyatt WF (1999) Homer Iliad Vols I-II (1st ed by AT Murray London

1924ndash25 revised by WF Wyatt) Cambridge (Mass) LondonMurray G (1932) ldquoThe Trojan Trilogy of Euripides (415 BC)rdquo Meacutelanges Gustave Glotz Paris

II 645ndash56mdash (1946) ldquoEuripidesrsquo Tragedies of 415 BC The Deceitfulness of Liferdquo Greek Studies

Oxford 127ndash48Murray P (1986) Plato On Poetry (Ion Republic 376e-398b9 Republic 595ndash608b10)

Cambridgemdash (2011) ldquoTragedy Women and the Family in Platorsquos Republicrdquo in P Destreacutee FG

Herrmann (eds) 175ndash94Muth S Petrovic I (2013) ldquoMedientheorie als Chance ndash Uumlberlegungen zur historischen

Interpretation von Texten und Bildernrdquo in B Christiansen U Thaler (eds) 281ndash318Mylonopoulos J (ed) (2010) Divine Images and Human Imaginations in Ancient Greece and

Rome LeidenMyrsiades K (ed) (2009) Reading Homer Film and Text MadisonNagy G (1983) ldquoSema and Noesis Some Illustrationsrdquo Arethusa 16 35ndash55mdash (1990) Pindarrsquos Homer The Lyric Possession of an Epic Past Baltimore Londonmdash (1996) Homeric Questions Austinmdash (2009) Homer the Classic Cambridge (Mass) Washington DCNaiden FS (1998) ldquoAlcestis the Ghostrdquo Lexis 16 77ndash85Natsina Ch (2012) ldquoThe Debt towards Aphrodite Female Dedicators and their Interrelations

with the Goddess in Votive Epigrams of the Greek Anthologyrdquo in M A Harder R FRegtuit G C Wakker (eds) 249ndash79

Nauerth C (1986) ldquoSzenen eines verlorenen euripideischen Dramas auf einem koptischenStoffrdquo in G Koch (ed) 39ndash47

Nehamas A (1982) ldquoPlato on Imitation and Poetry in Republic 10rdquo in JME Moravcsik PTemko (eds) 47ndash78

Neitzel H (1975) Homer-Rezeption bei Hesiod BonnNeacutemethy G (1909) Ciris epyllion pseudovergilianum BudapestNicolosi A (2007) Ipponatte lsquoEpodi di Strasburgorsquo Archiloco lsquoEpodi di Coloniarsquo (con unrsquo

appendice su P Oxy 69 4708) BolognaNiditch S (1983) ldquoOral Tradition and Biblical Scholarshiprdquo Oral Tradition 181 43ndash44Niehoff MR (ed) (2012) Homer and the Bible in the Eyes of Ancient Interpreters LeidenNietzsche F ([1874] 1980) On the Advantage and Disadvantage of History for Life (trans P

Preuss) IndianapolisNightingale AW (1995) Genres in Dialogue Plato and the Construct of Philosophy

CambridgeNikoloutsos KP (ed) (2013) Ancient Greek Women in Film OxfordNilsson ΜP (19673) Geschichte der griechischen Religion MunichNisbet RGM Hubbard M (1978) A Commentary on Horace Odes Book II OxfordNisetich F (1989) Pindar and Homer BaltimoreNisters T (2000) Aristotle on Courage Frankfurt am Main

Bibliography 461

OrsquoConnor D (2007) ldquoRewriting the Poets in Platorsquos Charactersrdquo in GRF Ferrari (ed)55ndash89

OrsquoHara JJ (1996) True Names Vergil and the Alexandrian Tradition of EtymologicalWordplay Ann Arbor

OrsquoMeara DJ (ed) (1981) Studies in Aristotle Washington DCmdash (ed) (1985) Platonic Investigations Washington DCOrsquoNeill KN (1999) ldquoOvid and Propertius Reflexive Annotation in Amores 18rdquo Mnem 52

286ndash307Ober J (1989) Mass and Elite in Democratic Athens Rhetoric Ideology and the Power of the

People PrincetonOber J Strauss B (1990) ldquoDrama Political Rhetoric and the Discourse of Athenian

Democracyrdquo in J Winkler F Zeitlin (eds) 237ndash70Ogden D (1996) Greek Bastardy Oxfordmdash (2001a) Greek and Roman Necromancy Princeton Oxfordmdash (2001b) ldquoThe Ancient Greek Oracles of the Deadrdquo Acta Classica 44 167ndash95mdash (ed) (2007) A Companion to Greek Religion Oxford Malden VictoriaOikonomidis K (1961) ldquoOdyssey by M Skouloudisrdquo Ethnos 2 Nov 1961Olson SD (1988) ldquoThe lsquolove duetrsquo in Aristophanesrsquo Ecclesiazusaerdquo CQ 38 328ndash30Ong WJ (1982) Orality and Literacy The Technologizing of the Word LondonOphuijsen JM Stork P (1999) Linguistics into Interpretation Speeches of War in

Herodotus VII 5 amp 8ndash18I LeidenOswald A (2011) Memorial LondonOtis B (1964) Virgil a Study in Civilized Poetry OxfordOtto A (1880) De fabulis Propertianis Part I Diss BratislavaOvink BJH (1931) Philosophische Erklaumlrung der Platonischen Dialoge Meno und Hippias

Minor AmsterdamOwens J (1981) ldquoThe Καλόν in the Aristotelian Ethicsrdquo in DJ OrsquoMeara (ed) 261ndash77Padel R (1992) In and Out of the Mind Greek Images of the Tragic Self PrincetonPage D L (1936) ldquoThe Elegiacs in Euripidesrsquo Andromacherdquo in C Bailey (ed) 206ndash30mdash (1979) Sappho and Alcaeus An Introduction to the Study of Ancient Lesbian Poetry

OxfordPapaioannou S (2005) Epic Succession and Dissension Ovid Metamorphoses

13623ndash 14582 and the Reinvention of the Aeneid Berlin New YorkPapanghelis Th D (1987) Propertius A Hellenistic Poet on Love and Death Cambridgemdash (1995) From Bucolic Eutopia to Political Utopia (Από τη βουκολική ευτοπία στην πολιτική

ουτοπία) Αthensmdash (1999) ldquorelegens errata litora Virgilrsquos Reflexive lsquoOdysseyrsquordquo in JNKazazis A Rengakos

(eds) 275ndash90Papanghelis Th Harrison S Frangoulidis S (eds) (2013) Generic Interfaces in Latin

Literature Encounters Interactions and Tranformations Berlin New YorkPappas N (1989) ldquoSocratesrsquo Charitable Treatment of Poetryrdquo Philosophy and Literature 13

248ndash61Parker J Matthews T (eds) (2011) Tradition Translation Trauma The Classic and the

Modern OxfordParker L (2007) Euripides Alcestis Oxford

462 Bibliography

Parmentier L (1925) ldquoLes Troyennesrdquo in H Greacutegoire L Parmentier (eds) Euripide Vol IVParis

Parry M (1971) The Making of Homeric Verse The Collected Papers of Milman Parry (ed byAdam Parry) Oxford

Partee MH (1981) Platorsquos Poetics The Authority of Beauty UtahPaschalis M (1997) Virgilrsquos Aeneid Semantic Relations and Proper Names OxfordPaton W R (1916ndash1918) The Greek Anthology with an English Translation Vols I-V

Cambridge (Mass) LondonPaul J (2008) ldquoWorking with Film Theories and Methodologiesrdquo in L Hardwick C Stray

(eds) 303ndash14mdash (2013) Film and the Epic Classical Tradition OxfordPavis P (2003) Analyzing Performance Theater Dance and Film (trans D Williams) Ann

ArborPearson L (1962) Popular Ethics in Ancient Greece StanfordPeirano I (2009) ldquoMutati artus Scylla Philomela and the End of Silenusrsquo Song in Virgil

Eclogue 6rdquo CQ 59 187ndash95Pelling C (2006) ldquoHomer and Herodotusrdquo in MJ Clarke BGF Currie ROAM Lyne

(eds) 75ndash104Pelling C (ed) (1990) Characterisation and Individuality in Greek Literature Oxfordmdash (ed) (1997) Greek Tragedy and the Historian OxfordPenzel J (2006) Variation und Imitation ein literarischer Kommentar zu den Epigrammen

des Antipater von Sidon und des Archias von Antiocheia TrierPeraki-Kyriakidou H (2006) ldquoAntonomasia and Metonymy in the Proem to Virgilrsquos Georgicsrdquo

in J Booth R Maltby (eds) 83ndash99mdash (2010) ldquoDionysus in the Service of Virgilrsquos Bucolic Poetry (O Διόνυσος στην υπηρεσία

της βουκολικής ποιητικής του Βιργιλίου)rdquo in S Tsitsiridis (ed) 555ndash82mdash (2013) ldquoVirgilrsquos Eclogue 460ndash63 A Space of Generic Enrichmentrdquo in Th Papanghelis

S Harrison S Frangoulidis S (eds) 217ndash230mdash (forthcoming) ldquoThe Smile of Acanthus as an Indicator of Poetics The Case of Virgil (Το

γέλιο του ακάνθου ως δείκτης ποιητικής Η περίπτωση του Βιργιλίου)rdquo in Proceedingsof the IXth Panhellenic Symposium of Latin Literature Athens

Perlman S (1964) ldquoQuotations from Poetry in Attic Orators of the Fourth Century BCrdquo AJPh85155ndash172

Perris S (2011) ldquoProems Codas and Formalism in Homeric Receptionrdquo CRJ 32 189ndash212Pertusi A (1952) ldquoIl significato della trilogia troiana di Euripiderdquo Dioniso 15 251ndash73Perysinakis ΙΝ (2004) ldquoHomerrsquos Iliad I A Reading in the Poetrsquos Language (Ομήρου Ιλιάδα Ι

Μια ανάγνωση με τη γλώσσα του ποιητή)rdquo Seminario 30 157ndash74mdash (2006) ldquoArchaic Moral Values and Political Behaviour in the Early and Middle Dialogues

of Plato and in the Laws (Αρχαϊκές ηθικές αξίες και πολιτική συμπεριφορά στουςπρώιμους και μέσους διαλόγους του Πλάτωνα και τους Νόμους)rdquo Αriadne 12 69ndash92

mdash (2009) ldquoThe Reception of Ancient in Modern Greek Literature An Itineraryrdquo in ThPylarinos (ed) 195ndash216

Petrain D (2006) ldquoMoschusrsquo Europa and the Narratology of Ecphrasisrdquo in MA Harder RFRegtuit GC Wakker (eds) 249ndash70

Petrakou K (1999) The Theatrical Contests 1870ndash1925 (Οι Θεατρικοί Διαγωνισμοί1870ndash1925) Athens

Bibliography 463

mdash (2007) Theatrical Turning Points and Courses (Θεατρικές (σ)τάσεις και πορείες) AthensPetrovic A (2007) Kommentar zu den Simonideischen Versinschriften Leiden Bostonmdash (2013) ldquoInscribed Epigrams in Orators and Epigrammatic Collectionsrdquo in P Liddel P

Low (eds) 197ndash213Petrovic I (2006) ldquoDelusions of Grandeur Homer Zeus and the Telchines in Callimachusrsquo

Reply (Aitia Fr 1) and Iambus 6rdquo AampA 52 16ndash41Pfeiffer E (1933) Virgilrsquos Bukolika Untersuchungen zum Form-problem StuttgartPfeiffer R (1949) Callimachus Vol I OxfordPfeijffer IL (2004) ldquoPindar and Bacchylides ldquo in IJF De Jong A Bowie R Nuumlnlist (eds)

213ndash32Phillips E D (1953) ldquoOdysseus in Italyrdquo JHS 73 53ndash67Phillips J (1987) ldquoPlatorsquos Use of Homer in the Hippias Minorrdquo Favonius 1 21ndash30mdash (1989) ldquoXenophonrsquos Memorabilia 42rdquo Hermes 117 365ndash70Pickard-Cambridge A (19882) The Dramatic Festivals of Athens (revised with a new

supplement by J Goold and DM Lewis) OxfordPigeaud J (1983) ldquoLa Meacutetamorphose de Scylla (Ciris 490ndash507)rdquo LEC 51 125ndash31Pirenne-Delforge V (1996) ldquoLes Charites agrave Athegravenes et dans lrsquo icircle de Cosrdquo Kernos 9

195ndash214mdash (2010) ldquoGreek Priests and lsquoCult Statuesrsquo in how far are they Unnecessaryrdquo in J

Mylonopoulos (ed) 121ndash41Pistrick E Scaldaferri N Schwoumlrer G (eds) (2011) Audiovisual Media and Identity Issues

in Southeastern Europe Newcastle upon TynePlanck H (1840) De Euripidis Didascalia Troica GoumlttingenPlaninc V (2003) Plato through Homer Poetry and Philosophy in the Cosmological

Dialogues MissouriPoole A (1976) ldquoTotal Disaster Euripidesrsquo The Trojan Womenrdquo Arion 3 257ndash87Poole W (1990) ldquoMale Homosexuality in Euripidesrdquo in A Powell (ed) 108ndash50Porter JI (2004a) ldquoNietzsche Homer and the Classical Traditionrdquo in P Bishop (ed) 7ndash26mdash (2004b) ldquoHomer The History of an Ideardquo in RL Fowler (ed) 324ndash43Powell A (ed) (1990) Euripides Women and Sexuality LondonPozzi D Wickersham J (eds) (1991) Myth and the Polis IthacaPratt LH (1993) Lying and Poetry from Homer to Pindar Falsehood and Deception in

Archaic Greek Poetics Ann ArborPrince C Kerr (2008) ldquoPoeta sovrano Horizons of Homer in Twentieth-Century Englishndash

Language Poetryrdquo in The Homerizon Conceptual Interrogations in Homeric StudiesWashington Center for Hellenic Studieshttpchsharvardedupublicationssecclassicsssp

Psychopedis Y (2008) Nostos (NP Goulandris Foundation-Museum of Cycladic Art) AthensPucci P (1987) Odysseus Polutropos Intertextual Readings in the Odyssey and the Iliad

IthacaPuchner W (2005) Courses and Turning-points Ten Theatrological Essays (Πορείες και

Σταθμοί Δέκα Θεατρολογικά Μελετήματα) Athensmdash (2010) Landscapes of the Soul and Myths of the City Iakovos Kambanellisrsquo Theatrical

Universe (Tοπία ψυχής και μύθοι πολιτείας το θεατρικό σύμπαν του ΙάκωβουΚαμπανέλλη) Athens

Purkis J (1992) ldquoReading Homer Todayrdquo in Emlyn-JonesHardwickPurkis (eds) 1ndash18

464 Bibliography

Putnam M (1998) Virgilrsquos Epic Designs New HavenPylarinos Th (ed) (2009) Greek Antiquity and Modern Greek Literature (Ελληνική αρχαιότητα

και νεοελληνική λογοτεχνία) Ιonian University Department of History ConferenceProceedings (Corfu 30 Οctober-1 Νovember 2008) Corfu

Quinn K (1968) Vergilrsquos Aeneid A Critical Description LondonRace W H (1990) Style and Rhetoric in Pindarrsquos Odes Atlantamdash (2009) Apollonius Rhodius Argonautica Cambridge (Mass) LondonRacevskis R (2008) Tragic Passages Jean Racinersquos Art of the Threshold New JerseyRacine J (1994) Andromache (trans into Greek by S Paschalis) AthensRadt S (20092) Tragicorum Graecorum Fragmenta (TrGF) Vol III Aeschylus GoumlttingenRamminger J (1991) ldquoImitation and Allusion in the Achaemenides Scene (Vergil Aeneid

3588ndash691)rdquo AJPh 1121 53ndash71Ramphos S (1978) The Exile of Poets A Platonic Paradox (H εξορία των ποιητών ένα

πλατωνικό παράδοξο) AthensRaubitschek AE (1968) ldquoDas Denkmal-Epigramrdquo LrsquoEacutepigramme Grecque (Entr Fond Hardt

14) 1ndash27Rayor DJ (2004) The Homeric Hymns Berkeley Los Angeles LondonReardon B (1996) ldquoCharitonrdquo in G Schmeling (ed) 309ndash35Reckford KJ (1974) ldquoPhaedra and Pasiphae The Pull Backwardrdquo TAPhA 104 307ndash28Redfield JM (19942) Nature and Culture in the Iliad North CarolinaRehm R (1994) Marriage to Death The Conflation of Marriage and Death Rituals in Greek

Tragedy Princetonmdash (2002) The Play of Space Spatial Transformation in Greek Tragedy PrincetonReilly JH (1978) Jean Giraudoux BostonReinhardt T (2006) ldquoPropertius and Rhetoricrdquo in H-C Guumlnther (ed) 199ndash216Rengakos A (1993) Der Homertext und die hellenistischen Dichter Stuttgartmdash (1994) Apollonios Rhodios und die antike Homererklaumlrung MunichRessel M (2000) ldquoLe metamorfosi del mito di Scillardquo Myrtia 15 5ndash26Revermann M (2013) ldquoParaepic Comedy Points and Practicesrdquo in E Bakola L Prauscello

M Telograve (eds) 101ndash28Reynolds M (2011) The Poetry of Translation From Chaucer and Petrarch to Homer and

Logue OxfordRhodes PJ (1981) A Commentary on the Aristotelian Athenaion Politeia Oxfordmdash (20112) A History of the Classical Greek World 478ndash323 BC Oxford MaldenRichardson L jr (1977) Propertius Elegies I-IV NormanRichardson N J (1974) The Homeric Hymn to Demeter Oxfordmdash (1993) The Iliad A Commentary (General Editor GS Kirk) Vol VI Books 21ndash24

CambridgeRicks D (1989) The Shade of Homer A Study in Modern Greek Poetry CambridgeRiemer P (1989) Die Alkestis des Euripides Untersuchungen zur tragischen Form FrankfurtRieu EV (1950) The Iliad HarmondsworthRitooacutek Z (1993) ldquoZur Trojanischen Trilogie des Euripidesrdquo Gymnasium 100 109ndash25Rivier A (1975) ldquoEuripide et Pasiphaerdquo in F Lasserre J Sulliger (eds) 43ndash60Robert C (1881) Bild und Lied BerlinRobert L (1966) ldquoSur un decret et sur un papyrus concernant des cultes royauxrdquo in AE

Samuel (ed) 175ndash211

Bibliography 465

Roberts M (1985) Biblical Epic and Rhetorical Paraphrase in Late Antiquity WiltshireRobertson N (1999) ldquoThe Stoa of the Hermesrdquo ZPE 127 167ndash72Robichez J (1976) Le theacuteacirctre de Giraudoux ParisRocha-Pereira MH (1989ndash902) Pausaniae Graeciae Descriptio Vols I-III LeipzigRogers K (1993) ldquoAristotlersquos Conception of Τὸ Καλόνrdquo Ancient Philosophy 13 355ndash71mdash (1994) ldquoAristotle on the Motive of Couragerdquo Southern Journal of Philosophy 32

303ndash13Roisman HM (2006) ldquoHelen in the Iliad Causa Belli and Victim of Warrdquo AJPh 127 1ndash36Rolley C (1994) La Sculpture Grecque 1 Des origines au milieu de Vegraveme siegravecle ParisRoochnik D (1990) ldquoThe Quarrel Between Philosophy and Poetry Studies in Ancient

Thoughtrdquo Ancient Philosophy 10 301ndash04Rose MA (1979) Parody Metafiction An Analysis of Parody as a Critical Mirror to the

Writing and Reception of Fiction Londonmdash (1993) Parody Ancient Modern and Post-modern CambridgeRose PW (2012) Class in Archaic Greece CambridgeRosen RM (1987) ldquoA Poetic Inspiration Scene in Hipponaxrdquo AJPh 1092 174ndash79mdash (1988) ldquoHipponax Boupalos and the Conventions of the Psogosrdquo TAPhA 118 29ndash41mdash (1990) ldquoHipponax and the Homeric Odysseusrdquo Eikasmos 1 11ndash25mdash (2007) Making Mockery The Poetics of Ancient Satire OxfordRosen RM Sluiter I (eds) (2003) Andreia Studies in Manliness and Courage in Classical

Antiquity LeidenRosen RM Sluiter I (eds) (2008) Kakos Badness and Anti-value in Classical Antiquity

LeidenRosen S (1988) The Quarrel Between Philosophy and Poetry Studies in Ancient Greek

Thought New YorkRosenbloom D Davidson J (eds) (2012) Greek Drama IV Texts Contexts Performance

OxfordRotstein A (2010) The Idea of Iambos OxfordRubin DC (1995) Memory in Oral Traditions The Cognitive Psychology of Epic Ballads and

Counting-out Rhymes New YorkRudolph KC (2010) ldquoHomeric Criticism in the Hippias Minorrdquo

httpscamwsorgmeeting2010programabstracts06B1RudolphpdfRuhl M (2000) Die Darstellung von Gefuumlhlsentwicklungen in den Elegien des Properz

GoumlttingenRuiz-Montero C (1996) ldquoThe Rise of the Ancient Novelrdquo in G Schmeling (ed) 29ndash85Rundin J (1996) ldquoA Politics of Eating Feasting in Early Greek Societyrdquo AJPh 117 179ndash215Russell D (1990) ldquoEthos in Oratory and Rhetoricrdquo in C Pelling (ed) 197ndash212Russo J Fernaacutendez-Galiano M Heubeck A (1992) A Commentary on Homerrsquos Odyssey

Vol III OxfordRusten JS (1982) ldquoThe Aeschylean Avernus Notes on P Koumlln 3125rdquo ZPE 45 33ndash38Rutherford RB (1996) Homer CambridgeSabot AF (1976) Ovide poegravete de lrsquoamour dans ses œuvres de jeunesse ParisSakellariou Ch (1990) The Sleep of the Lotus-Eaters AthensSalkever SC (1993) ldquoSocratesrsquo Aspasian Oration The Play of Philosophy and Politics in

Platorsquos Menexenusrdquo American Political Science Review 87 133ndash43

466 Bibliography

Salvatore A (1955) Studi sulla tradizione manoscritta e sul testo della Ciris II Commentarioe testo critico Napoli

mdash (1984) ldquoEchi degli Aratea nella Cirisrdquo Ciceroniana 5 237ndash41Samuel AE (ed) (1966) Essays in Honor of CBradford Welles New HavenSansone D (2009) ldquoEuripidesrsquo New Song The First Stasimon of Trojan Womenrdquo in JRC

Cousland JR Hume (eds) 193ndash203Saunders T (2008) Bucolic Ecology Virgilrsquos Eclogues and the Environmental Literary

Tradition LondonScaldaferri N (2011) ldquoA Tool for Research a Source for Identity Construction Considerations

and Controversies on the Use of Audiovisual Mediardquo in E Pistrick N Scaldaferri GSchwoumlrer (eds) 14ndash36

Scarcella AM (1959) ldquoLetture Euripidee Le Troaderdquo Dioniso 22 60ndash70Scarth EA (2008) Mnemotechnics and Virgil The Art of Memory and Remembering

SaarbruumlckenSchein SL (1984) The Mortal Hero Berkeley Los Angelesmdash (ed) (1995) Reading the Odyssey Selected Interpretive Essays PrincetonSchiesaro A (2003) The Passions in Play Thyestes and the Dynamics of Senecan Drama

CambridgeSchmeling G (ed) (1996) The Novel in the Ancient World Leiden New York CologneSchmid W Staumlhlin O (1940) Geschichte der griechischen Literatur Vol I 3 MunichSchmitz Th (1992) ldquoDatierung und Anlaszlig der vierten Olympischen Ode Pindarsrdquo Hermes

120 142ndash47mdash (1994) ldquoNoch einmal zum Mythos in Pindars vierter olympischer Oderdquo RhM 137

209ndash17Schoumlll A (1839) Beitraumlge zur Geschichte der griechischen Poesie BerlinSchubert P (ed) (2012) Proceedings of the 26th International Congress of Papyrology

GenevaScodel R (1980) The Trojan Trilogy of Euripides Goumlttingenmdash (1992) ldquoInscriptions Absence and Memory Epic and Early Epitaphrdquo SIFC 10 57ndash76mdash (2002) Listening to Homer Tradition Narrative and Audience Ann ArborScourfield JHD (ed) (2007) Texts and Culture in Late Antiquity WalesSeeck GA (2008) Euripides Alkestis Berlin New YorkSegal C (1971) ldquoAndromachersquos anagnorisis Formulaic Artistry in Iliad 22437ndash476rdquo HSCP

75 33ndash57mdash (1978) ldquoThe Myth was Saved Reflections on Homer and the Mythology of Platorsquos

Republicrdquo Hermes 106 315ndash36mdash (19972) Dionysiac Poetics and Euripidesrsquo Bacchae New JerseySeidensticker B (1982) Palintonos Harmonia Studien zu komischen Elementen in der

griechischen Tragoumldie GoumlttingenSeleškovic MT (1968) ldquoKopitareva prepiska sa Fridrihom Volfomrdquo Kovčežiċ 8 109ndash13Sens A (2011) Asclepiades of Samos Epigrams and Fragments OxfordSeveryns A (1928) Le Cycle eacutepique dans lrsquoEacutecole drsquoAristarque Liegravege ParisShapiro A Burian P (2009) Trojan Women by Euripides OxfordSharrock A Morales H (2000) Intratextuality Greek and Roman Textual Traditions OxfordSickle J van (1975) ldquoThe new erotic fragment of Archilochusrdquo QUCC 20 125ndash56Sikelianos A (1980) Prose (Πεζός λόγος) Vol II Athens

Bibliography 467

mdash (1981) Prose (Πεζός λόγος) Vol III Athensmdash (19995) Lyric Life (Λυρικός βίος) Vol I Athensmdash (20034) Lyric Life (Λυρικός βίος) Vol II AthensSilk MS (ed) (1996) Tragedy and the Tragic Oxfordmdash (20042) Homer The Iliad CambridgeSkiadas A (1965) Homer im griechischen Epigramm AthensSkouloudis M (1961) Odyssey AthensSkouteropoulos ΝΜ (1995) Plato Hippias Minor (Πλάτωνος Ιππίας Ελάττων) ΑthensSkutsch F (1901) Aus Vergils Fruumlhzeit LeipzigSkutsch O (1968) Studia Enniana Londonmdash (1985) The Annals of Quintus Ennius OxfordSlings S R (1991) ldquoThe Quiet Life in Euripidesrsquo Antioperdquo in H Hofmann MA Harder

(eds) 137ndash52Small JP (1995) ldquoArtificial Memory and the Writing Habits of the Literaterdquo Helios 222

159ndash66mdash (1997) Wax Tablets of the Mind Cognitive Studies of Memory and Literature in Classical

Antiquity London New YorkSmith A (2010) ldquoPorphyry and his schoolrdquo in LP Gerson (ed) I 325ndash57Smith RA (1997) Poetic Allusion and Poetic Embrace in Ovid and Virgil Ann ArborSnell B (1937) Euripides Alexandros und andere Strassburger Papyri mit Fragmenten

griechischer Dichter Hermes Einzelschr 5 BerlinSobchack V (1990) ldquoSurge and Splendor a Phenomenology of the Historical Epicrdquo

Representations 29 24ndash49Sokratous K (1984) Penelope and her Suitors NicosiaSolmsen F (1984) ldquoPhren kardia psyche in Greek Tragedyrdquo in D E Gerber (ed) 265ndash74Solomon J (2001) The Ancient World in Cinema New Haven Londonmdash (2007) ldquoThe Vacillations of the Trojan Myth Popularization and Classicization Variation

and Codificationrdquo IJCT 143ndash4 482ndash534Sommerstein A H (2007) Aristophanes Ecclesiazusae Warminstermdash (2008) Aeschylus Fragments London Cambridge (Mass)mdash (2015) ldquoTragedy and the Epic Cyclerdquo in M Fantuzzi C Tsagalis (eds) 461ndash86Sopina NR (1986) ldquoNew Light on the Alexander of Euripides and its Place in Euripidean

Dramardquo Vestnik Drevnej Istorii 176 117ndash30Sotiriou M (1998) Pindarus Homericus GoumltttingenSourvinou-Inwood C (1995) lsquoReadingrsquo Greek Death OxfordSpanoudakis K (2004) ldquoAdesp Pap Eleg SH 964 Partheniusrdquo APF 50 37ndash41Spence JD (1984) The Memory Palace of Matteo Ricci New YorkSpies A (1930) Militat omnis amans Diss TuumlbingenSprague R K (1962) Platorsquos Use of Fallacy New YorkStahl H-P (1985) Propertius ldquoLoverdquo and ldquoWarrdquo Individual and State under Augustus

BerkeleyStanford WB (1954) The Ulysses Theme Oxfordmdash (1959) Homer Odyssey Books I-XII BristolStansbury- Orsquo Donnell M (1989) ldquoPolygnotosrsquos Iliupersis A NewReconstructionrdquo AJA 93 203ndash15mdash (1990) ldquoPolygnotosrsquos Nekyia A Reconstruction and Analysisrdquo AJA 94 213ndash35

468 Bibliography

Stegemann V (1930) Astrologie und Universalgeschichte Studien und Interpretationen zuden Dionysiaka des Nonnos von Panopolis Leipzig

Steidle W (1968) Studien zum antiken Drama unter besonderer Beruumlcksichtigung desBuumlhnenspiels Munich

Stein H (1889) Herodotos vierter Band Buch VII BerlinSteiner DT (2008) ldquoBeetle Tracks Entomology Scatology and the Discourse of Abuserdquo in

RM Rosen I Sluiter (eds) 59ndash117mdash (2010) Odyssey Books XVII-XVIII CambridgeStephens S (2004) ldquoFor you Arsinoehelliprdquo in B Acosta-Hughes E Kosmetatou M

Baumbach (eds) 161ndash76Stevens PT (1971) Euripides Andromache OxfordStewart A (1990) Greek Sculpture An Exploration London YaleStewart J A (1892) Notes on the Nicomachean Ethics of Aristotle OxfordStinton TCW (1965) Euripides and the Judgement of Paris LondonStoumlssl F (1968) Euripides Die Tragoumldien und Fragmente Vol II ZurichStrauss Clay J (forthcoming) ldquoHomerrsquos Epigraph Iliad 7 87ndash91rdquo Phil 159Stroh W (1971) Die roumlmische Liebeselegie als werbende Dichtung AmsterdamStrohm H (1957) Euripides Interpretationen zur dramatischen Form MunichStruck PT (2004) Birth of the Symbol Ancient Readers at the Limits of Their Texts

PrincetonSullivan SD (1989) ldquoThe Extended Use of Psyche in the Greek Lyric Poetsrdquo La parola del

passato 44 241ndash62Swanger D (1997) ldquoThe Metaphysics of Poetry Subverting the lsquoAncient Quarrelrsquo and

Recasting the Problemrdquo Journal of Aesthetic Education 313 55ndash64Syndikus HP (2006) ldquoThe Second Bookrdquo in H-C Guumlnther (ed) 245ndash318mdash (2010) Die Elegien des Properz DarmstadtSzaacutedeczky-Kardoss S (1959) Testimonia de Mimnermi Vita et Carminibus (Acta Universitatis

Szegedinensis Sectio Antiqua 1959 Minora Opera ad studium antiquitatis pertinentia 2)Szeged

Tanner S (2010) In Praise of Platorsquos Poetic Imagination LanhamTaplin O (1977) The Stagecraft of Aeschylus The Dramatic Use of Exits and Entrances in

Greek Tragedy Oxfordmdash (1980) ldquoThe Shield of Achilles within the Iliadrdquo GampR 27 1ndash21mdash (1992) Homeric Soundings Oxfordmdash (2007) ldquoSome Assimilations of the Homeric Simile in Late Twentieth- Century Poetryrdquo

in B Graziosi E Greenwood (eds) 177ndash90Tar I Mayer P (eds) (2005) Studia Catulliana In memoriam Stephani Caroli Horvath

(1931ndash 1966) SzegedTarrant D (1951) ldquoPlatorsquos Use of Quotation and Other Illustrative Materialrdquo CQ 45 59ndash67Taylor AE (1926) Plato The Man and his Work LondonTaylor CCW (2006) Nicomachean Ethics Books II-IV OxfordTelograve M (2002) ldquoPer una grammatica dei gesti nella tragedia greca Irdquo MD 48 9ndash75Terzakis A (1961) ldquoOdyssey by M Skouloudisrdquo To Vima 5 Nov 1961Theodorakis M (1986) The Ways of the Archangel (Οι δρόμοι του Aρχαγγέλου) Vol I

Athensmdash (1993) 40 Songs for Children (40 τραγούδια για παιδάκια και παιδιά) Athens

Bibliography 469

mdash (1997) Poetry Set to Music Songs (Mελοποιημένη ποίηση Τραγούδια) Vol I Athensmdash (2002) Where can I find my Soul (Πού να βρω την ψυχή μου) Athensmdash (2007) ldquoUniversal Harmony (Συμπαντική αρμονία)rdquo in Y Kouyoumoutzakis (ed)

75ndash102Thill A (ed) (1980) Lrsquoeacuteleacutegie romaine Enracinement Thegravemes Diffusion MulhouseThomas E (1964) ldquoVariations on a Military Theme in Ovidrsquos Amoresrdquo GampR 11 151ndash65Thomas R (2000) Herodotus in Context Ethnography Science and the Art of Persuasion

CambridgeThomas RF (1983) ldquoVirgilrsquos Ecphrastic Centrepiecesrdquo HSCP 87 175ndash84mdash (1988) Virgil Georgics Vol I Books I-II Cambridgemdash (1998) ldquoMelodious Tears Sepulchral Epigram and Generic Mobilityrdquo in MA Harder

RF Regtuit GC Wakker (eds) 205ndash23Thrylos A (1980) (review of 1961) ldquoM Skouloudis Odyssey a Satirical Comedy in Three

Partsrdquo Greek Theatre (Ελληνικό Θέατρο) Vol IX (1962ndash63) Athens 13ndash14mdash (1981) (review of 1966) ldquoD Christodoulou Hotel Circe a Play in Two Parts and Five

Picturesrdquo in Greek Theatre (Ελληνικό Θέατρο) Vol X (1964ndash66) Athens 387ndash89Tilg S (2010) Chariton of Aphrodisias and the Invention of the Greek Love Novel OxfordTimpanaro S (1996) ldquoDallrsquoAlexandros di Euripide allrsquoAlexander di Enniordquo RFIC 124 5ndash70Todd S C (2000) Lysias Austinmdash (2007) A Commentary on Lysias Speeches 1ndash11 OxfordTrammel Ε (194142) ldquoThe Mute Alcestisrdquo CJ 37 144ndash50Truumlmpy C (2010) ldquoObservations on the Dedicatory and Sepulchral Epigrams and their Early

Historyrdquo in M Baumbach A Petrovic I Petrovic (eds) 167ndash80Trzaskoma S (2010) ldquoChariton and Tragedy Reconsiderations and New Evidencerdquo AJPh 131

219ndash31Tsagalis C (2008a) Inscribing Sorrow Fourth-century Attic Funerary Epigrams Berlin New

Yorkmdash (2008b) The Oral Palimpsest Cambridge (Mass)mdash (2008c) ldquoTransformations of Myth The Trojan Cycle in the Three Great Tragic Poets

(Μεταμορφώσεις του Μύθου Ο Τρωικός Κύκλος στους Τρεις Μεγάλους Τραγικούς)rdquo inA Markantonatos C Tsagalis (eds) 33ndash115

Tsitsiridis S (ed) (2010) Parachoregema Studies on Ancient Theatre in Honour of ProfessorGregory M Sifakis Herakleion

Uhl A (1998) Servius als Sprachlehrer zur Sprachrichtigkeit in der exegetischen Praxis desspaumltantiken Grammatikerunterrichts Goumlttingen

Urmson JO (1982) ldquoPlato and the Poetsrdquo in JME Moravcsik P Temko (eds) 125ndash36Usher S (1990) Isocratesrsquo Panegyrius and To Nicocles Warminstermdash (1999) Greek Oratory Tradition and Originality Oxfordmdash (2007) ldquoSymbouleutic Oratoryrdquo in I Worthington (ed) 220ndash35Usher S Najock D (1982) ldquoA Statistical Study of Authorship in the Corpus Lysiacumrdquo

Computers and the Humanities 16 85ndash105Ussher RG (1973) Aristophanes Ecclesiazusae OxfordValakas K (1987) Homeric Mimesis and the Ajax of Sophocles Diss CambridgeVan der Valk M (1963ndash64) Researches on the Text and Scholia of the Iliad Vols I-II

LeidenVan Lieshout RGA (1980) Greeks on Dreams Utrecht

470 Bibliography

Van Steen G (2001) ldquoPlaying by the Censorsrsquo Rules Classical Drama revived under theGreek Junta (1967ndash74)rdquo Journal of the Hellenic Diaspora 271ndash2 133ndash94

mdash (2011) Theatre of the Condemned Classical Tragedy on Greek Prison Islands OxfordVandiver E (2010) Stand in the Trench Achilles Classical Receptions in British Poetry of the

Great War OxfordVarikas V (1961) ldquoThe Odyssey on stagerdquo Ta Nea 15 Nov 1961mdash (1966) ldquoHotel Circerdquo Ta Nea 3 May 1966Vasaly A (1993) Representations Images of the World in Ciceronian Oratory BerkeleyVellacott P (1975) Ironic Drama A Study of Euripidesrsquo Method and Meaning CambridgeVenuti L (2011) ldquoThe Poetrsquos Version or An Ethics of Translationrdquo Translation Studies 42

230ndash247Vermeule E (1979) Aspects of Death in Early Greek Art and Poetry BerkeleyVernant JP Vidal-Naquet P (1986) Mythe et trageacutedie en Gregravece ancienne ParisVerrall AW (1895) Euripides the Rationalist A Study in Art and Religion CambridgeVian F (1990) Nonnos de Panopolis Les Dionysiaques Vol IX Chants XXV-XXIX ParisVlastos G (ed) (1971) Philosophy of Socrates New Yorkmdash (1991) Socrates Ironist and Moral Philosopher IthacaVollgraff G (1921) ldquoΕκ μύρτου κλαδίrdquo Mnem 49 246ndash50Vox O (1975) ldquoEpigrammi in Omerordquo Belfagor 30 67ndash70Wade-Gery HT (1933) ldquoClassical Epigrams and Epitaphs A Study of the Kimonian Agerdquo JHS

53 71ndash104Walcot P (1973) ldquoThe Funeral Speech A Study of Valuesrdquo GampR 20 111ndash21mdash (1978) Envy and the Greeks A Study of Human Behaviour Warminstermdash (1996) ldquoContinuity and Tradition The Persistence of Greek Valuesrdquo GampR 43 169ndash77Walcott D (1990) Omeros Londonmdash (1993) The Odyssey A Stage Version LondonWallace MB (1984) ldquoThe Metres of Early Greek Epigramsrdquo in DE Gerber (ed) 303ndash15Walters KR (1980) ldquoRhetoric as Ritual The Semiotics of the Attic Funeral Orationsrdquo

Florilegium 2 1ndash27Webb R (2009) Ekphrasis Imagination and Persuasion in Ancient Rhetorical Theory and

Practice Farnham BurlingtonWebster TBL (1966) ldquoEuripidesrsquo Trojan Trilogyrdquo in M Kelly (ed) 207ndash13Weil R (1955) ldquoEacuteschine lecteur de Platonrdquo REG 68 xiiWeiss R (1981) ldquoὉ Αγαθός as Δυνατός in the Hippias Minorrdquo CQ 31 287ndash304Wells JB (2009) Pindarrsquos Verbal Art An Ethnographic Study of Epinician Style Cambridge

(Mass) LondonWendel C (19582) Scholia in Apollonium Rhodium vetera BerlinWest D (1990) Virgil The Aeneid Londonmdash (2002) Horace Odes III OxfordWest M L (1966) Hesiod Theogony Oxfordmdash (1974) Studies in Greek Elegy and Iambus Berlinmdash (1982) Greek Metre Oxfordmdash (1989ndash19922) Iambi et Elegi Graeci Vols I-II Oxfordmdash (1998ndash2000) Homerus Ilias Vols I-II Stuttgart Leipzigmdash (2013) The Epic Cycle A Commentary on the Lost Troy Epics OxfordWest S (1967) The Ptolemaic Papyri of the Iliad Cologne Opladen

Bibliography 471

mdash (1987) ldquoAnd it came to pass that Pharaoh dreamed Notes on Herodotus 2139 141rdquo CQ37 262ndash71

mdash (1988) A Commentary on Homerrsquos Odyssey Vol I Introduction and Books I-VIII OxfordWheeler AL Goold GP (19882) Ovid Tristia Epistulae ex Ponto Cambridge (Mass)Whitaker R (1983) Myth and Personal Experience in Roman Love-elegy GoumlttingenWhitby M (2007) ldquoThe Bible Hellenized Nonnusrsquo Paraphrase of St Johnrsquos Gospel and

Eudociarsquos Homeric Centosrdquo in JHD Scourfield (ed) 195ndash231White H (1985) New Essays in Hellenistic Poetry Amsterdammdash (2006) ldquoStudies in the Text of Latin Poets of the Golden Agerdquo Minerva 19 175ndash92Whitman CH (1958) Homer and the Heroic Tradition CambridgeWhitmarsh T (2010) ldquoProse Fictionrdquo in JJ Clauss M Cuypers (eds) 395ndash412Wiener MH (2011) ldquoMycenaerdquo in M Finkelberg (ed) 535ndash38Wigodsky M (1972) Vergil and Early Latin Poetry WiesbadenWikeacuten E (1937) Die Kunde der Hellenen von dem Land und den Voumllkern der

Apenninenhalbinsel bis 300 vChr LundWilamowitz-Moellendorf U von (19062) Griechische Tragoumldien Vol III Berlinmdash (1914) Aischylos Interpretationen BerlinWillcock M (1997) ldquoNeoanalysisrdquo in I Morris B Powell (eds) 174ndash89Willi A (ed) (2002) The Language of Greek Comedy OxfordWilliams B (1993) Shame and Necessity BerkeleyWilliams F (1978) Callimachus Hymn to Apollo A Commentary OxfordWilliams G (1983) Technique and Ideas in the Aeneid New Haven LondonWilliams RD (1962) P Vergili Maronis Aeneidos Liber Tertius Oxfordmdash (1980a) ldquo Review on Lyne 1978rdquo JRS 70 247mdash (1980b) ldquoVirgil and Homerrdquo in B Marshall (ed) 170ndash76Wills J (1996) Repetition in Latin Poetry Figures of Allusion OxfordWilson D (1970) The Life and Times of Vuk Stefanović Karadžić 1787ndash1864 Literacy

Literature and National Independence in Serbia OxfordWilson DF (2002) Ransom Revenge and Heroic Identity in the Iliad CambridgeWilson JR (1967) ldquoAn Interpolation in the Prologue of Euripidesrsquo Troadesrdquo GRBS 8

205ndash23Winkler J Zeitlin F (eds) (1990) Nothing to do with Dionysos Athenian Drama in its

Social Context PrincetonWinkler MM (ed) (2001) Classical Myth and Culture in the Cinema New Yorkmdash (ed) (2007) Troy From Homerrsquos Iliad to Hollywood Epic MaldenOxfordmdash (2007) ldquoThe Trojan War on the Screen An Annotated Filmographyrdquoin MM Winkler

(ed) 202ndash15mdash (2009) Cinema and Classical Texts Apollorsquos New Light CambridgeWoumlhrle G (1999) Telemachs Reise Vaumlter und Soumlhne in Ilias und Odyssee oder ein Beitrag

zur Erforschung der Maumlnnlichkeitsideologie in der homerischen Welt GoumlttingenWolf FA (1985) Prolegomena to Homer 1795 (trans and ed by A Grafton GW Most

JEG Zetzel) PrincetonWoodruff P (1982) ldquoWhat Could Go Wrong with Inspiration Why Platorsquos Poets Failrdquo in

JME Moravcsik P Temko (eds) 137ndash50Wooten C (1987) Hermogenesrsquo On Types of Style Chapel HillWorman N (1997) ldquoThe Body as Argument Helen in Four Greek Textsrdquo ClAnt 16 151ndash203

472 Bibliography

mdash (2002) The Cast of Character Style in Greek Literature Austinmdash (2007) ldquoThe Voice which is not One Helenrsquos Verbal Guises in Homeric Epicrdquo in H

Bloom (ed) (2007b) 149ndash68Worthington I (2003) ldquoThe Authorship of the Demosthenic Epitaphiosrdquo MH 60 152ndash57mdash (ed) (2007) A Companion to Greek Rhetoric MaldenWoytek E (2005) ldquoAnmerkungen zur Catull-Rezeption in der Cirisrdquo in I Tar P Mayer (eds)

77ndash89Wyke M (1997) Projecting the Past Ancient Rome Cinema and History New Yorkmdash (2002) The Roman Mistress Ancient and Modern Representations OxfordWypustek A (2013) Images of Eternal Beauty in Funerary Verse Inscriptions of the

Hellenistic and Greco-Roman Periods Leiden BostonXanthakis-Karamanos G (1998) ldquoHomer and Euripides The Cyclops and the Troadesrdquo

Platon 50 28ndash38Yates FA (1966) The Art of Memory LondonYoung DC (1983) ldquoPindar Pythians 2 and 3 Inscriptional ποτέ and the Poetic Epistlerdquo

HSCP 87 31ndash48Zajko V (2004) ldquoHomer and Ulyssesrdquo in RL Fowler (ed) 311ndash23Zanetto G Canavero D Capra A Sgobbi A (2004) (eds) Momenti della ricezione

omerica Poesia arcaica e teatro MilanZanker P Ewald BC (2013) Living with Myths The Imagery of Roman Sarcophagi (trans J

Slater) OxfordΖanos P (1884) ldquoPenelopersquos Suitors and Odysseusrsquo Homecomingrdquo in Greek Theatre

(Ελληνικό Θέατρο) Vol I Athens 1ndash140Zeitlin F (2001) ldquoVisions and Revisions of Homerrdquo in S Goldhill (ed) 195ndash266Zembaty JM (1989) ldquoSocratesrsquo Perplexity in Platorsquos Hippias Minorrdquo in JP Anton A Preus

(eds) 51ndash70Ziolkowski J (1981) Thucydides and the Tradition of Funeral Speeches at Athens New YorkZissos A (2008) Valerius Flaccusrsquo Argonautica Book 1 Oxford

Bibliography 473

Notes on Contributors

Margarita Alexandrou (UCL) is completing her doctoral thesis a commentary onthe fragments of the iambic poet Hipponax Her research interests lie primarilyin Archaic Greek poetry and its reception across the spectrum of Greek andRoman literature She has a growing interest in Greek literary papyrology andis currently co-editing a volume on the methodology of working with literaryfragments

Karim Arafat is Emeritus Reader in Classical Archaeology at Kingrsquos College Lon-don where he taught for many years before moving to Athens He now teaches atDeree the American College of Greece He has published extensively on Classicalart particularly vase-painting the relations between art and literature and Pau-sanias His books include Pausaniasrsquo Greece Ancient Artists and Roman Rulers(Cambridge 1996) Classical Zeus A Study in Ancient Art and Literature (Oxford1990)

Anastasia Bakogiannirsquos research and publications focus on the reception ofGreek Literature in the modern world especially in the performance culture ofmodern Greece She is the author of Electra Ancient and Modern Aspects ofthe Tragic Heroinersquos Reception (Institute of Classical Studies 2011) editor of Dia-logues with the Past Classical Reception Theory and Practice (ICS 2013) and co-editor of War as Spectacle Ancient and Modern Perspectives on the Display ofArmed Conflict (Bloomsbury 2015)

Chris Carey taught at the University of St Andrews the University of MinnesotaCarleton College and Royal Holloway the University of London before becomingProfessor of Greek at University College London He has published on Greeklyric Homer tragedy and comedy Greek law and politics and the Attic oratorsHe is currently writing a commentary on Book VII of Herodotus for CambridgeUniversity Press a book on Thermopylae for Oxford University Press and abook of essays on Pindarrsquos Olympian Odes

Athanasios Efstathiou is Associate Professor of Ancient Greek Language and Lit-erature at the Department of History of the Ionian University He obtained hisfirst degree in Classics and his MA in Classics and Byzantine Studies from theDepartment of Philology (Aristotle University of Thessaloniki) Subsequentlyhe attended as a non-award student the MA course on Late Antiquity and Byzan-tium at Kingrsquos College London while he acquired his PhD in Classical Oratory at

Royal Holloway College (University of London) His research interests cover thesubjects of rhetoric and oratory of the Classical and Byzantine period historiog-raphy attic law Athenian democracy papyrology palaeography history of Greeklanguage

Varvara Georgopoulou is Assistant Professor of Modern Greek Theatre at the De-partment of Theatre Studies of the University of the Peloponnese Her researchinterests include theatre criticism the revival of ancient Greek drama as wellas gender issues in drama She has taken part in many conferences in bothGreece and abroad She is the author of Theatre Criticism in Mid War Athens (2Vols Athens 2008ndash09) The Theatre in Cephalonia 1900ndash 1953 (Athens 2010)Female Routes Galateia Kazantzaki and the Theatre (Athens 2012) and The Mir-rors of Dionysus History and Ideology in Modern Greek Theatre 1920ndash 1950 (Ath-ens 2016)

Lorna Hardwick is Professor Emerita in Classical Studies at the Open UniversityUK and director of the Reception of Classical Texts research projectWith Profes-sor James Porter she is Series Editor of Classical Presences (Oxford UniversityPress) and she was the founding editor of the Classical Receptions Journal Shehas published books and articles on Homer Athenian Cultural History and onmodern translations and adaptations of classical material especially poetryand drama

daggerDaniel Jacob (1947ndash2014) was Professor of Greek at the Department of Classicsof the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki since 1992 His main research interestsfocused on Pindar Greek tragedy especially Euripides Aristotlersquos Poetics andthe reception of ancient Greek literature He was the author of seven books in-cluding Pindarrsquos Pythian Odes (Herakleion 1994) The Poetics of Greek Tragedy(Athens 1998) for which he received an honourary award by the Academy of Ath-ens Issues of Literary Theory in Aristotlersquos Poetics (Athens 2004) and a two-vol-ume commentary on Euripidesrsquo Alcestis (Athens 2012) for which he received asecond honourary award by the Academy of Athens He published extensivelyin Greek and international scholarly journals and collective volumes

Maria Kanellou is a Teaching and Honorary Research Fellow at UCL and an As-sociate Lecturer at the University of Kent She is currently revising for publica-tion her PhD thesis entitled Erotic Epigram A Study of Motifs The thesis studiesthe development and generic features of the literary epigram especially of itserotic subtype from the Hellenistic to the early Byzantine period through theclose analysis of the life-cycle of recurrent themes She is also preparing the pub-

476 Notes on Contributors

lication of two collective volumes on ancient Greek epigram arising out of twointernational conferences held at UCL

Ioanna Karamanou (MPhil Cambridge PhD University College London) is Assis-tant Professor of Greek Drama at the Department of Theatre Studies of the Uni-versity of the Peloponnese Her research interests focus on Greek tragedy and itsreception tragic fragments papyrology and ancient literary criticism She is theauthor of Euripides Danae and Dictys (BzA 228 MunichLeipzig 2006 KG SaurDe Gruyter) and has published a number of articles in international peer-re-viewed journals and chapters in international collective volumes She is current-ly completing an edition and commentary on Euripidesrsquo Alexandros

Boris Kayachev has recently obtained a doctorate from the Universityof Leeds with a thesis on the pseudo-Virgilian Ciris His currentinterests include Apolloniusrsquo Argonautica and its use of non-Homericepic Latin elegy and its engagement with Hellenistic models as wellas a number of texts outside the classical canon

Robert Maltby is Emeritus Professor of Latin Philology at the University of LeedsHis research interests include Latin Language Roman Comedy and Roman ElegyApart from numerous periodical articles in these areas his publications includeA Selection of Latin Love Elegy (Bristol 1980) A Lexicon of Latin Etymologies(Leeds 1991) Tibullus Elegies (Cambridge 2002) Terence Phormio (Oxford2012) and with K Belcher Wileyrsquos Real Latin (Malden MA 2014)

Christina-Panagiota Manolea (BA in Classics University of Athens 1992 PhD inClassics University College London 2002) is lecturing on Greek Civilization (Hel-lenic Open University) She has worked on the reception of ancient Greek literarytradition in Neoplatonism and the reception of ancient Greek rhetoric in Byzan-tine and Modern Greek writers She is currently editing Brillrsquos Companion to theReception of Homer from the Hellenistic Age to Late Antiquity

Kleanthis Mantzouranis is a Teaching Fellow in Classics at the University of StAndrews He has previously taught at UCL and Birkbeck College He receivedhis PhD from UCL in 2012 and is currently working on turning his thesis intoa monograph His specialist interests lie in Aristotle and the history of Greek eth-ical and political thought

Andreas N Michalopoulos is Associate Professor of Latin at the University ofAthens He is the author of Ancient Etymologies in Ovidrsquos Metamorphoses A Com-


mented Lexicon (Leeds 2001) Ovid Heroides 16 and 17 Introduction Text andCommentary (Cambridge 2006) and Ovid Heroides 20 and 21 IntroductionText Translation and Commentary (Athens 2014) His research interests includeAugustan poetry ancient etymology Roman drama Roman novel and the mod-ern reception of Classical literature

Charilaos N Michalopoulos is Assistant Professor of Latin at the Department ofGreek Philology of the Democritus University of Thrace His research interests in-clude Augustan poetry gender studies and classics and the modern reception ofLatin literature He has published on Ovid Seneca and Martial and is the authorof Myth Language and Gender in the Corpus Priapeorum (Athens 2014)

Pantelis Michelakis is Reader in Classics at the University of Bristol He is theauthor of Greek Tragedy on Screen (OUP 2013) Euripidesrsquo Iphigenia at Aulis(Duckworth 2006) and Achilles in Greek Tragedy (CUP 2002) He has also co-edit-ed The Ancient World in Silent Cinema (CUP 2013) Agamemnon in Performance458 BC to AD 2004 (OUP 2005) and Homer Tragedy and Beyond Essays in Hon-our of PE Easterling (SPHS 2001)

Katerina Mikellidou (BA Athens MA Oxford) completed her PhD (2014) on theencounters between the living and the dead in fifth-century drama under the su-pervision of Professor Chris Carey (UCL) She has taught Intermediate Latin inUCL and Modern and Ancient Greek in the University of Cyprus She is currentlyteaching lsquoPhilosophical Textsrsquo (University of Cyprus) and the postgraduatecourse lsquoTheoretical Approaches to Ancient Greek Literaturersquo (Open Universityof Cyprus) She is mainly interested in Greek Drama eschatology ritual and Ar-chaic poetry

Sophia Papaioannou is Associate Professor of Latin literature at theNational and Kapodistrian University of Athens Her principal areas ofresearch include ancient epic the literature and culture of the Age ofAugustus and Roman Comedy Her main publications include books on OvidrsquosMetamorphoses Plautus Terence and New Comedy Part of her currentresearch is a book on the influence of Homeric orality in the structureand poetics of Virgilrsquos Aeneid

Helen Peraki-Kyriakidou is a retired Assistant Professor of LatinLiterature at the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki Her main areas ofinterest are Virgilrsquos Eclogues and Georgics Roman epic andhistoriography She has also published a number of articles on ancient


etymology and etymologizing Together with Stelios Phiorakis she haswritten a book on The Law Code of Gortyn (Herakleion 1973)

Ioannis n Perysinakis is Professor Emeritus of Ancient Greek Literature at theDepartment of Philology of the University of Ioannina His teaching and researchinterests focus on ancient Greek Literature with an emphasis on moral valuesand political behaviour from Homer to Plato and Aristotle and the reception ofancient Greek in Modern Greek Literature He has written extensively onHomer Hesiod lyric poetry Greek tragedy Plato and Modern Greek LiteratureHis publications include The Concept of Wealth in Herodotus (Ioannina 19982)and Archaic Lyric Poetry (Athens 2012) He is currently working on the ancientquarrel between philosophy and poetry

Kyriaki Petrakou is Professor at the Department of Theatre Studies of the Univer-sity of Athens Her research focuses on Modern Greek Theatre from the mid-nine-teenth century onwards She is the author of seven books including The DramaCompetitions 1870ndash 1925 (Athens 1999) Theatrological Miscellanea (Athens 2004)Kazantzakis and the Theatre (Athens 2005) The Impact of Modern Greek TheatreAbroad Translations ndash Performances (Athens 2005) Theatrical Attitudes andCourses (Athens 2007) She has taught in the Universities of Vienna (2000) Sile-sia (2002) and in the Open University of Cyprus (2011ndash2013)

Andrej Petrovic is Senior Lecturer at the Department of Classics and Ancient His-tory of Durham University His research interests and publications concern GreekEpigraphy and Religion His published work on early Greek epigram includes themonograph Kommentar zu den Simonideischen Versinschriften (Brill 2007) andArchaic and Classical Greek Epigram (co-edited with M Baumbach and I Petrov-ic CUP 2010)

Ivana Petrovic is Senior Lecturer in Greek literature at the Department of Classicsand Ancient History of Durham University Her book Von den Toren des Hades zuden Hallen des Olymp Artemiskult bei Theokrit und Kallimachos (Brill 2007) stud-ies contemporary religion in Hellenistic poetry She has co-edited volumes on theRoman triumph (Stuttgart 2008) and on Greek Archaic epigram (CUP 2010) Shehas also published papers on Greek poetry Greek religion and magic Her forth-coming monograph co-written with Andrej Petrovic discusses the phenomenonof inner purity in Greek religion

Margarita Sotiriou is Lecturer of Classical Philology at the University of the Pe-loponnese She is the author of Pindarus Homericus (Goumlttingen 1998) Her pub-


lications concern Archaic lyric poetry mainly choral song its poetics perform-ance and reperformance as well as its reception within antiquity and intertex-tuality Her current main project is a commentary on the Epinician Odes of Bac-chylides

Hara Thliveri (PhD Kingrsquos College London) has taught at the Department of Greekand Latin at UCL at the University of London MA programme lsquoThe classical pastin Modern Greecersquo and at the Open University Her publications include lsquoThe Dis-cobolos of Myron Narrative Appeal and Three-dimensionalityrsquo in F MacfarlaneC Morgan (eds) Exploring Ancient Sculpture (London 2010) lsquoTowards a ModernUnderstanding of Topos and Logos The Olympia of Angelos Sikelianosrsquo SkepsisXXIIii (2012) lsquoArt and Poetics in Nikos Engonopoulosrsquo in A Bakogianni (ed)Dialogues with the Past (London 2013) In 2013 she edited a volume in honourof the composer Mikis Theodorakis

Eleni Volonaki (MA PhD Royal Holloway University of London) is Assistant Pro-fessor at the Department of Philology University of the Peloponnese She hasalso taught at the Department of Classics Royal Holloway (1995ndash2004) at theOpen University UK (2003ndash2007) and at the Hellenic Open University (2006ndash2014) She is the author of A Commentary on Lysiasrsquo Speeches Against Agoratosand Against Nicomachos (Athens 2010) and has published in international jour-nals and in collective volumes in the fields of ancient Greek law and rhetoricGreek values and epic poetry and Hellenistic rhetoric She is completing a com-mentary on Lycurgusrsquo speech Against Leocrates which is to be published in BICSSupplements

Maria Ypsilanti obtained her first degree from the Department of Greek Literatureof the University of Athens (1991ndash 1995) She studied at Kingrsquos College London(MA in Classics 1996ndash1997) and at University College London (PhD in Classics1998ndash2003) PhD thesis An Edition with Commentary of Selected Epigrams of Cri-nagoras forthcoming (revised and enriched with the rest of Crinagorasrsquo poems)in Oxford University Press Since 2004 she teaches Ancient Greek Literature atthe University of Cyprus Her research interests include Hellenistic poetry poetryof Late Antiquity epigram tragedy and textual criticism


General Index

folgt

Index of Homeric Passages

folgt

Trends in Classics ndashSupplementary Volumes

Edited by Franco Montanari and Antonios Rengakos

Scientific CommitteeAlberto Bernabeacute middot Margarethe BillerbeckClaude Calame middot Philip R Hardie middot Stephen J HarrisonStephen Hinds middot Richard Hunter middot Christina KrausGiuseppe Mastromarco middot Gregory NagyTheodore D Papanghelis middot Giusto PiconeKurt Raaflaub middot Bernhard Zimmermann

Volume 37

Homeric Receptionsacross Generic andCultural Contexts

Edited byAthanasios Efstathiou and Ioanna Karamanou

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication DataA CIP catalog record for this book has been applied for at the Library of CongressBibliographic information published by the Deutsche NationalbibliothekThe Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutschen Nationalbibliografiedetailed bibliographic data are available on the Internet at httpdnbdnbde

ISBN 978-3-11-047783-2e-ISBN (PDF) 978-3-11-047979-9e-ISBN (E-Pub) 978-3-11-047918-8ISSN 1868-4785

copy 2016 Walter de Gruyter GmbH BerlinBostonPrinting and binding CPI books GmbH LeckPrinted on acid-free paperPrinted in Germanywwwdegruytercom

Preface

This collective volume grew out of an international conference on Homeric Re-ception held at the Department of History of the Ionian University in Corfu in No-vember 2011 All papers profited by the fruitful interaction between classicistsand reception scholars which gave rise to challenging and refreshing questionsand subsequently by the process of peer review for publication The ensuing re-vising process took a considerable period of time but we hope that the revisionsmade contributed to the focus on the generic and cultural contexts of Homericreception and in turn to the coherence of the volume as a whole We are ex-tremely grateful to the General Editors of this series Professor Antonios Renga-kos and Professor Franco Montanari for their brilliant guidance their scholarlyacumen their great perceptiveness and unfailing patience throughout the publi-cation process

This conference was made possible thanks to the valuable insight scholarlyvigour and unstinting support of Professor Chris Carey who has been for us amentor in the truest sense over the last decades The debt that we owe him can-not be adequately expressed in wordsWe are much indebted to Professor LornaHardwick for generously offering her valuable advice and great expertise on clas-sical reception during the preparation of the volume for publication and to thefour anonymous readers for providing constructive criticism and improving com-ments We are truly grateful to Professor Mike Edwards Professor Ariadne Gart-ziou-Tatti Professor Yorgos Kentrotis Professor Stratis Kyriakidis and ProfessorIoannis Perysinakis for their fruitful suggestions as members of the ConferenceAdvisory Board Special thanks are due to Professor Dimitris Anoyatis-Peleacute Pro-fessor Theodosis Pylarinos and Assistant Professor Ilias Yarenis of the Depart-ment of History of the Ionian University for their excellent collaboration as mem-bers of the conference Organizing Committee

To our great regret Professor Daniel Jacob who was a member of the Con-ference Advisory Board brightening the conference with his presence and partic-ipating with a significant paper included in this corpus passed away on 21 May2014 before this volume went to press Those who were fortunate to have metDaniel Jacob were impressed by his philological vigour scholarly insight andsteadfastness Younger scholars benefited enormously from his humanity hiskind encouragement and the valuable guidance which he generously offeredto them For young researchers he was and still is a model of academic conductand scholarly devotion His academic life formed part of the high scholarly ach-ievements of the Department of Classics of the Aristotle University of Thessalo-niki A remarkable volume dedicated to his memory and edited by his eminent

colleagues Professor Antonios Rengakos and Professor Poulheria Kyriakou isforthcoming in this series (Wisdom and Folly in Euripides) The editors of thepresent volume feel the need to honour the memory of Professor Daniel Jacobgratefully acknowledging his major offer to classical scholarship and his ever-lasting aretē

Athanasios Efstathiou Ioanna KaramanouDepartment of History Department of Theatre StudiesIonian University University of the Peloponnese

VI Preface

Table of Contents

Preface V

Ioanna KaramanouThe Contexts of Homeric Reception 1

Part I Framing

Lorna HardwickHomer Repetition and Reception 15


Margarita AlexandrouHipponax and the Odyssey Subverting Text and Intertext 31

Andrej PetrovicArchaic Funerary Epigram and Hectorrsquos Imagined Epitymbia 45

Margarita SotiriouPerformance Poetic Identity and Intertextuality in Pindarrsquos Olympian 4 59

Chris CareyHomer and Epic in Herodotusrsquo Book 7 71

Part III Homeric echoes in philosophical and rhetoricaldiscourse

Athanasios EfstathiouArgumenta Homerica Homerrsquos Reception by Aeschines 93

Eleni VolonakiHomeric Values in the Epitaphios Logos 125

Ioannis PerysinakisThe Ancient Quarrel between Philosophy and Poetry Platorsquos HippiasMinor 147

Kleanthis MantzouranisA Philosophical Reception of Homer Homeric Courage in AristotlersquosDiscussion of ἀνδρεία 163

Christina-Panagiota ManoleaHomeric Echoes Pythagorean Flavour The Reception of Homer inIamblichus 175


Maria KanellouἙρμιόνην ἣ εἶδος ἔχε χρυσέης Aφροδίτης (Od 414) Praising a Femalethrough Aphrodite ndash From Homer into Hellenistic Epigram 189

Karim ArafatPausanias and Homer 205

Maria YpsilantiThe Reception of Homeric Vocabulary in Nonnusrsquo Paraphrase of St JohnrsquosGospel Εxamination of Themes and Formulas in Selected Passages 215


Helen Peraki-KyriakidouTrees and Plants in Poetic Emulation From the Homeric Epic to VirgilrsquosEclogues 227

Sophia PapaioannouEmbracing Homeric Orality in the Aeneid Revisiting the Composition Politicsof Virgilrsquos First Descriptio 249

Charilaos N Michalopouloslsquotollite me Teucrirsquo (Verg Aen 3601) Saving Achaemenides SavingHomer 263

VIII Table of Contents

Boris KayachevScylla the Beauty and Scylla the Beast A Homeric Allusion in theCiris 277

Andreas N MichalopoulosHomer in Love Homeric Reception in Propertius and Ovid 289

Part VI Homeric Scholarship at the Intersection of Traditions

Robert MaltbyHomer in Servius A Judgement on Servius as a Commentator onVirgil 303

Ivana PetrovicOn Finding Homer The Impact of Homeric Scholarship on the Perception ofSouth Slavic Οral Traditional Poetry 315


Katerina MikellidouAeschylus reading Homer The Case of the Psychagogoi 331

Daniel J JacobSymbolic Remarriage in Homerrsquos Odyssey and Euripidesrsquo Alcestis 343

Ioanna KaramanouEuripidesrsquo lsquoTrojan Trilogyrsquo and the Reception of the Epic Tradition 355

Varvara GeorgopoulouAndromachersquos Tragic Persona from the Ancient to the Modern Stage 369

Kyriaki PetrakouOdysseus Satirical The Merry Dealing of the Homeric Myth in Modern GreekTheatre 379

Table of Contents IX


Pantelis MichelakisThe Reception of Homer in Silent Film 393

Anastasia BakogianniHomeric Shadows on the Silver Screen Epic Themes in Michael CacoyannisrsquoTrilogy of Cinematic Receptions 405

Hara ThliverilsquoTravelling to the Light Aiming at the Infinitersquo The Odyssey of MikisTheodorakis 417

Bibliography 435


General Index 481

Index of Homeric Passages 483

X Table of Contents

Ioanna Karamanou

The Contexts of Homeric Reception

Introduction

For more than two decades Homeric scholarship has been fruitfully interactingwith the increasingly developing field of classical reception studies by delvinginto the manner in which Homeric poetry has been transmitted translated inter-preted rewritten and represented A respectable number of studies have investi-gated the reworkings of Homeric poetry in Greek and Latin literaturesup1 and in laterperiods of timesup2 along with the significance of audience and reader response asa trigger for the ancient and subsequent interpretations of Homersup3

The purpose of this collective volume is naturally not to offer an exhaustivetreatment of the fields of Homeric reception this would be impossible not leastbecause particular areas as for instance the Hellenistic or Latin transforma-tions of Homeric poetry may well provide enough material for several volumesRather its objective is quite different As stated in the title it seeks to explorehow varying aspects of Homeric poetics appeal to and can be mapped on to adiversity of contexts both vertically that is over time and horizontally across dif-ferent genres of the same period This key approach is consistent with a funda-mental concept of classical reception studies which is the exploration of thecontexts of reception and of the manner in which the reworking of the sourcetext is shaped under different socio-historical intellectual literary and artisticconditions

I am truly grateful to Professor Lorna Hardwick for kindly taking the time to read through thisintroduction and for providing valuable comments In a chronological order see Knauer Kindstrand Neitzel Barchiesi aValakas Rengakos and Knight Rutherford ndash Sotiriou Zeitlin Graziosi ch Michelakis Fowler (ed) section (esp Hunter ndash and Farrell ndash) Fantuzzi Hunter ch and ZanettoCanavero Capra Sgobbi (eds) Graziosi a Nagy Michel on Homericreception in ancient philosophy see Lamberton Planinc Manolea See most importantly Callen King Beissinger Tylus Wofford (eds) Hardwick ndash Clarke Currie Lyne (eds) Graziosi Greenwood (eds) Winkler(ed) a Hall Latacz Greub Blome Wieczorek (eds) Davis Most Nor-man Rabau (eds) Myrsiades (ed) Vandiver Bizer See especially the chapters by Purkis Furbank and Hardwick in Emlyn-JonesHardwickPur-kis (eds) Lamberton Keaney (eds) Scodel ndash Nagy Niehoff(ed)

The significance of context exploration has been theoretically propoundedby Charles Martindale in a chapter entitled lsquoFraming Contextsrsquo of his seminalwork focusing on the hermeneutics of reception⁴ lsquoContextsrsquo he argues lsquoarenot single nor are they found ldquolying aboutrdquo as it were we have to constructthem from other texts which also have to be interpreted (And by text I meanevery vehicle of signification so that in this extended sense a mosaic or a mar-riage ceremony is a ldquotextrdquo as much as a book)rsquo⁵ This concept originates inJaussrsquos theory of the aesthetics of reception asserting the continuing interactionbetween source text and the receiving work in conjunction with the receiverrsquos so-cial and cultural context⁶ Reception is thus figured dialogically as a two-wayprocess of interpretation backwards and forwards The relation between thesource text and the receiving work is reciprocal therefore elucidating the formeras much as the latter At the same time it is essential to look at the routesthrough which the ancient source text has passed and at the manner in whichgeneric and cultural conditions have shaped later reworkings

Accordingly the wide spectrum of Homeric transformations is approached inthis volume in the light of their generic and cultural contexts Genre and cultureare intrinsically interrelated and both play a key role in establishing the receiv-errsquos lsquohorizon of expectationsrsquo This notion was introduced by Jauss to refer to thereceiverrsquos mind-set determined by hisher literary and socio-cultural milieu andto frame the reciprocal relationship between source text and receiver⁷ In turnthe survey of the contexts of Homeric reworkings presupposes the investigationof the interplay of epic with different genres (literary scholarly artistic) andunder varying cultural conditions A major part of this volume naturally coversthe echoes of Homer in classical and post-classical literature (sections II-V) aswell as exploring the implications of Homeric transmission in Latin and Serbiancontexts (section VI) and Homeric refigurations in the performing arts such astheatre film and music (sections VII and VIII) At the same time these contribu-tions seek to evaluate how Homeric referents are appropriated within differentcultural contexts and over a wide time span (Ancient Greece Modern GreeceRome Europe and North America) Therefore the very use of the plural in thetitle (lsquoreceptionsrsquo rather than lsquoreceptionrsquo) aims at drawing attention to the multi-formity and diversity pervading the transformations of Homeric poetry

Martindale ndash see also Hardwick esp ch Martindale Jauss Reception is regarded as a fundamentally lsquodialogicrsquo process also in the major the-oretical works of Gadamer and Iser For a discussion of the impact of these theoriessee for instance Holub

ndash Hardwick ndash Martindale ndash See Jauss ndash Hardwick ndash Holub

ndash

2 Ioanna Karamanou

As mentioned above the shared objective of the essays is the exploration ofthe generic and cultural contexts of Homeric reception At the same time thiscollective volume displays a range of methodological approaches by bringing to-gether internationally acclaimed researchers and acute young scholars in thefields of classics and reception studies The value of the publication of selectedpapers originating in an academic conference derives from the engagement ofthe participants in genuine scholarly lsquodialoguersquo which stimulates carefulthought and scholarly interaction about the issues raised in individual papersthus enhancing the cohesion of the resulting collection of essays This collabo-rative attitude constitutes a distinctive feature of the research in the area of clas-sical reception which invites a variety of voices and a series of theoretical per-spectives testifying to the vitality of debates and to the breadth of possiblereceptions⁸ Consequently an effective interdisciplinary collaboration betweenreception scholars and classicists is required so that reception studies couldbenefit from the formal analysis of classical scholarship and at the sametime a broadly conceived dialectical discipline of classics could be formed toconnect the interpretation of texts with their reception history⁹

This position is brought to the fore by Lorna Hardwick in the first sectionwhich forms a theoretical framework for the analysis of Homeric receptionShe argues that the in depth-study of formal structures and conventions providesinsight into the cultural power of Homeric reworkings This approach aims at rec-onciling the formal and aesthetic appreciation with the cultural interpretation ofreception thus contributing to a long-lasting debate among reception scholarssup1⁰From this viewpoint Lorna Hardwick focuses on the transformations of Homericpoetry in the light of the concept of lsquorepetitionrsquo which as developed by Deleuzeexcludes the possibility of exact replication She investigates the ways in whichlsquorepetition with a differencersquo appropriates Homeric formal qualities so that thereceiving work enables the reader to experience the processes shaping the con-tinuing dialogue between ancient and modern It is noteworthy that in the caseof Homeric receptions the formal arrangements of the receiving work often im-plicitly provide a lsquocommentaryrsquo on the source text thus offering insight intothe manner in which Homeric poetry is interpreted and remodelled As she

See Hardwick and Stray ndash Kallendorf ndash Bakogianni I ndash The va-riety of the activators of reception and the vigour of debates are suggestive of the lsquodemocraticrsquonature of classical reception analysis on this wide-ranging topic see recently HardwickHarri-son (eds) On the latter position see Martindale xiii and his fresh assessment twenty years later inMartindale cf also Brockliss ChaudhuriHaimson LushkovWasdin ndash See for instance Goldhill ndash and Martindale ndash


has pointed out in an earlier study reception (and in this case Homeric recep-tion) involves lsquoa necessary interplay between invention and critiquersquosup1sup1 Hencethe formal analysis of the source text the receiving work and the mediatingworks is significant in evaluating the aesthetic qualities of each productionand in investigating the relationships among them in the light of their varyingcontexts

The role of reception as a form of lsquocommentaryrsquo is reiterated in the secondsection by Margarita Alexandrou who argues that Hipponaxrsquos engagementwith the Odyssey functions as a commentary in that it sheds light on Odysseanelements which are only implicit in the Homeric oeuvre Marginality and grotes-query run through Hipponactean poetry underlined by the fact that events andpersona were partly modelled on the Odyssey to create a sustained metapoeticengagement with the Homeric epos which serves both to undermine the epicand to undercut the authority of the third person narrator This complex processgenerates an unusually rich intertextuality which raises interesting questionsabout audience response and the contexts of Hipponaxrsquos poetry

From the Archaic subversion of the epic we move on to explore Homeric ech-oes in the equally Archaic poetry of kleos and praise The reception of Homer insepulchral epigrams of the Archaic period is investigated by Andrej Petrovicwho looks into two Iliadic passages associated with funerary epigrams by an-cient scholiasts and raises the question whether a distinct relation between Ho-meric lsquoepigrammaticrsquo passages and early epigrammatic production can be iden-tified His case study involves the close analysis of two sixth-century BCsepulchral epigrams which appropriate Homeric structural and stylistic ele-ments and thus seem to have been ideologically and formally chiselled afterthe Iliadic lsquoepigrammaticrsquo passages Likewise Margarita Sotiriou discusses Pin-darrsquos appropriation of formal thematic and conceptual elements from the eighthbook of the Odyssey in his Fourth Olympian Ode to praise his patron by compar-ing him with heroic exempla Investigating the performative context of the odeshe argues that Pindar refigures the Homeric scene and the πεῖρα motif in partic-ular in order to present himself as a lsquopersona projected by the poemsrsquo and shapehis distinct identity as a lsquoprimary narratorrsquo announcing his patronrsquos success withtruthfulness and thus establishing the reception of his ode by his audienceHence the poetrsquos multifaceted dialogue with his source text provides insightinto Pindaric poetics performance and audience response

The epic narratorrsquos bestowal of kleos and its reception by Herodotus arebrought forward by Chris Carey who delves into the complexity of the historianrsquos

Hardwick

4 Ioanna Karamanou

appropriation of Homeric elements Herodotus is placed at a crossroads as heselects lsquothose bits and pieces of the oral memory of the Archaic period that fithis own literary and ideological agendarsquosup1sup2 whilst aligning himself with his con-temporary Ionic intellectual milieu His complex relationship with epos is prom-inent in the seventh book locating the Persian Wars within the larger context ofhostilities between East and West for which the epic treatment of the Trojan Warserves as an equivalent Herodotusrsquo interplay with epic is suggestive of the his-torianrsquos emulation with his source text as he claims equivalent or greater statusfor his own narrative by presenting this Persian invasion as exceeding all of theearlier East-West confrontations

The third section looks across strands in Homeric reception within philo-sophical and rhetorical discourse Philosophy and oratory are brought togetherin this part of the volume on the basis of the theoretically propounded essentialinteraction between knowledge and eloquencesup1sup3 Athanasios Efstathiou consid-ers the implications of the use of Homeric quotations based on the oral learningof poetry in Aeschinesrsquo extant speeches pointing out that Homer is employed asan authority with the purpose of validating the oratorrsquos argumentation and per-suasiveness At the same time these lsquoHomeric argumentsrsquo form indicators of theaudiencersquos paideia and lsquohorizon of expectationsrsquo showcasing the cultural con-texts of mid-fourth century Athens and the pivotal role that Homeric poetryplayed in civic processes Eleni Volonaki then reiterates the key notion of Homer-ic kleos (mainly discussed in the second section) and its ideological transplanta-tion into the genre of funeral oration To praise their contemporary achieve-ments orators appropriate epic paradigms and transform the concept of aretē(virtue) which becomes imbued with the democratic values represented by thecitizen soldier and is associated with the collective glory of the anonymousgroup within the context of the polis in contrast to the epic praise of individu-ality

The reconfiguration of the Homeric notion of aretē is similarly brought to thefore in Platorsquos Hippias Minor forming the focus of the analysis by Ioannis Pery-sinakis This discussion provides a case study on the ancient philosophical re-ception of poetry as it stresses the challenge posed to the values representedin the Homeric epics by Platonic thought which subjected the poetic mythosto logos and rejected mimēsis for not educating children on aretē This chaptershowcases the transformation of Homeric virtue into the Platonic conception

Rose See for instance Pl Phdr e-c Arist Rh andashb a CicTusc ndash De or esp ndash Quint Inst ndash


of excellence being particularized in sophia (wisdom) and having dynamis (abil-ity) as a prerequisite Subsequently Kleanthis Mantzouranis reflects on the im-pact of Aristotlersquos response to the epic paradigms of martial valour As he pointsout the philosopherrsquos use of Homer is a purposeful act of reception aiming toillustrate by means of concrete examples the forms of courage he describesand to reinforce his argument by adducing the authority of the poet whichcould be paralleled to a certain degree with the rhetorical practice previouslyexamined by Athanasios Efstathiou Aristotle uses Homer as a benchmark refin-ing and developing the epic representation of valour in order to elucidate hisown conception of genuine courage The implications of the selection ofHomer as a source text by the Neoplatonic philosopher Iamblichus are evaluatedby Christina-Panagiota Manolea Iamblichus chose to incorporate Homeric ele-ments in his own discussion of important philosophical matters either directlyor indirectly drawing on his master Porphyry and on Plato by taking into ac-count his audiencersquos familiarity with Homer Nonetheless as she observes thephilosopher appropriates epos when he considers it fit to his argumentationsince his aim is not to explain Homer as his teacher Porphyry did but to enrichhis own Neoplatonic philosophical exegesis

The fourth section highlights the transformation of epic style and motifs aswell as the perception of Homer as a cultural authority from the Hellenistic pe-riod to Late Antiquity Maria Kanellou discusses the refiguration of the Homericmotif of praising female appearance through comparison to the archetypal beau-ty of Aphrodite in Hellenistic epigrams She observes that the transformation ofthis motif has been shaped through a nexus of cross-generic religious and po-litical factors leading to the literary deification of queens by the Ptolemaiccourt poets and the heroization of mere mortals The authority of Homeric poetryas a source text is investigated by Karim Arafat who argues that Pausaniasrsquo af-finity with Homer seems to emerge from his perception of the poet as an arche-typal periegete Pausaniasrsquo agenda with respect to his approach of the Homericepics differs from that of his contemporaries as for instance Philostratus andmay also shed light on the reception of Homer as a means of defining the cultur-al background and intellectual trends of the second sophistic SubsequentlyMaria Ypsilantirsquos inquiry into the appropriation of Homeric vocabulary metreand imagery in the Paraphrase of St Johnrsquos Gospel by Nonnus of Panopolis raisesissues of genre culture and audience response within the Christian milieu ofLate Antiquity She points out that Nonnusrsquo hexameter rephrasing of the Gospelembellishes Johannine prose highlights and interprets theological notions anddoctrinal concepts by addressing an audience both well-versed in the epic tradi-tion and interested in religious matters

6 Ioanna Karamanou

The fifth section brings telling instances of Latin transformations of Homericpoetry to the fore The chapter by Helen Peraki-Kyriakidou provides an apt tran-sition from the preceding section to the focus of this one since it showcases thesignificance of the cross-generic interplay between Hellenistic poetry and Ho-meric epos for the formation of Latin pastoral The author stresses that Virgilwhose main source text in the Eclogues is Theocritusrsquo bucolic poetry entersinto a fertile dialogue with Homer regarding the style function and symbolismof plant-catalogues which are at the same time naturally imbued with Theocri-tean features of the pastoral genre Subsequently Sophia Papaioannou delvesinto Virgilrsquos appropriation of the core feature of Homeric orality in the ekphrases(descriptiones) developed in the Aeneid She argues that Virgil is particularlyaware to emphasize the complex intertextuality as the cornerstone at the foun-dation of the structure of the Aeneid accordingly the poet seems to suggest thateach descriptio may be subjected to multiple possible readings due to the flex-ibility of the descriptive technique of visualization which is an equivalent to theprocess of motif transference that predominates in Homeric orality

The metapoetic significance of Virgilrsquos refashioning of the Odyssean Cyclopsepisode in the Achaemenides scene of the Aeneid is investigated by Charilaos Mi-chalopoulos This chapter contextualizes the impact of this reworking on Virgilrsquoswider poetological programme of Homeric reception through which he providesa self-definition of his own poetry and its position in the course of continuity andchange within the epic tradition At the same time the intellectual processes in-volved in Virgilrsquos strategies of transforming Homeric poetry are indicators ofHomerrsquos cultural and ideological assimilation in Rome The similarly Odysseanfigure of Scylla forms the intertext in the narrative of the pseudo-VirgilianCiris Boris Kayachev sets out to explore the implicit allusion to the Homeric Scyl-la haunting the Ciris as an intertextual Doppelgaumlnger of her Roman equivalentThis stealthy intrusion of the Homeric intertext could provide insight into the po-etological agenda of the Ciris and into allusion as a form of literary receptionThis section closes with the examination of the cross-generic transformationof Homeric love themes in Roman elegy by Andreas Michalopoulos It is stressedthat Propertius and Ovid draw parallels between the poetic persona and Homericheroes in their representation of the militia amoris motif In metapoetic termsthe epic system of values is transfigured and filtered through the elegiac-eroticsystem of values while the genre of elegy is self-defined by means of its compar-ison and emulation with epos

The sixth section brings forward the impact of Homeric transmission on dif-ferent scholarly and cultural traditions such as Latin scholarship and the edi-tion of Serbian traditional poetry Robert Maltbyrsquos essay pursues the idea pro-pounded by Lorna Hardwick and subsequently by Margarita Alexandrou that


commentary is and should be perceived as a form of reception by investigatingthe function of Homeric quotations in Serviusrsquo commentary on Virgilrsquos AeneidHe focuses on six comparisons of passages in Virgil with their Homeric sourcetext pointing out that the main criteria applied to evaluate Virgilrsquos receptionof Homer are narrative credibility and stylistic appropriateness which have along scholarly tradition stretching back to the Alexandrian scholia via earlierLatin commentators Robert Maltby brings forward the notion of the receiving au-thorrsquos emulation with his source text also stressed by Chris Carey Charilaos Mi-chalopoulos and Andreas Michalopoulos by suggesting that Servius is willing toconcede that on occasion Virgil manages to surpass his model text From thepurely philological implications of the reception of Homeric scholarship wenow move on to explore its cultural power as well Ivana Petrovic draws atten-tion to the impact of 18th and 19th century Homeric scholarship on the perceptionof Serbian oral traditional poetry She demonstrates that the views of the Germanscholar Friedrich August Wolf who regarded the Iliad and the Odyssey as a col-lection of popular songs shaped the conditions of preservation and assessmentof Serbian oral poetry This is a case of cultural exchange involving the appropri-ation of the renowned figure of Homer to bestow authority to the collection ofSerbian folk poems and also his use as a shield to counter the ban on the circu-lation of this collection in Europe where traditional Serbian poems were seen aspolitically charged material The latter fact showcases a significant dimension ofclassical reception which is the potential of ancient texts to be employed as ameans of countering censorship and enabling socio-political concerns to be con-veyed through the neutral medium of classical culturesup1⁴

The two last sections of this volume delve into the transformations of Homer-ic material in the performing arts theatre film and music The seventh sectionengages with the theatrical reception of epos over a wide time-span extendingfrom Greek and Roman drama to European and Modern Greek theatre KaterinaMikellidou explores the intertextual nexus between the Homeric Nekyia and itsAeschylean version in the fragmentarily preserved Psychagogoi pointing out thatAeschylus opens a persistent dialogue with his source text and as in severalaforementioned cases of Homeric reception he establishes a network of compet-itive dynamics As well as regularly recalling the Odyssean archetype the Ae-schylean adaptation challenges it through a process of lsquonormalizationrsquo of thehero bringing him closer to the ordinary man which is divergent from Homerrsquostreatment of necromancy unfolding the full proportions of Odysseusrsquo boldness

For such examples see Hardwick ndash van Steen ndash Hardwick ndash

8 Ioanna Karamanou

The tragic refiguration of prominent Odyssean motifs is similarly illustrated inDaniel Jacobrsquos essay offering a close analysis of the literary processes whichshape the transformation of the archetypal reunion of husband and wife inthe Odyssey at the end of the Alcestis This intertextual relationship can be deci-phered on the basis of the thematic and structural pattern of nostos which has apivotal position in both the Odyssey and the Alcestis Nonetheless its receptionin the Alcestis is a complex process in that the flexible dynamics of the nostosmotif result in considerable deviations from the source text thus providing lsquoapalimpsest in which parts of the earlier text may be read through the overwrittentextrsquo Likewise Ioanna Karamanou sets out to explore the cross-generic transfor-mation of Homeric material into tragedy in the lsquoTrojan trilogyrsquo of Euripides inthe light of fifth-century cultural contexts which have shaped the dramatic refa-shioning of the source text Examining less explored aspects of the Euripideanreception of Homeric ideology from the standpoint of his tragic rhetoric in theformal debates of the Alexandros and the Trojan Women she argues that thedramatist engages in a dialogue with Homeric ethics by embedding his epic ref-erents within agonistic contexts Euripides exploits the dynamics of his tragicrhetoric to juxtapose aspects of Homeric thought to his contemporary ethicsthus showcasing the dialectic as well as the tension between the ideology ofepos and fifth-century values

Moving on to later theatrical receptions of Homer Varvara Georgopoulou in-vestigates the reception history of Andromachersquos persona and the cultural proc-esses shaping this figurersquos dramatic transformation The ancient Greek (Euripi-des) and Latin tragic treatments of Andromachersquos legend (Seneca) constitutekey stages in the theatrical reception of this Homeric figure bringing to thefore dominant themes such as war-violence militarism and gender issueswhich are then reiterated in later theatre French Classicism (Racine) the Inter-war period (Giraudoux) and Modern Greek theatre (Akis Dimou) These theatricalreworkings of Andromachersquos figure take place within diverse contexts and undervarying historical and cultural conditions which shape the treatment of theaforementioned themes and their ideological implications The interrelation be-tween classical reception studies and theatre research is brought forward by Kyr-iaki Petrakou who offers her perspective on the performance history and criticalreception of the parodic treatments of the Odyssean legend in Modern Greek the-atre By employing essential tools of critical analysis of theatre performancesuch as theatre criticism and audience response she delineates the relationshipbetween the theatrical transformation of epos and the socio-political and ideo-logical forces shaping the cultural identity of Postwar Greece This archetypalmyth is subversively employed often as a means of political allegory alludingto the intrigues of political power and the misleading rhetoric of persuasion


used by the media In these plays among which Iakovos Kambanellisrsquo OdysseusCome Home has a pivotal position Odysseus is transformed into the bearer of acontemporary anti-myth suggesting the illusion of humanity about leadershipand touching on crucial ideological issues arising from Postwar circumstances

From the theatrical receptions of Homer we move on to the cinematic andmusical refigurations of epos in the eighth section Pantelis Michelakisrsquo inquiryinto the reception history of Homer in silent cinema showcases how these pro-ductions engage with a range of narrative modes technological means and spec-tatorial practices available to early cinema raising questions about the historio-graphical and methodological implications of this research for the reception ofHomer in film and popular culture He revisits the fundamental feature of Ho-meric orality also highlighted in the chapters by Athanasios Efstathiou SophiaPapaioannou and Ivana Petrovic to argue that early film does not merely repre-sent the orality of Archaic Greek epic but also helps define it The generic diver-sity of these films breaks down the canonical work of Homer into componentparts reconfigured within a number of culturally contingent cinematic modes in-cluding not only action and romance but also trick cinematography fantasy andparody At the same time the materiality of these filmswhich survive in multipleprints differing in terms of preservation conditions overall length number andorder of scenes challenges the fixity of the cinematic artwork in ways invitingcomparison with the multiformity of Homeric texts The filmic transformationsof the Homeric material are similarly explored by Anastasia Bakogianni who at-tempts to lsquounmaskrsquo elements of Michael Cacoyannisrsquo implicit dialogue with eposwith regard to narrative and themes in his cinematic reception of Euripidesrsquo Elec-tra Trojan Women and Iphigenia in Aulis Her counter-reading of Cacoyannisrsquo tril-ogy argues for the pivotal role of the viewerrsquos lsquohorizon of expectationsrsquo condi-tioned by the spectatorrsquos familiarity with the Homeric epics which determinesthe threads that one can lsquodiscoverrsquo in this production and are differently experi-enced by each viewer and within varying contexts As she points out the trilogyis permeable to such interpretations not least because of the popularity of thegenre of epic in cinema on which Cacoyannis fruitfully drew

The last section closes with Hara Thliverirsquos survey on the recent and so farunexplored Odyssey by the leading Greek composer Mikis Theodorakis Hiswork draws freely on the key Odyssean motif of nostos mdashalso discussed by Dan-iel Jacobmdash to represent the completion of the composerrsquos personal nostos Theo-dorakisrsquo artistic affinity with Homer also emerges from the fact that throughouthis eighty-year career he managed to elevate poetry to a continuing narrative ofnational Greek myth His Homerically oriented song-cycle thus provides an in-centive to identify the reception of the Odyssean nostos pattern in popular dis-course by investigating how ancient symbols may feed collective memory and

10 Ioanna Karamanou

national awareness and construct cultural identity in conjunction with the com-poserrsquos literary and artistic milieu

The lines of inquiry that have been sketched out indicate that the points ofconvergence and divergence between the Homeric poems and their receptionsare to a great extent conditioned by the generic and cultural contexts of boththe source text and the receiving work The approach to reception as a form oflsquocommentaryrsquo reiterated in the chapters of this volume sheds light not only onthe receiving work but also on those very aspects of the source text whichhave attracted attention in its subsequent reworkings In more specific termsHomeric values and patterns are reframed within different contexts elucidatingthe complex dialectic as well as the tension between source text and receptionThis investigation also yields insight into the ideological forces shaping thecross-generic and cross-cultural transplantation of epic concepts into the receiv-ing work Homerrsquos archetypal figure is regularly employed as an authority withthe purpose of validating narrative rhetorical argumentation and philosophicalexegesis but also as a means of outwitting censorship Key features of epos asfor instance its orality are appropriated in metapoetic terms as well as beingreconfigured within performative contexts The receiving authorrsquosartistrsquos trendtowards emulation with the source text often functions as a means of genericself-definition providing insight into hisher literary or artistic agenda All thesame Homeric concepts are also liable to be subversively employed as in thecase of parody or to be challenged from the standpoint of their philosophicalreception

Overall the varied strategies of refiguring the Homeric epics form indicatorsof the generic and cultural conditions defining the receiving work and of the lsquoho-rizon of expectationsrsquo of readers and audience At the same time the wide-rang-ing lsquomigrationrsquo of Homeric material through time and across place as shaped byideological forces suggests that Homeric reception holds cultural power beinginstrumental in the construction of new cultural identities


Part I Framing

Lorna Hardwick

Homer Repetition and ReceptionlsquoSlow-striding Achilles who put the hex on HectorA swallow twitters in Troy Thatrsquos where we startrsquo

This is an extract from the opening sequence of Derek Walcottrsquos The Odyssey AStage Versionsup1 When I saw the play staged in its opening run at Stratford-upon-Avon the audience laughed at these lines Probably laughter was on several levelsbut at least some of it was because spectators knew both that Achilles was lsquoswift-footedrsquo and that the wound to his heel accounted for the actorrsquos limp across thestage One characteristic of Walcottrsquos use of classical material is the way that hemanipulates it to create an irreverent counter-text The swallow twittering inTroy slyly reminded the spectators of chaos theory and also of the trauma that en-sued from Troy Here however my point is that Walcott continued to use the Ho-meric form the formulaic epithet It was part of the joke in which audience recog-nition was combined with a play on words Achilles made Hector famous via thehexameters of the Iliad In terms of epic poetics the epithet lsquoslow-striding is a goodexample of substitution where the singer takes a phrase and changes a singlewordsup2 In Walcottrsquos riff Homer and Caribbean vernacular intersect

This essay aims to bring consideration of formal elements back to the centreof analysis of classical receptions The artificial polarities between studies basedon aesthetics and those based on cultural history and its contexts have some-times precluded study in depth of the role of formal structures and conventionsas a nexus between the ancient text and its audiences and between the ancienttext and its subsequent receptionssup3

If the relationship between the ante-text and its receptions is to be genuinelydialogical that is if the ancient text and its transmission and appropriationshave something to say to one another and if each influences the way that theother is read then ways have to be found of enabling close reading of the ancienttext and the modern to stake out a field of exchange Steiner calls this relation-ship one of lsquoreciprocityrsquo However reciprocity is just the fourth stage of his her-meneutic model a model that is marred by the language of violence which heuses for the second stage ndash an image of violation of the ante-text by the new

Walcott See further Hainsworth For discussion of the aestheticscultural history debates see MartindaleThomas (eds)

I do however draw on the initial stage in Steinerrsquos model that of trust ndash trustthat the ante-text has something of value to offer⁴

The hermeneutic process has been described in different ways Julia Gaisserhas written persuasively of lsquoaccretionsrsquo qualities and associations that adhere tothe ante-text in the course of its subsequent migrations re-readings and rewrit-ings She describes how perceptions of the texts and of their meaning are alteredthrough time They become lsquopliable and sticky artefacts gripped moulded andstamped with new meanings by every generation of readers and they come tous irreversibly altered by their experiencesrsquo⁵ Equally important in my vieware the dynamic processes through which poetry travels and survives and be-comes an active agent through time place language and culture This lsquoiterabil-ityrsquo of poetry is one of the key aspects that reception scholars have to handle asthey struggle to find ways of describing and explaining how and why ancienttexts continue to resurface and to act as artistic and cultural catalysts Differentapproaches have characterised the process in different ways Pucci drawing onDerrida has explored the capacity of ancient texts to produce semantic andemotional effects even when the original social and historical co-ordinates areoccluded or misunderstood by the subsequent readers and spectators⁶ Puccirsquosdiscussion was grounded in theatre poetry Poetic responses to Homer are notonly a central strand in ancient tragedy but also carriers of the energy that en-ables the richness and moral and psychological complexities of the performancepoetry of the Homeric poems to engage with the new situations into which theyare transplanted⁷ Elizabeth Cook in her prose poem Achilles included a seduc-tive sensory communication of lsquoA game of Chinese whispers A hot word throwninto the next lap before it burns It has not been allowed to set Each hand thatmomentarily holds it weighs it before depositing it with a neighbour also inad-vertently moulds it communicates its own heatrsquo (Cook 2001 104)

Scholars have rightly turned away from lsquouniversalistrsquo models that kidnap po-etic energy and write backwards in order to permanently inscribe values that arelargely invented restrospectively But the problems of explaining and interpretingtranshistorical and transcultural movements are real enough and have to be con-fronted afresh if classical reception research is to be more than an accumulationof case studies that do not go beyond the particularities and specificities inwhich they are embedded

Steiner ndash Gaisser Pucci Hardwick

16 Lorna Hardwick

In this essay I suggest that the reception histories of the Homeric epics pres-ent case studies that are not only important in themselves but also in combina-tion benefit from an approach that combines analysis of the formal elements ofthe ancient texts with close reading of what has been done with them In thatway Homeric receptions can make a special contribution in offering paradigmsfor other areas of classical reception There are two main reasons for this Firstlythe formal elements of epic mdashsuch as for example formulaic epithets similesring compositions proems codas and focalised narrativesmdash provide productiveopportunities for close reading of what happens when the formal aspects of theHomeric poems are transmitted and adapted in other literary traditions Second-ly they also provide a way into the many receptions of Homer which are eithernot directly lexically-based or use the text in inventive ways Sometimes formalaspects persist even when the interaction is not primarily lexical The tensionsbetween formal and non-formal aspects of Homeric reception may provide con-trasts not just between different receptions but also sometimes within differentaspects of the same work

To make a start in exploring this challenging area I shall focus on one keyarea the practice of repetition Philosophers such as Deleuze have used the con-cept of repetition to counter any assumptions that exact replication can ever bepossible repetition is always repetition with a difference⁸ Much has been writ-ten by scholars on the importance of cumulative technique in Homer⁹ and thedirections and tones of the expansiveness that it creates both within thepoems and in interactions with listeners and readers This expansiveness occursboth within the Homeric poems and between the poems and their receptions Forexample in the Iliad the image of the reapers which at 1167ndash71 is part of a sim-ile that holds in stark contrast the corn harvest and the mutual destruction of thetwo armies is elaborated at 18550ndash60 in the scene of harvest plenty on theshield of Achilles The image of the reapers has echoes in different directionswithin the poemWriters responding to Homer can transplant that poetic move-ment although they may contextualise it in a different waysup1⁰

Both within the Homeric poems and in subsequent literature embedded rep-etition grows into the poetics of difference Poets such as Derek Mahon have self-reflexively exploited Heraclitusrsquo metaphor of the river in which it is never possi-ble to step into the same river twice Not only the river but also the wader isnever quite the same

Deleuze Kirk vol i Reynolds


Nobody steps into the same river twiceThe same river is never the sameBecause that is the nature of waterSimilarly your changing metabolismMeans that you are no longer you[hellip]You will tell me that you have executedA monument more lasting than bronzeBut even bronze is perishableYour best poem you know the one I meanThe very language in which the poem was written and the idea of languageAll these things will pass away in time(Mahon lsquoHeraclitus on Riversrsquo in Mahon 1979 107)

Mahonrsquos allusion here is to Horacersquos claim in Odes 3301 that lsquoExegi monumen-tum are perenniusrsquo (lsquoI have executed a monument more lasting than bronzersquotrans West 2002 259) but an analogy might equally be made with the notionof kleos in Homer the claim that the reputation of the heroic warriors andtheir lsquogood deathsrsquo sung by the poets will outlive them One might replyldquoyes but in different ways in different traditionsrdquo and as Mahon suggests ina constantly changing poetic

I want to try to keep the axes of repetition and difference in a creative ten-sion and to trace some examples of how lsquorepetition with a differencersquo uses andadapts Homeric formal qualities with the result that the poetry that emergeshelps readers and scholars to experience and to analyse the continual processof dialogue between ancient and modern In his recent book David Hopkinshas called this lsquoConversing with Antiquityrsquo He proposes a reading processwhich works both backwards and forwards a process in which reception (andtranslation) is never a lone encounter between two parties lsquothough acts of recep-tion are necessarily made in and by individual minds those minds are them-selves already full of the imaginings intuitions and emotions of other humanmindsrsquosup1sup1 My approach is perhaps less gentle less urbane it recognises thesharp edges and the difficulties and disturbances even the conflicts that mayarise from these encounters

Homeric reception involves a variety of processes translation transplanta-tion re-imagining rewriting re-performance Sometimes these overlap Oftenthe formal aspects of lsquorepetitionrsquo serve as a metaphor for agencies that transferpoetic energy across time language and place As a basis for discussion I haveselected four aspects of the Homeric poems and shall briefly mention examples

Hopkins Italics original

18 Lorna Hardwick

of each that bear on the topic of lsquorepetitionrsquo The four areas are formal elementsiconic episodes performance themes

a Formal elements

Formal elements that we have become accustomed to identify with distinctiveHomeric poetics include epithets similes and focalised narrative Separatelyand in combination each of these has an impact in recent literary receptionsshaping readersrsquo perceptions of what is specifically Homeric about the new writ-ing The aesthetic and cultural power of the new writing both draws on Homerand also remodels Homer The formal intertextuality becomes a distinctivepart of the poetics of the new writer who is both writing from his or her literarytradition and aiming to create a new dimension to it

Homeric similes have been drawn into new work in ways that play with per-ceptions of both the ancient and the modern For instance in Patrick KavanaghrsquoslsquoEpicrsquo (1951) the Irish poet Kavanagh (who was to be an important influence onSeamus Heaney and Michael Longley) transposes into a context of disputesabout agricultural land in rural Ireland the simile from Iliad 12421ndash25 inwhich there is a stalemate between the two opposing sides In so doing hedraws on the translation by EV Rieu that he had recently read lsquothey werelike two men quarrelling across a fence in the common field with yardsticks intheir hands each of them fighting for his fair share in a narrow striprsquosup1sup2

This is interesting because Kavanagh does not refer to the specific simile norto the ancient context of the Achaian and Trojan armies A reader who did notknow the Iliad (or at least not very well) might miss the repetitionsup1sup3 Kavanaghworked from the local to the global In this case the global was lsquothe year ofthe Munich botherrsquo that is the events preceding World War II which werealso exercising his mind as he wrote Only later in the poem does he allude tolsquothe ghost of Homerrsquo that helped him to see the links between local mattersand the world stage Some of Kavanaghrsquos readers would spot the reversal ofthe Homeric simile others would merely have a generalised conception ofHomer as a lsquopoet of warrsquo In either case it is the formal movement that is impor-tant

There are many notable examples of the localglobal connection being madethrough the use of short (often very short) Homeric similes in Derek Walcottrsquos

Rieu See further Hardwick


Omeros (1990)sup1⁴ Such use of similes is part of Walcottrsquos poetic technique whichexploits a variety of classicizing devices including an ironic katabasissup1⁵ For lon-ger and more expansive similes we can turn to Michael Longley who often in-cludes a very close translation as part of his sonnets into which he interpolateshis own specificities of place and linguistic register drawing on any disjunctionthat is part of the Homeric simile An example is his exploitation of the poppy asthe image of the death of Gorgythion in lsquoA Poppyrsquo (2000)sup1⁶ In contrast with Ka-vanagh the classicist Longley expects his readers to be aware of this He writeslsquoan image Virgil steals hellipand so do Irsquo thus proclaiming his own status alongsideVirgil as a poet energised by Homer (Longley 2006 255)

However my argument about the importance of formal elements does notdepend just on the examples of transposition of similes A whole range of fram-ing and detailed devices is involved In a recent discussion of formalism in Ho-meric reception Simon Perris argues that Homeric receptions pointedly use pro-ems and codas to position themselves with respect to genre theme and literarytradition and that this is a highly charged literary manoeuvre that establishes orrejects a relationship with Homeric epicsup1⁷ Perrisrsquo discussion ranges over exam-ples from poetry (Logue and Walcott) to science fiction and the novel Formalopening and closing devices as much as similes position the new works bothin relation to Homer and in relation to other works This suggests that compar-ison between new works (including between genres) is important in allowingconsideration of how they relate to one another as well as to the Homericante-text Hopkinsrsquo concept of lsquoconversingrsquo has lateral trajectories as well as di-achronic The triangularity model involved in reading comparative relationshipsallows close reading and formal analysis to operate without constraining therange of meanings or positioning the ancient text as a closed arbiter of meaningand cultural value

b Iconic episodes

These are episodes that lsquorecurrsquo (sc are repeated) in many receptions of HomerThey draw on knowledge of the story of the Iliad or the Odyssey includingstock scenes that are repeated within the poems themselves and also appeal

See Hardwick for discussion of the relationship between Walcottrsquos strategy in Omeros and the tree-felling simile used in the narrative of the death of Sarpedon in Iliad ndash Hardwick Discussed in Taplin Perris

20 Lorna Hardwick

to a wider audience that may have more generalised perceptions about what sortof poet Homer is Sometimes the lsquorepetition with a differencersquo involves the se-quence and arrangement of lines For example Michael Longley lsquoCeasefirersquo(1995) which images the supplication scene between Priam and Achilles inIliad 24 moves to the very end of the poem and after the meal of reconciliation

I get down on my knees and do what must be doneAnd kiss Achillesrsquo hand the killer of my son(Longley 2006 225)

Longleyrsquos lines thus represent a coda to this variant on the stock scene of sup-plication rather than a kind of proem and so perhaps bring home to readerswhat they will have to do in order to live in peace across the sectarian divideat the time of a truce in the north of Ireland

Recent examples which have taken Homeric repetition with a difference farbeyond the circle of classicists have featured the slaughter of the suitors and thehanging of the maids in the Odyssey Michael Longley lsquoThe Butchersrsquo (1991)transposed the slaughter to modern Ireland during lsquoThe Troublesrsquo (Longley2006 194) Derek Walcott in The Odyssey A Stage Version (1993) had Penelopeprevent the hanging of the maid probably because Walcott could not stomachthe apparent aesthetic validation of a treatment of house slaves that resonatedwith the history of slavery in the Caribbean In Walcott the simile associatedwith the fluttering of the maids as they hung (Odyssey 22465ndash72) is transferredto Penelope as an image of her suffering lsquothey tried to strangle lovehellipShe flut-tered She played dead but her warm heart still beatrsquo (Walcott 1993 158)

The hanging of the maids has come to represent a topos in the history of op-pression It underlies the hangings of women in the futuristic fundamentalistpatriarchy depicted in Margaret Atwoodrsquos The Handmaidrsquos Tale (1986) and ofthe maids in her novella The Penelopiad (2005) which was subsequently adapt-ed for the stage and premiered by the Royal Shakespeare Company The publish-ed play text has an image of the mains on the cover (Atwood 2007) In the stageversion the play ends with Penelopersquos vision of the dead maids who return tohaunt her and Odysseus lsquoWe had no voicewe had no namewe had no choic-ehellipwe took the blameit was not fairrsquo But they resist Penelopersquos grasp

I hold out my arms to them my doves my loveliest ones But they only run awayRun isnrsquot quite accurate Their legs donrsquot move Their still-twitching feet donrsquot touch theground(Atwood 2007 scene 32 p 82)


c Performance

Atwoodrsquos staged Penelopiad differed in significant respects from the book ver-sion that preceded it notably the arguments presented for and against the hang-ing of the maids (lsquoThe Trial of Odysseusrsquo)sup1⁸ Performing Homerrsquos performance po-etry rather than reading it on the page brings together rhapsode players andaudience in ways that are sometimes mediated by expectations about Greek the-atre but which also draw on the interactions that the Homeric poems set up be-tween poem and listeners In her introductory remarks to the Edinburgh Festivalrehearsed readings from her work Achilles (Edinburgh Book Festival 2003 12 Au-gust) Elizabeth Cook paid tribute to the actor Greg Hicks because of his experi-ence of classical performance She said that what made Homer a poet for thepresent was not just the material shared between antiquity and modernity(fishspearsshields) but rather the physiology and chemistry of the bodywhich enabled communication of emotions that enabled moderns to have a rap-port with the ancients These elements were to the fore in Verse Theater Manhat-tanrsquos 2003 tour of Christopher Loguersquos lsquoAccountrsquo of the Iliad War Music (present-ed by an all-female cast) I was able to interview the company after theirperformance in Bristol in March 2003 One actor commented (on Loguersquos text)that lsquoitrsquos a very muscular texthelliptherersquos not a huge thought process between feel-ing and action So I know for myself that the more I could invest in it physicallythe betterhellipto understand and really wrap myself around these charactersrsquo Sheadded that lsquowe had worked with very heavy shields and swords during the fightsso that we learned the weight of these weapons so that when we didnrsquot have themwe had the physical memory of what it was like to move with thatrsquo (italics added)This placed great demands on the audience because in the actual performanceweapons were not used lsquoDuring rehearsal we just had to keep trusting theyrsquoregoing to see what wersquore going for without us holding the actual spearrsquo

Performance poetry ancient and modern brings the physical memory of theaudience into play This adds an extra dimension to what Elizabeth Minchin hasdiscussed in her 2007 monographsup1⁹ (This is a companion work to her Homer andthe Resources of Memory [2001] which considers the implications of cognitivetheory to the Homeric epics) In her 2007 book Minchin explores the relationshipbetween discourse and memory which she stresses is multifaceted including in-formation stored by the senses and also lsquoworld knowledgersquo that is informationabout the physical environment the social world and the skills needed in those

See Atwoodrsquos comment in Atwood viindashviii Minchin

22 Lorna Hardwick

contexts (Minchin 2007 9) This she argues supports the bard providing scriptsfrom episodic memory (eg on preparing meals harnessing horses departingguests) What carries these into the poems are the formal aspects of stylisationand poetic language One element cues the next and carries into compositionThey embrace not only physical acts but also speech acts Minchinrsquos analysis car-ries this further and she shows how rhythm repetition and memory are inter-twined in the generation of lsquoanswersrsquo (opcit 96 ff) The answers examined byMinchin are mainly those invited in conversation They involve the respondenttaking the words and phrases of the question posed and reusing them in hisor her answer (for instance when Apollo asks Hermes whether he would wishto be in Aresrsquo position in Od 8335ndash37) I suggest that this may be a fruitful anal-ogy to use in discussing Homeric receptions The rewriter responds to the ante-text by including the material that has triggered his or her response And as Min-chin points out (opcit 107) poetic and everyday conversational practices oftenconverge

d Themes

The handling of such themes as war and peace in Homeric receptions would re-quire a paper in itself The assumption that such situations are repeated through-out history enables the themes in Homer to be used as a field for creative inter-pretation and reflection War as a theme that links Homer with subsequenthuman experience and has affinities with theatrical performance in that it re-quires the bodily co-presence of fighters (military practitioners commonly referto the area of combat as the lsquotheatrersquo) Metaphors and experiences of war are sig-nificant activators of the links between the poetry of the Iliad and modern read-ers and listeners Homeric epic provides experiential parallels and psychologicaltriggers that enable war poetry to communicate across generations contributinga physical and emotional force to the rhythm repetition and memory describedby Minchin In her recent study of literary representations of war from the Iliadto Iraq Kate McLoughlin comments

lsquoThe reasons that make warrsquos representation imperative are as multitudinous as thosewhich make it impossible to impose discursive order on the chaos of conflicthellipto keepthe record for the self and others (those who were there and can no longer speak for them-


selves and those who were not there and need to be told to give some meaning to massdeath to memorialisehellipto provide cathartic relief to warn and even through the warningto promote peacersquosup2⁰

Multi-faceted aspects of Homeric repetition and reception ndash formal performativeand thematicmdashhave been brought together in a new poem by Alice Oswald enti-tled Memorial (2011) which Oswald describes as a lsquotranslation of the Iliadrsquos at-mosphere not its story generated by the Iliadrsquos enargeia (which she glossesas lsquobright unbearable realityrsquo) To communicate that enargeia she strips awayHomeric narrative to reveal a poem made of similes and short biographies of sol-diers which she thinks derive from the Greek tradition of lament poetry So herpoem presents a lsquokind of oral cemeteryrsquo an attempt to remember peoplersquos namesand lives She paraphrases the biographies but translates the similes Each is re-peated as if in a lament (with a sometimes incantatory effect) and is also trans-posed away from its place in Homerrsquos poem a kind of parataxis She wrote lsquoI usethem as openings to see what Homer was looking atrsquo (Oswald 2011 2) The trans-positions add to the memorial a lament for those whose names were only record-ed in Homer with little or no comment They are in some ways subversive of thestress on iconic episodes that is found in so many receptions of Homer So herethere is repetition with a difference to make a new poem but it is a repetitionthat also draws on the structures in the Homeric poem itself

Oswaldrsquos text starts with a list of names of those killed in the Iliad Thenames take up seven and a half pages They are not in alphabetical order ason most memorials but in the order of their passing So the poem begins prosai-cally lsquoThe first to die was Protesilausrsquo (opcit 13) The descriptions of the menand their deaths use material that is in Homer but they are interwoven with sim-iles taken from different parts of the poem Unlike Logue who uses differentnames so that there is a disjunction from Homer that can disorientate the readerOswald retains the names but expands on their deaths by associating them withthe refrains provided by similes that are repeated In the Catalogue of Ships inthe second book of the Iliad Protesilaus is introduced as the first leader to die(2695ndash702) there is an allusion to his widow who tears her cheeks with griefand then the focus returns to his successor as leader Oswald reworks thislsquoHis wife rushed out clawing her facersquo and lsquoPodarcus his altogether less impres-sive brotherTook over command but that was long agoHersquos been in the blackearth now for thousands of yearsrsquo Time is rewritten both forwards and back-wards Then a nine-line simile is repeated twice to give Protesilaus the memorialthat he does not achieve in Homer

McLoughlin

24 Lorna Hardwick

Like a wind-murmurBegins a rumour of wavesOne long note getting louderThe water breathes a deep sighLike a land ndash rippleWhen the west wind runs through a fieldWishing and SearchingNothing to be foundThe corn stalks shake their green heads(Oswald 201114)

There are echoes of the simile at Iliad 2144ndash52 when the assembly of Greeksloses heart and begins to leave for home but there is also a foreshadowing ofGlaukosrsquo simile of the leaves at Iliad 6146ndash51 in which he likens the genera-tions of humanity to those of the leaves which are scattered by the wind butthe trees from which they are shaken produce new leaves in the next season Os-wald holds the two similes in tension by the use of the phrase lsquoshake their greenheadsrsquo for the corn-stalks that can provide no comfort but nevertheless image thepromise of new life In Homer the formulaic epithet applied to the grain-givingfield in 2548 (ζείδωρος ἄρουρα) is associated with Erechtheus and autochthonyOswald takes up the sequence of associations in the next section which refers toEchepolus lsquoknown for his cold seed-like concentrationrsquo and to Elephenor whodies trying to reclaim his corpse In contrast with Homer in Oswald both attracta short simile in lament again repeated

Like leavesSometimes they light their green flamesAnd are fed by the earthAnd sometimes it snuffs them out(opcit 15)

The shaking heads of the corn stalks of the previous simile are given a greaterambivalence by juxtaposition with the one that follows it in Oswald

I hope I have shown that lsquorepetitionrsquo in its various guises also involves move-ment and difference At its most effective it is also developmental The formalstructures in Homer and their transplantation into a new work provide waysof marking and responding to lsquotime tensionsrsquosup2sup1 as well as bringing the repressedto the fore The most influential aspects of Homeric epic such as iconic episodesthemes and the poetics of performance need to be considered through the formalstructures and practices that transmit and embed them I suggest that examina-

I borrow the insight from Taplin


tion of repetition and difference both formal and narrative yields significant in-sights into how the Homeric poems are subsequently conceived and reconceivedIf I am right in my claims that the study of the migration of iconic episodes andthemes in Homer necessarily involves formal elements then the relationship be-tween the textual study of the Homeric poems and the lsquoidea of Homerrsquo that per-sists in the popular imagination (eg Homer as a poet of war) also becomes partof a lateral conversation rather than a polarity This is exemplified in Oswaldrsquospoem There is surely rich work to be done to trace the propensities that differentformal elements take with them when they are repeated and varied in new con-texts

Finally I would like to comment briefly on the issues raised for the lsquoethics ofreceptionrsquo a strand of debate in contemporary studies that has particular impli-cations for the status and interpretation of the Homeric poems and the recep-tions that they have inspired A recent article by the translation studies scholarLawrence Venuti was called lsquoThe Poetrsquos Version or An ethics of translationrsquosup2sup2 Inthis article Venuti revisited some of his early work on lsquodomesticatingrsquo and lsquofor-eignisingrsquo models for translation He argues that lsquothe poetrsquos versionrsquo is a sec-ond-order creation that mixes translation and adaptation and that this is a twen-tieth-century phenomenon that is distinct from early modern notions oflsquoimitationrsquo Part of his argument is about the critical impact of creative rework-ings on the receiving culture a relationship that he addresses in terms of ethicsHe complains that lsquothe poets who practise it have not always been forthrightabout what they have donersquosup2sup3 There are several things wrong with this state-ment For a start poets do what poets will do Practising the art of poetrydoes not necessarily require the provision of a commentary on their work (de-spite the usefulness of such metapoetical material as authorial prefaces or theextensive interviews given by poets such as Seamus Heaney and Derek Walcott)However my main disagreement with Venuti is that in the case of rewritings ofHomer the commentary is in the poetry A lsquocommentaryrsquo is actually often implic-itly contained in the new text in the formal arrangements chosen by the newwriter These are not a mystery closed to those (including the new writer) whomay not know Homeric Greek but are transparent both on the page and onthe stage They at minimum provide the raw material for comparisons and atmaximum introduce an element of self-reflexivity

Thus attention to the formal aspects of the relationship between the ante-text the new text and the mediating texts both implies respect for the aesthetics

Venuti Venuti

26 Lorna Hardwick

of each of the contributions (recognizing the fluidity of recombinations in all theliterary traditions that are involved) and as a result enables comparisons withinand between texts Adaptations of form both signal relationships and complicatethem whether the exchanges take place in conversational mode (as Hopkinsterms it) or in challenging mode (as Logue practises it and as Oswald explores)Much is talked about the lsquonew philologyrsquo that classical reception research re-quires I think it is important that formal analysis and comparison is part ofthe scrutiny not solely of literary receptions but also of those that exploreother genres Such investigations imply greater collaboration between receptionscholars and specialists in other areas of Classics The Corfu conference offeredus a range of examples and approaches and as we heard about them in the var-ious panels we experienced a central strand of Homeric poetics and its recep-tions ndash repetition with a differencesup2⁴

I would like to thank the organisers for devising this conference and I am grateful to the Ion-ian University for its warm welcome and hospitality to visitors from overseas in November It was an honour and a delight to be in the company of such a gathering of Homer scholars



Margarita Alexandrou

Hipponax and the OdysseySubverting Text and Intertext

Reception of a text can take multiple forms citation imitation opposition re-modelling parody Of all these modes parody is both the most indicative of au-thority of the target text and the most interesting play with poetic authority as itis arguably the most metapoetic of all literary devices The lsquosubversiversquo receptionof the Homeric Odyssey by the sixth-century BC iambic poet Hipponax is onesuch case of a play with poetic authority that has already been explored asparodysup1 (on parodic treatments of Odysseus in later periods of time see Petrakouin this volume)

My aim in this paper is to investigate the engagement of Hipponax withHomer and to revisit the subtle intra-textual and inter-textual dynamics betweenthe receiving and the source texts and their respective genre iambos and epos Ihope to show that the Odyssey is firmly embedded in the conceptualization ofHipponaxrsquos own iambos that the epos is there not only as a hypotextsup2 of parodicallusion but as an intertext that is employed particularly at moments where thepoetic agenda is articulated In order to deconstruct and analyze the complexityof Hipponaxrsquos reception of the source text I will examine briefly some notablefeatures of his poetry that single him out amongst archaic poets

Hipponax represents the latest and in a sense most distilled phase of archaiciambos Active in a different geographical and chronological area in comparison tothe older exponents of the genre Archilochus and Semonides Hipponax distanceshimself from the mainstream iambos in many respects by narrowing down its

I am indebted to Professor Chris Carey for his insightful comments on this paper For parody in Hipponax see Degani ndash Pogravertulas Miralles and Pogravertulas ndash Rosen Carey ndash Parody is a multifarious phenomenontherefore a useful but perhaps limited term for the complex intertextual and intergeneric engage-ment at play here in Hipponax My aim here is not to deny the importance of parody in Hippo-nax but to shed some further light on its presence and role The complex nature of Hipponaxrsquosparody fits recent accounts that see parody of one text as revealing of the hypertextrsquos own fic-tional practices and therefore acting as meta-fiction On parody as literary criticism see Dentith and on parody as metafiction see Rose and Genette () coins the term to indicate the text upon which the secondary work is modelled(the secondary text itself is called hypertext) The intertextual relationship of the hypertext to thehypotext is not necessarily parodic

scope and taking some of its features to extremessup3 Through his poetry he creates afictional or semi-fictional world a very narrow low and circumscribed worldwithin which he situates himself and other low characters This world presentedby his poetry is one dominated by ugly people burglars beggars and gluttonsand humorous episodes of sexual and scatological activity of a farcical and grotes-que nature Recurrent characters and situations across his poems create a sense ofcoherence a character named Bupalus is regularly vilified as an enemy and Areteanother recurring figure appears to be a woman of sexual license⁴ even a char-acter named Hipponax regularly figures as a brawler burglar beggar or sexualpredator sometimes impotent a character involved in all kinds of humiliatingactivities⁵ The Hipponactean narrator (implicitly distinct from the Hipponax char-acter) is also an outsider and situates himself among the dregs⁶

Hipponaxrsquos love for ugliness marginality and grotesquery is reflected inboth diction and form his linguistic register achieves a degree of cruditywhich outstrips his predecessors and his Ionic dialect contains elements ofLydian⁷ His invective is distinctive in the lack of any wider element of reflectionor justification for his attacks and he constitutes a new and lsquouglierrsquo turn for iam-bos even in his use of metre He uses the choliambicscazon metre (an iambicmetre which ends in a spondee rather than an iambos) a lsquolamersquo metre as itsname suggests whose ending creates a rhythmically limping effect compatiblewith the lsquouglyrsquo and unorthodox character of Hipponaxrsquos poems

As I shall argue the extent to which Hipponax uses lsquouglinessrsquo⁸ (in languagetheme metre social register construction of the poetic persona) and the way inwhich the Homeric intertext is introduced in this world creates more than just a dif-ference within the standard generic range already offered by the lsquoless elevatedrsquo iam-bosiambic agenda His use of ugliness is embedded in a larger (meta)poetic strat-

General important studies on Hipponaxrsquos iambography are West ndash and ndash De-gani and Miralles-Pogravertulas Brown ndash Carey ndash For gen-eral recent discussions of iambos see Bartol Carey Kantzios Rotstein The name Bupalus occurs in the corpus eleven times frr W W W W W W W a W W (also perhaps in frr W W though the text is veryuncertain) and the name Arete four frr W W W W Another female characterCypso with the name perhaps being an obscene distortion of the name Calypso seems to appeartwice in the corpus in frr W and W (in the second instance the text is uncertain) See frr W and W On the distinctiveness of the Hipponactean narrator see Morrison mainly ndash Seealso Carey ndash On Hipponactean language see most recently Hawkins By lsquouglinessrsquo I mean the marked deviation from social physical aesthetic poetic moral ide-als and norms which invites the alienation of the readeraudience


egy which uses intertextual dynamics to make an implicit statement about earlyGreek poetic genres and also achieves as we shall see below complex effects interms of characterization of the primary narrator and the received text

A selection of a number of Hipponactean fragments can illustrate the constantmultilayered engagement with the OdysseyWhereas at first glance they appear to belowlife accounts of frauds sexual encounters fights or drinking events they seemhowever to be bringing Odyssey to the foreground in a number of ways⁹

Hipponax uses the Odyssey primarily to outline the profile of the iambistnarrator himself as it is evident in the following hymnic style poems

Ἑρμῆ φίλrsquo Ἑρμῆ Μαιαδεῦ Κυλλήνιεἐπεύχομαί τοι κάρτα γὰρ κακῶς ῥιγῶκαὶ βαμβαλύζω hellipδὸς χλαῖναν Ἱππώνακτι καὶ κυπασσίσκονκαὶ σαμβαλίσκα κἀσκερίσκα καὶ χρυσοῦστατῆρας ἑξήκοντα τοὐτέρου τοίχου (fr 32 W)sup1⁰

Hermes dear Hermes son of Maia CyllenianI pray to you for I am shivering violently and terriblyand my teeth are chatteringhellipGive Hipponax a cloak tunic sandals felt shoesand 60 gold staters on the other side

ἐμοὶ γὰρ οὐκ ἔδωκας οὔτέ κω χλαῖνανδασεῖαν ἐν χειμῶνι φάρμακον ῥίγltεοgtςοὔτrsquo ἀσκέρηισι τοὺς πόδας δασείηισιἔκρυψας ὥς μοι μὴ χίμετλα ῥήγνυται (fr 34 W)

For you havenrsquot yet given me a thick cloakas a remedy against the cold in winternor have you covered my feet with thick felt shoesso that my chilblains not burst

The speaker claims to be operating from a state of great poverty and makes anumber of bold requests to Hermes The distinctive tone here resides both inthe ironic irreverence of the narrator and also the intimate relationship that isimplied to exist between the narrator and god Hermes reminiscent of Odysseusrsquorelationship with his divine patron Athena (and occasionally Hermes see also

By that time the Homeric epics must have already been the most recognizable Greek culturalartefacts The poet could therefore rely on his audience to engage in the triangular process nec-essary for successful intertextuality All Hipponactean fragments are quoted according to West IEG

ndash translations arefrom Gerber with minor adjustments


below discussion of fr 79 W) Moreover the request for a cloak especially enhan-ces identification with Odysseus and simultaneously leads to an undercutting ofthe iambist by recalling Od 1678ndash85sup1sup1 where Telemachus at Eumaeusrsquo placepromises to give a cloak sandals and food to Odysseus In the requests of theirreverent narrator in the Hipponactean fragment lurks no less irony than inthe episode with the disguised king Odysseus in Odyssey 16

Another instance of identification of the Hipponactean narrator with Odys-seus occurs in fr 73 W with the narrator being involved in a boxing matchwhich is described in graphic detail and recalls strongly Odysseusrsquo boxingmatch with Irussup1sup2

ὤμειξε δrsquo αἷμα καὶ χολὴν ἐτίλησενἐγὼ δεγ[ ]οἱ δέ μltεο ὀgtδόντεςἐν ταῖς γνάθοισι πάντες ltἐκgtκεκινltέαgtται (fr 73 W)

helliphe pissed blood and shat bilebut Ihellip and all the teethin my jaws have been dislodgedhellip

A Hipponax character distinct from the Hipponactean narrator is often involvedin low narratives and is also modelled on the figure of Odysseus We are betterserved in this respect by fr 79 W that preserves a more substantial narrativeHere the Hipponax character is assimilated to Odysseus again by evoking recog-nisable incidents from the Odyssey

ἀ ]λοιᾶσθα[ιτῆς ] ἀνοιΐης ταύτη[ςτὴ ]ν γνάθον παρα[

]ι κηρίνους ἐποι[ 5]κἀνετίλησε[]χρυσολαμπέτωι ῥάβδωι ]αν ἐγγὺς ἑρμῖνος

Ἑρμῆς δrsquo ἐς Ἱππώνακτος ἀκολουθήσαςτο ]ῦ κυνὸς τὸν φιλήτην 10

]ὡς ἔχιδνα συρίζει]αξ δὲ νυκτὶ βου[hellip()][]καὶ κατεφράσθη[]δευς κατεσκη[

Od ndash ἀλλrsquo ἦ τοι τὸν ξεῖνον ἐπεὶ τεὸν ἵκετο δῶμα ἕσσω μιν χλαῖνάν τε χιτῶνά τε εἵματακαλά δώσω δὲ ξίφος ἄμφηκες καὶ ποσσὶ πέδιλα πέμψω δrsquo ὅππῃ μιν κραδίη θυμός τε κελεύει Od κάπτων ἀμφοτέρῃσι χαμαῖ δε κε πάντας ὀδόντας γναθμῶν ἐξελάσαιμι For a dis-cussion of the relation between Hipponax and the Homeric Odysseus see Rosen ndash


ἐμερ]μήριξε τῶι δὲ κ[η]λητ[ῆι 15]ς παῦνι μυῖαν [

ὁ δrsquo αὐτίκrsquo ἐλθὼν σὺν τριοῖσι μάρτυσινὅκου τὸν ἔρπιν ὁ σκότος καπηλεύειἄνθρωπον εὗρε τὴν στέγην ὀφέλλοντα ndashοὐ γὰρ παρῆν ὄφελμα ndash πυθμένι στοιβῆς 20

hellip to be cudgelledhelliphellip of this foolishnesshelliphellip(striking) his jawhelliphellipmade of waxhelliphellipand he shat uponhelliphellipstaff gleaming with goldhelliphellipnear the bed postAnd Hermes providing an escort to the house of Hipponaxhellipthe dog-stealerhellip helliphisses like a viperhelliphellip(Hipponax deliberating) at nighthelliphellipand devisedhelliphelliphellippondered and to the charmerhelliphellipsmall() (like) a flyhellipWith three witnesses he went at onceto the place where the swindler sells wineand found a fellow sweeping the roomwith a stock of thorn since no broom was at hand

This obscure and quite complicated narrative is typically Hipponactean in style inthat it is broadly realistic vivid and racy concerning probably an act of theft inwhich a number of characters are involved (Hermes and the Hipponax characterat l 9 the recurring Bupalus perhaps at l 12 and three witnesses at l 17) Hermesrsquointervention betrays that his narrative is more than just a story about lowlifes andinvites us to notice the interaction with epos and see this as a parallel to Athenarsquosdivine patronage to Odysseussup1sup3 Hipponax seems to act as the hero of his own nar-rative with his own divine patron and is simultaneously also a lowlife trickster thispresentation has a bearing on Odysseussup1⁴ One recalls also specifically Od 10275ndash301 where a disguised Odysseus meets Hermes on his way to Circe and the godgives him the potion that will later protect him from her

Moreover Hipponax lsquopopulatesrsquo his poetry with lsquoOdysseanrsquo characters (AreteCypso)sup1⁵ Their presence and the very fact that they are taken from the fairytale

See Carey On Odysseus as the archetypal trickster see for instance Pucci See above n


world of Odysseusrsquo adventures described in the Odyssey is in marked contrast to thearguably different kind of ugly fairytale world suggested by the Hipponactean con-texts

Frr 13 and 14 Wwhich probably formed parts of a single poem present a drink-ing party of people of the low orders (notice that they drink wine from a milk pail)Arete is presiding over this party so the scene parodically recalls the Phaeacian Are-tersquos presence and presiding role in Alcinousrsquo palace in Od 753ff

ἐκ πελλίδος πίνοντες οὐ γὰρ ἦν αὐτῆικύλιξ ὁ παῖς γὰρ ἐμπεσὼν κατήραξε (fr 13 W)

drinking (plural) from a pailfor she had no cup since the slave had fallen on itand smashed it

ἐκ δὲ τῆς πέλληςἔπινον ἄλλοτrsquo αὐτός ἄλλοτrsquo Aρήτηπρούπινεν (fr 14 W)

they were drinking from the pail nowhe and now Arete were drinking a toast

Less straightforward in its Odyssean overtones but also significant is fr 12 W inwhich the recurring figures of Bupalus and Arete seem to be involved in whatlooks to be an act of theft or fraudsup1⁶ Apart from Arete here being set in yet anotherlowlife story parody is enhanced on another level Despite the low content we haveuse of high style language (Ἐρυθραίων παῖδας δυσώνυμον cf eg Il 6255 δυσώνυ-μοι υἷες Aχαιῶν) which creates this mock stylistic effect typical of Hipponaxsup1⁷Here(at least in what is preserved from this poem) one steps back from very specific en-gagement with Odysseus to a more pervasive sort of epic feel

τούτοισι θηπέων τοὺς Ἐρυθραίων παῖδαςὁ μητροκοίτης Βούπαλος σὺν Aρήτηιdaggerκαὶ ὑφέλξων τὸν δυσώνυμον daggerἄρτον (fr 12 W)Bupalus the mother-fucker with Aretefooling with these words (by these means) the Erythraeanspreparing to draw back the damnable loaf

The majority of scholars read this passage as an erotic one see Masson ad loc Degani ad loc Rosen However for reasons that are beyond the scope of this paper I take itas a narrative of an act of stealing We sporadically find other mock epic diction in the Hipponactean corpus eg fr a W frWand W Wand W (which are specifically parodying the hymnic form) see also fr W and fr W


Apart from similar fleetingsubtle evocations of the Odyssey in the scazonpoems there is some scanty evidence that Hipponax may have composedmore substantial mock-epic narratives as suggested in frr 74ndash77 W

οδυ[[

ω[[ (fr 74 W)

hellipOdysseushellip

timesndash υ ]ωλῆν[timesndash υ ]ζ ων φυκι[timesndash ]αν αὐτὸν ὅστις ε[timesndash ]ἐπεὶ τὸν ψωμὸ[ν

]ερεῦσι τὴν γενὴ[ν (fr 75 W)helliphellipseaweedrazor-fishhelliphelliphim whohelliphellipsincewhen the nibbleshelliphellipthey ask questions about hismy familyhellip

timesndash υndash ]υψου[timesndash υ (ndash) ]αιηκας[timesndash υ ]επλοωσεν[times ]ασιος ὥσπερ βου[

]υτο φρενώλης τ[ 5times ]θεν διδάξων γ[timesndash ]ο κορσιππ[timesndash υ ]λυκρον κ[timesndash υ ]εκτης[timesndash ]ενειδα[ 10

timesndash υ ]αλλα τ[ (fr 77 W)

hellip(C)ypso ()helliphellip(Ph)aeacians()helliphelliphelliplike (Bupalus)helliphellipfrenziedhelliphellip(came) to predicthelliphelliplotus roothellip

Although the condition of these fragments is desperate they seem to have con-stituted either a single poem or adjacent poems as parts of a single Odysseannarrative sequence (on grounds of content and position on the papyrus) Hippo-nax seems to mainly draw again his refashioned material specifically on the


Phaeacian rhapsodies of the Odysseysup1⁸ A number of narrative details would fit adistorted version of Odysseusrsquo adventures related in a very condensed mannerreferences to seaweed (fr 752 W) to the Phaeacians asking questions about fam-ily (fr 755 W) and to τὸν ψωμό[ν (lsquomorselrsquo or lsquonibblesrsquo in fr 754 W) may pointeither to the Cyclops incident (linguistically) or may involve a distorted allusionto the Phaeacian dinner of Odysseussup1⁹

The transformation of the Homeric model seems substantial firstly there isperhaps admixture with other contemporary themes and characters (perhaps areference to Bupalus in fr 774 W) Secondly the poem would appear to bequite long for the Hipponactean standards though still much shorter than theepic Thirdly it may have moved quite rapidly between incidents which wouldmake it visibly different from epic and may have also displayed some of thechanges of scene and pace that we find elsewhere in Hipponaxsup2⁰

The third person singular narrative raises important questions regarding thenarrator either the regular Hipponactean narrator tells the story of an Odysseusas an extra-diegetic narrator or even Odysseus himself assumes the role of thenarrator as in the Odyssey and narrates a distorted version of his well-known ad-ventures This in turn makes one wonder if Odysseus here was modelled on thecharacter of Hipponax (as Hipponax is elsewhere modelled on Odysseus)

The most crucial indication here for our understanding is that fr 74 W preserveswhat seems from the papyrus to be a title relating to Odysseus or Odyssey (οδυ[)most likely the only Hipponactean title preserved in the whole of the corpus Itmay be that the distinctive Odyssean mythical content of this poem justified the at-tribution of a title as well as its scale In fact if indeed frr 74ndash77 W belonged to afirst person narrative entitled Ὀδυσσεύς we are probably indeed before a little mockmini-epicsup2sup1 The mock-epic content of this set of fragments and the title could evenpoint to a type of performance different than that of the rest of the Hipponactean

See Rosen ndash who regards Odysseus as figuring as a satirist already in Homerand then becoming a favourite iambic and comic theme The occurrence of διδάξων (fr W) suggests that we may even have a reference to a prophe-cy Perhaps the pronounced narrative element of iambos in comparison to the rest of lyric ac-knowledged by Bowie ndash allowed Hipponax to elaborate in this kind of reception ofthe epic as narrative element is a distinctive feature of the epos as well and this enabled theHipponactean narrator to align or contrast himself with the Homeric one Of course it may also be that Hipponaxrsquos predilection for the Odyssey reflects the penchantof the author and of his generic agenda for mythological narratives in general For a more de-tailed discussion of this set of fragments along with another set of Hipponactean fragments(frr ndash W) that seem to relate mythical narrative see Alexandrou


material perhaps festive rather than sympotic something which has a bearing onthe implications of the narrative style and intertextsup2sup2

Parodic transformation of the Homeric model by Hipponax takes also anoth-er form It accommodates the hexameter and Homeric formulae Fr 128 W con-stitutes a satire of the grandiose Homeric metre used to satirize the exceedingappetite of a voracious glutton but also constitutes a very concentrated parodyof the beginning lines of the Odysseysup2sup3

Μοῦσά μοι Εὐρυμεδοντιάδltεαgt τὴν ποντοχάρυβδιντὴν ἐν γαστρὶ μάχαιραν ὃς ἐσθίει οὐ κατὰ κόσμονἔννεφrsquo ὅπως ψηφῖδι lt gt κακὸν οἶτον ὀλεῖταιβουλῆι δημοσίηι παρὰ θῖνrsquo ἁλὸς ἀτρυγέτοιο (fr 128 W)

Tell me Muse of the sea swallowingthe stomach carving of Eurymedontiades who eats in no orderly mannerso that through a baneful vote determined by the peoplehe may die a wretched death along the shore of the undraining () sea

Hipponax however departs from Homerrsquos word-order to enhance the parodic ef-fect and parades a number of Homericepic motifs the invocation to the Musethe interposition of the first person the request to sing the epic dialectal formsthe long compound Homeric style words in appropriate metrical positions theuse of Homeric formulae and allusion to Charybdissup2⁴ It may be that hexametricalparody was a significant strand in the corpus which is unfortunately lost to ussup2⁵

In frr 72 W and 16 W we seem to digress from the Odyssey and have a refer-ence to the famous Rhesus story in Iliad 10

ἐπrsquo ἁρμάτων τε καὶ Θρεϊκίων πώλωνλευκῶν daggerὀείους κατεγγὺςdagger Ἰλίου πύργωνἀπηναρίσθη Ῥῆσος Αἰνειῶν πάλμυς (fr 725ndash7 W)

There is much dispute in scholarship about the performance of Hipponactean poetry I incline tothe view that much of the material is sympotic and that public performance was possible only forpart of the corpus For the different views on Hipponactean performance see West OCD sv lsquoiambicpoetry Greekrsquo (for festive performance) and Bowie (for sympotic performance) Fr W mentioning Cypso scans in hexameter and enhances the possibility that theremay have been more poems written in hexameters designed to be parodies of the epos as inthe case of fr W or maybe we had poems with a mixture of rhythms For comic parody of the epic invocation see also Archil fr W τὸν κεροπλάστην ἄειδεΓλαῦκον See below the testimonium of Athenaeus Β


(while sleeping near) the towers ofIlium by his chariot and white Thracian foalsRhesus sultan of the Aeneianswas despoiled of themhellip

ἐγὼ δὲ δεξιῶι παρrsquo Aρήτηνκνεφαῖος ἐλθὼν rsquoρωιδιῶι κατηυλίσθην (fr 16 W)

with a heron on the right I went to Aretein the dark and took up lodging

However it seems suggestive that the two clear references of Hipponax to theIliad come from the Doloneia which takes us back to the Odysseus territoryagain and his famous dolos set against Rhesus This could imply that Hipponaxrsquosinterest may have been Odysseus (including Iliadic references to him) and notexclusively or predominantly the Odyssey and that the accident of the traditionmay have distorted our perspectivesup2⁶

In fr 16 W Hipponax draws on the portent and prodigies of Homeric narra-tive (Il 10274 ff) and the military language more generally in a predictably eroticcontent The reference to the heron takes us firmly to the Doloneia againsup2⁷

Lastly Homeric echoes are also present in the more serious strand of Hippo-naxrsquos corpus If the highly disputed with reference to their authorship Strasbourgepodes were actually composed by Hipponax as I take them then they further at-test to his reception of Homeric language and imagery in compositions that conformto the lyric composed for the aristocratic hetereiasup2⁸ More specifically in fr 115 W itis the figure of Odysseus who seems once again to be the main intertext the poemanticipates a fateful castaway end for an enemy drawing on the archetypal cast-away Odysseus recalling also Homeric linguistic syntactical and stylistic elements

κύμ[ατι] πλα[ζόμ]ενοςκἀν Σαλμυδ[ησσ]ῶι γυμνὸν εὐφρονε[ 5Θρήϊκες ἀκρό[κ]ομοι

λάβοιεν ndash ἔνθα πόλλrsquo ἀναπλήσαι κακὰδούλιον ἄρτον ἔδων ndashῥίγει πεπηγότrsquo αὐτόν ἐκ δὲ τοῦ χνόουφυκία πόλλrsquo ἐπέχοι 10

It is certainly reasonable to suppose that this reference to the Iliad was not isolated seeSteiner ff who has argued that Hipponax seems to have drawn his diction and imageryfrom the Iliad also in the case of fr W See the discussion of Pogravertulas On this see most recently the thorough discussions of Nicolosi and Carey ndash who take the Strasbourg Epodes as Hipponactean


κροτltέοιgt δrsquo ὀδόντας ὡς [κ]ύων ἐπὶ στόμακείμενος ἀκρασίηιἄκρον παρὰ ῥηγμῖνα κυμαhellipδουταῦτrsquo ἐθέλοιμrsquo ἂν ἰδεῖνὅς μrsquo ἠδίκησε λ[ὰ]ξ δrsquo ἐπrsquo ὁρκίοις ἔβη 15τὸ πρὶν ἑταῖρος [ἐ]ών (fr 1154ndash 16 W)

hellipdrifting about on the waveAnd at Salmydessus may the top-knottedThracians give him nakeda most kindly reception- there he will have full measure of a multitude of woeseating the bread of slaves-stiff from cold As he comes out from the foammay he vomit much seaweedand may his teeth chatter while he lies on his face like a dogat the edge of the surfhis strength spenthellipThis is what Irsquod like him to experiencewho treated me unjustly by trampling on his oathshe who was formerly my friend

Despite the scantily preserved Hipponactean corpus it is possible to distinguisha number of different strands long narratives of the narratorrsquos demi-monde ac-tivities poems imitating the hymnic style long mythological narratives as wellas hexametric ones and perhaps even more mainstream lyric compositions inall of them strikingly there lurks the Odyssey and the figure of Odysseus

What Hipponaxrsquos interaction with epos creates is quite remarkable We arebefore a two-directional receptive process which is revealed and conveyed bysetting up contrasting worlds His engagement with epos has an impact on ourperception both of the speaker and of the narrative (as more than just lowlife sto-ries) and also functions as commentary on the Odysseyepos since it sheds lighton elements of the Odyssey that are only implicit in the epos (for reception aslsquocommentaryrsquo on the source text see Hardwick in this volume) On such a read-ing Hipponaxrsquos love for lsquouglinessrsquo goes beyond a simple selection within therange of opportunities offered by the genre We note a tendency to subvertepic by means of substituting ugliness cowardice and low status for all that isimplicit in the very notion of the heroic epic We also note the fundamental am-biguity which underlies this engagement in that the appeal to epic simultane-ously underlines the antinomian character world and storyline of the Hipponac-tean narrator The intertextual play thus creates a text which is subversion inboth directions it serves both to undermine epic and also to undercut the au-thority of the third person narrator Just as the epic looks slightly preposterousin the way in which it is brought into a new context the speaker himself is


placed under question as he presents himself as a trickster and a low-life beingable however to compose most sophisticated allusive fiction and blur two po-etic traditions This complex two-directional effect generates an unusually richand demanding intertextuality which in turn raises interesting questionsabout audience and context of the Hipponactean poetry

It therefore emerges that the reception of the Homeric epos by Hipponaxamounts to (among other things) an exercise in poetics The increased levelboth of fictionality and appropriation of and interplay with earlier poetry giveshis work a pronounced metapoetic dimension as wellmdashan aspect which has re-ceived only limited attention from recent scholarship mostly focusing on the per-vasive presence of parody of the Homeric epossup2⁹

This sense of Hipponaxrsquos unusual poetic stance and the pervasive presenceof parody is reflected also in the tradition which credits him with its invention(Ath 15698b)sup3⁰ though the claim of the invention is suspect the point aboutparody remains suggestive for the way Hipponax was read in later ages

Πολέμων δrsquo ἐν τῷ δωδεκάτῳ τῶν πρὸς Τίμαιον περὶ τῶν τὰς παρῳδίας γεγραφότων ἱστορῶντάδε γράφει lsquoκαὶ τὸν Βοιωτὸν δὲ καὶ τὸν Εὔβοιον τοὺς τὰς παρῳδίας γράψαντας λογίους ἂνφήσαιμι διὰ τὸ παίζειν ἀμφιδεξίως καὶ τῶν προγενεστέρων ποιητῶν ὑπερέχειν ἐπιγεγονόταςεὑρετὴν μὲν οὖν τοῦ γένους Ἱππώνακτα φατέον τὸν ἰαμβοποιόν λέγει γὰρ οὗτος ἐν τοῖςἑξαμέτροις

Polemon inquiring into the composers of parody writes as follows in the twelfth book of hislsquoAddress to Timaeusrsquo lsquoI should say that both Boeotus and Euboeus who composed parodiesare skilled in words because they play with double meanings and although born later out-strip the poets who preceded them It must be said however that the iambic poet Hipponaxwas the founder of the genre For he speaks as follows in hexameters

The importance of the Odyssey in Hipponaxrsquos work may actually have been moreprofound than the texts allow us to evaluate as is revealed by the fact that itseems to have been built into what was probably Hipponaxrsquos poetic initiationAccording to an anecdote by Choeroboscus in one of his poems Hipponax re-lates a meeting of him with an old woman named Iambe who is washing woolby the shoresup3sup1

For parody as metafiction see references in n Aristotle in Poet a contrary to the above testimonium calls Hegemon of Thasos theinventor of parody but by this he probably means that Hegemon made parody a profession SeeGerber n For discussion of this anecdote see Rosen b ndash Brown ndash Brown ndash and Fowler who adds to the line quoted by Choeroboscus two more linesfound in a fourteenth century manuscript On Iambe and her relation to iambos see West


εἴρηται (scil ἴαμβος) ἤτοι ἀπὸ Ἰάμβης τῆς Κελεοῦ θεραπαίνης ἥτις τὴν Δήμητρα λυπουμένηνἠνάγκασε γελάσαι γέλοιόν τι εἰποῦσα τῷ ῥυθμῷ τούτου τοῦ ποδὸς αὐτομάτως χρησαμένη ἢἀπὸ Ἰάμβης τινὸς ἑτέρας γραός ᾗ Ἱππῶναξ ὁ ἰαμβοποιὸς παρὰ θάλασσαν ἔρια πλυνούσῃ συν-τυχὼν ἤκουσε τῆς σκάφης ἐφαψάμενος ἐφrsquo ἧς ἔπλυνεν ἡ γραῦς

ἄνθρωπrsquo ἄπελθε τὴν σκάφην ἀνατρέπειςκαὶ συλλαβὼν τὸ ῥηθὲν οὕτως ὠνόμασε τὸ μέτρον ἄλλοι δὲ περὶ τοῦ χωλιάμβου τὴν ἱστορίανταύτην ἀναφέρουσι γράφοντες τὸ τέλος τοῦ στίχου

τὴν σκάφην ἀνατρέψεις (Choerob in Heph 31)

It derived its name (scil iambos) either from Iambe Celeusrsquo maidservant who compelled thegrieving Demeter to laugh by saying something in jest and spontaneously using the rhythm ofthis metre or from some other Iambe an old woman whom Hipponax the iambic poet met asshe was washing wool by the sea and heard her say as he touched the trough at which the oldwoman was washing

lsquoSir be gone you are upsetting the troughrsquoAnd grasping what had been said he named the metre after her But others refer this narra-tive to the choliambus writing as the end of the line

lsquoyou will upset the troughrsquo

If it is accurately presented by our later source this story was probably a combi-nation of a highly adapted version of Archilochusrsquo own initiation scene (his veryfamous meeting with the Muses inspired by Hesiodean Dichterweihe)sup3sup2 with theHomeric meeting of Odysseus and Nausicaa by the shore (Od 6149ff) The sig-nificance of this is twofold on the one hand this was probably also a program-matic statement by Hipponax on his relation to the Odyssey a fact which showshow highly influential the Homeric intertext was to his poetry to have presuma-bly even influenced his own story of poetic initiation The kind of distortion ofthe Homeric story perhaps also illustrates that the use of the Homeric intertextwithin his poetry in general was of a similar kind distorted allusive parodic(and perhaps sustained throughout much of the corpus) Particularly importantin the passage is the substitution of the ugly old woman of low status for thebeautiful young virgin princess

If Hipponax had actually used both forms (iambic and scazon) attested bythe anecdote in his possible relation to the Iambe incident then it is as if heis almost enacting a double ἀνατροπή this sense of turning over of the troughwittily points to the fact that he is inverting the rhythm of his predecessor(from iambic to scazons) We may be here before a highly metapoetic moment

ndash Richardson ff Brown ndash Rosen ndash Rotstein ndash Mnesiepes inscription SEG (E col ii ff= Arch Test Tarditi) see Miralles ndash Clay ndash On the ancient tradition of Dichterweihe see Kambylis West ndash


as what is evidently at issue is to define the genre and his oeuvre in relation tothe genre by enacting an adjustment of the rhythm associated with the genrewhile aligning his genre and his oeuvre with the Odyssey

Thus what one gets in Hipponax arguably amounts to a poetics and aesthet-ics of the ugly The case of Hipponactean reception of Homer brings to mind thecase of the geographically and chronologically adjacent Margites which is an-other example of epic subversion of a different kind however (as it focuses onan intellectual anti-hero rather than a moral anti-hero which is the case ofthe Hipponactean narrator) suggesting that we should see this multilayered en-gagement with other texts (and especially epos) in Hipponax as something prob-ably generated by chronology and geography In the Margites features such asits length its extra-diegetic third person narrative and its epic metre suggest af-finities with epic and define it generically up to a point On the other hand cer-tain aspects of narrative technique the juxtaposition of high and low the paro-dic tone and the importance of an anti-hero align it with the Hipponacteaniambos Even rhythmically some of the effects are suggestive of Hipponax TheMargites begins with hexameters and then moves to iambics if this is happeningconstantly then it lacks the fluency of the Homeric hexameter and has a haltingquality to it which aligns it once again with the Hipponactean scazon and thevarious asynartetic metres that one gets in iambos The Margites thereforeseems to be placing itself ambiguously in terms of genre categories it hasvery strong literary cultural affinities with Hipponax something which com-bined with the geographical proximity is very suggestive indeed of the factthat what one gets a glance into with Hipponax is both the distinctive oeuvreof a single poet as well as the product of a cultural milieu

Hence one can see that a careful reading of the scanty corpus of Hipponaxcould be quite insightful We are dealing with an archaic poet who is stretchingthe boundaries of Greek iambos Greek poetic fiction and idea of aesthetics to ex-tremes His poetry has a metapoetic dimension which is both highly self-awareas a kind of writing and to some extent is an experiment with form in extractinga particular aspect of the iambos turning it into the essence of the corpus andsetting up a mirror for epic poetry

In conclusion the complexity and allusiveness of his poetry justifies why itaroused the fascination of Hellenistic poets such as Callimachus and Herodaswho were as Hipponax himself very fond of intertextual play and unusualmodes of poetry Hipponax has therefore arguably been characterized occasion-ally as a lsquoproto-Hellenistic poetrsquo However as he was wronged by the tradition(his work has been very fragmentarily preserved) we can only glimpse whatcould probably have been a most fascinating reworking of the Homeric Odyssey


Andrej Petrovic

Archaic Funerary Epigram andHectorrsquos Imagined Epitymbia

From its very beginnings Greek epigram displays literary features associated withepic language metre and motifs A glance through some 460 verse-inscriptionsfrom the period between the eighth and fifth century BC reveals a wealth of lexe-mic morphological dialectal syntactical and even narrative elements whichearly Greek epigram shares with the Iliad and the Odysseysup1 epigram whose lit-

I would like to express my gratitude to the organizers of the conference the beacons of Greekfiloxenia dear friends and editors of this volume Ioanna Karamanou and Athanasios Efstathioufor their support criticism and patience as well as my thanks to the audience at the IonianUniversity in Corfu for their suggestions and observations As always I am deeply grateful toIvana Petrovic for her critique encouragement and the many insightful remarks which sheprovided on several drafts of this paper My earlier Durham colleague Don Lavigne contributedgreatly to this paper in many ways in particular concerning the form of the argument Theanonymous reviewers have both corroborated this paper and have helpfully suggested severalimprovements and clarifications I am indebted to all of them but I should like to highlight inparticular an Italian readerrsquos knowledgeable contribution to my comments on scholia

Finally I owe much to serendipity a chance encounter of Jenny Strauss Clay and IvanaPetrovic at a Berlin conference made the author of these lines realize that Jenny and I wereworking on exactly the same Iliadic material simultaneously Even if we relied on differentapproaches the findings of our papers agree and complement each other to a great extent I amdeeply indebted to the generosity of Jenny Strauss Clay who shared her persuasive and refinedpaper (lsquoHomerrsquos Epigraph Iliad 787ndash91rsquo forthcoming in Philologus) with me in advance of itspublication and suggested several improvements to mine I acknowledge my debt to this cha-riessa amoibē in the main text and the footnotes Abbreviations of epigraphic corpora follow the guidelines of SEG The standard edition ofverse-inscriptions of this period is CEG DAA FH GV and LSAG (with Poinikastas httppoinikastascsadoxacuk) remain useful resources for the study of early Greek verse-in-scriptions Much work remains to be done on the intersection and interaction between epos andepigram here I am pointing out a selection of the most influential and useful studies Bowie discusses narrative traits in early Greek epigram and their similarities with epos Gutz-willer discusses Homeric echoes in heroic epitaphs of the Classical age Skiadas

analysed the influence of Homer on later literary epigram Harder is concerned with epiclegacy and the appropriations of Trojan myths within Hellenistic epigrams Truumlmpy in-vestigates the language and dialect of early dedicatory and sepulchral verse-inscriptions Tsa-galis (a ndash) explores the imagery of Attic sepulchral epigram of the fourth centuryBC also in the light of epic influences MuthPetrovic investigate the impact of Homericideology on Archaic monumental representations and epigrams

erary history starts in the last quarter of the eighth century BCsup2 and epos theoldest orally transmitted genre seem to have been closely connected in multipleways during the first three centuries of Greek literary historysup3

In this paper I shall explore the early traces of intertextual references be-tween the two genres and collect remnants of epigrammatic language explicitlyrecognized as such by the ancient commentators of the epics Then I shall inves-tigate aspects of the appropriation of epic passages in the funerary epigrams ofthe Archaic period Did passages from the Homeric epics which were understoodin antiquity as lsquoepigrammaticrsquo leave traces on the inscriptional material of theArchaic period My aim is therefore to look into the surviving epigrammatic ma-terial of the Archaic period with the purpose of throwing more light on elementsof distinctly Homeric (as opposed to the more general and infinitely more elusiveepic) tradition identifiable in early Greek sepulchral epigram

However there are several underlying methodological issues which imposelimits to the scope of the conclusions one can reach if two entities clearly dis-cernible as separate (as epigram and the Homeric epics are) demonstrate thesame properties at the same time (eg formulas)⁴ and possess the same features(eg hexameter) need we analyse their notional influence or their notional con-currence Did they impinge on each-other or did they both draw from the samereservoir an epic reservoir once fresh and luscious now dry and dusty The like-liest answer seems to be that both possibilities may have occurred even if com-plex difficulties associated with contingencies of early Greek literature hinderany simple solution⁵ ndash especially so when it comes to the relationship betweenlost epic traditions Homeric epics and archaic sepulchral epigram

Therefore I shall investigate their marked that is distinctive features by fo-cusing first on Homeric passages with traits of verse-inscriptions and then onverse-inscriptions in particular sepulchral with distinctive Homeric features

Haumlusle ( ‐) labelled it for that reason as lsquothe oldest literary genre of European historyrsquo Allusions to the epics occur as early as in eighth-century BC verse-inscriptions see CEG

(lsquoDipylon vasersquo) CEG (lsquoIschia cuprsquo) and the discussion in FantuzziHunter ndash On the genesis fixation and transformations of Homeric texts in the Archaic period see Nagy ndash On the alleged formulaic character of early Greek epigram see BaumbachA Pet-rovic I Petrovic ndash on methodological approaches in the study of epigrammatic recep-tion see FantuzziHunter ch and Hunter The situation is as complex in the case of the reception of Homer in non-inscriptional earlyGreek poetry for a discussion see the bibliographical survey in Giangrande In a recenttalk at Oxford (Stesichorus conference March ) Adrian Kelly argued that it is only with Ste-sichorus that we find the first unambiguous case of literary reception of the Iliad and the Odys-sey whilst epic traits identifiable in earlier authors stem from a shared pool of epic traditionsFor an insightful discussion see Scodel

46 Andrej Petrovic

as far as these can be found The reason for the focus on sepulchral epigram asobject of the present investigation is first and foremost the nature of genres rec-ognized in epics as lsquoepigrammaticrsquo and the corresponding epigrammatic materialsurviving from the Archaic period as ought to become immediately obvious

a Epigrams in Homer

The history of Greek epigram is inextricably intertwined with epic also becauseboth the Iliad and the Odyssey contain passages six in number which were readin antiquity with epigrammatic conventions and functions in mind In 1975 OnofrioVox gathered and analysed five such passages from the Iliad Ancient commentatorsexplicitly labelled all five as lsquoepigrammaticrsquo⁶ identifying them variously as lsquoepi-gramsrsquo and lsquoepigrammaticrsquo or even using the generic term lsquoepikedeiarsquo sometimesused of funerary epigrams In 2005 David Elmer added to the material assembledby Vox an Odyssean passage relating Ich-Rede of Athena disguised as Menteswhich was also labelled as an lsquoepigramrsquo by a scholiast (1180ndash81)

Of the six epic lsquoepigramsrsquo three come from teichoskopia scenes (Il 3156ndash583178ndash80 3200ndash02)⁷ These textual segments along with the newcomer lsquotheepigramrsquo of AthenaMentes are in form and function closely reminiscent of epi-

For explicit references in the scholia see below See also Scodel Dinter ( ndash)discusses further lsquoepitaphic gesturesrsquo in the Iliad and points out that the portrayal of Iphionrsquosdeath adheres to epigraphic conventions (Il ndash) See Elmer lsquoHelenrsquos epigramsrsquo followed by ancient labels in square brackets (a)Il ndash lsquoοὐ νέμεσις Τρῶας καὶ ἐϋκνήμιδας Aχαιοὺς τοιῇδ᾽ ἀμφὶ γυναικὶ πολὺν χρόνονἄλγεα πάσχειν αἰνῶς ἀθανάτῃσι θεῇς εἰς ὦπα ἔοικενrsquo[τρίγωνον ἐπίγραμμα πρῶτος Ὅμηροςγέγραφε τὸ ldquoοὐ νέμεσις Τρῶαςrdquo ἀφrsquo οἵου γὰρ τῶν τριῶν στίχων ἀρξόμεθα ἀδιάφορον ScholiaAT] (b) Il ndash οὗτός γ᾽ Aτρεΐδης εὐρὺ κρείων Aγαμέμνων ἀμφότερον βασιλεύς τ᾽ ἀγαθὸςκρατερός τ᾽ αἰχμητήςδαὴρ αὖτ᾽ ἐμὸς ἔσκε κυνώπιδος εἴ ποτ᾽ ἔην γε [ὡς ἑνὶ λόγῳ ἐπιγραμματικῶςαὐτὸν δηλοῖ Scholion T] (c) Il ndash lsquoοὗτος δ᾽ αὖ Λαερτιάδης πολύμητις Ὀδυσσεύς ὃςτράφη ἐν δήμῳ Ἰθάκης κραναῆς περ ἐούση εἰδὼς παντοίους τε δόλους καὶ μήδεα πυκνά [ἐν βραχεῖτὸ ἐπίγραμμα πάντα ἔχει μετὰ ἐπαίνων δὲ περὶ ἑκάστου ἐκτίθεται διὰ τὸ προσπεπονθέναι τῷἙλληνικῷ Scholia AbT] Three passages relating to Helen are found in the third book of theIliad gathered within some lines and displaying characteristics which are shared to an ex-tent by both early inscriptional and later literary epigram These are the features due to whichVox ( ) believed that the poems cannot function as epigrams qua epigrams (i) in two ofthe cases [(a) ndash and (c) ndash] the epigrams were understood by critics ancient andmodern as lsquotrigōna epigrammatarsquo that is lsquothree angled epigramsrsquo such three-liners whose po-etic architecture allows for verses to be read in any sequence (be it a-b-c or a-c-b or any of theother four possibilities and (ii) all three have descriptive features unattested in the epigraphiccontext of the early period For a critique of these views see Elmer ndash


grammatic Beischriften as Elmer persuasively demonstrated Such epigrams areexplanatory (this is to avoid the anachronistic use of the term lsquoekphrasticrsquo) in na-ture and used to accompany works of art from the Archaic period onwards Ishall leave aside the Beischriften because they were recently the subject of El-merrsquos detailed investigation and because both the epigraphic and the literarymaterial of the Archaic period furnish only limited comparanda for this epigram-matic subgenre⁸

Instead I shall focus on the remaining two Homeric passages both of whichcan be read as funerary epigrams stemming from Hectorrsquos imagination⁹ Theseare an epitaphion for a fallen warrior envisaged by Hector (Il 789ndash90) andan epitaphion imagined both for Hector and as I suggest for his widow(Il 6460ndash61) I shall suggest that they both employ generic features that we rec-ognize in archaic sepulchral epigrams for fallen warriors and ladies of high birthrespectively Furthermore I shall argue that certain archaic epigrams may wellhave been composed with Hectorrsquos imaginary epigrams in mind

b Hector as Composer of a Sepulchral Epigram

I shall start with the most famous of the epic lsquoepigramsrsquo an Iliadic passage inwhich Hector challenges the Greeks to select the best and strongest amongthem to fight a duel with him Even though his opponent is only yet to be select-ed and Hectorrsquos victory uncertain he already envisages his victory and a tombwith a monument which will preserve the kleos of this duel (784ndash91)sup1⁰

τὸν δὲ νέκυν ἐπὶ νῆας ἐϋσσέλμους ἀποδώσω ὄφρα ἑ ταρχύσωσι κάρη κομόωντες Aχαιοί σῆμά τέ οἱ χεύωσιν ἐπὶ πλατεῖ Ἑλλησπόντωι καί ποτέ τις εἴπησι καὶ ὀψιγόνων ἀνθρώπων νηῒ πολυκλήϊδι πλέων ἐπὶ οἴνοπα πόντον

lsquoἀνδρὸς μὲν τόδε σῆμα πάλαι κατατεθνηῶτοςὅν ποτrsquo ἀριστεύοντα κατέκτανε φαίδιμος Ἕκτωρrsquo

ὥς ποτέ τις ἐρέει τὸ δrsquo ἐμὸν κλέος οὔ ποτrsquo ὀλεῖται

See Elmer the closest parallels for such epigrams are those from the chest of Kypselos(allegedly coming from the sixth century BC) quoted by Pausanias For a recent analysis also inrespect to their relationship to epics see Borg (with further literature) To the functionalparallels adduced by Elmer one could add interesting cases of sepulchral epigrams used as Beis-chriften on vases of the Classical period (see Gutzwiller ndash) See Elmer lsquoAn overtly sepulchral character distinguishes the two epigrams of the ldquoHec-toradrdquorsquo For an analysis of graves (and material objects) as transmitters of historical memory (lsquoar-chaeology of the pastrsquo) in the epics see Grethlein ndash with ndash on graves aslsquotime-marksrsquo and spatial marks

48 Andrej Petrovic

But his corpse I will give back among the strong-benched vessels so that the flowing-hairedAchaeans may give him due burial and heap up a mound upon him beside the broad passageof Hellespont And some day one of the men to come will say as he sees itone who in hisbenched ship sails on the wine-blue water

lsquoThis is the mound of a man who died long ago in battlewho was one of the bravest and glorious Hector killed himrsquo

So will he speak some day and my glory will not be forgotten(trans based on Lattimore 1951)

Do these lines refer to inscribed texts The epigrammatic character of Hectorrsquoswords projected onto the sēma of a fallen warrior was recognized as such by an-cient scholiasts possibly already in the Hellenistic period the bT scholia on theIliad parts of which are of Alexandrian and parts of late antique origin statethat Hector as if he has already won the duel is writing (epigraphei) his praiseson the grave This praise the scholiast remarks is self-praise rather than praiseof the fallen and takes the form of an epikedeion even before there is a corpse (τὸἐπικήδειον πρὸ τοῦ θανάτου διατιθείς)sup1sup1 Since epikedeion is a term used of se-pulchral epigrams and sepulchral elegies and dirges alikesup1sup2 and given that thescholiast associates it with Hectorrsquos act of writing on the grave it follows thatthe scholiastrsquos contemporaries envisaged it as an actual inscribed funerary text

Scholium T on the other hand picking up the first words of the lsquoepigramrsquo(ἀνδρὸς μὲν τόδε σῆμα) asserts that these words are uttered lsquoin contrast to thediscovery of the scriptrsquosup1sup3 which would imply that vv 89ndash90 do not designatean actual inscription However this statement ought not to be taken at facevalue as what the scholiast is apparently attempting to do is to correct the (wide-spread) view that the passage indeed was a reference to an inscribed monu-

Cf Dickey ndash on the date and origin of the bT scholia b(BCEE)T (ad Il )ἀνδρὸς μὲν τόδε σῆμα ὡς ἤδη νενικηκὼς ἐπιγράφει τῷ τάφῳ daggerτὸνdagger ἐπινίκιον οὐκ ἐπὶ τεθνηκότιἀλλrsquo οὐδὲ γιγνωσκομένῳ τῷ μέλλοντι μονομαχεῖν τὸ ἐπικήδειον πρὸ τοῦ θανάτου διατιθείς Seealso scholia b and T ad v for a criticism of Hectorrsquos behaviour and his characterization asvain boastful and barbarian See LSJ sv Plu Mor a and IMEGR T ad ἀνδρὸς μὲν τόδε σῆμα πρὸς τὴν τῶν γραμμάτων εὕρεσιν I need to stress here mydebt to the anonymous reader who pointed out deficiencies in my original (and as I came torealise unlikely) interpretation of the preposition πρός lsquoCredo che si debba mantenere il signi-ficato letterale contro in contrasto con lrsquoinvenzione della scrittura e seguendo le indicazioni diH Erbse nellrsquoed e nellrsquoapparato mettere questo scolio in rapporto con lo schol Ariston Il a relativo alle famose tavolette incise affidate da Preto a Bellerofonte (Aristonico [Aristarco]interpreta grapsai come xesai encharaxai ldquoincidererdquo ldquointagliarerdquo) Drsquoaltra parte la conclusionedi Petrovic resta valida lo schol T Il conferma e contrario lrsquoesistenza dellrsquoaltra interpreta-zione antica (secondo la quale Ettore ha in mente un vero e proprio epitymbion inciso)rsquo


ment as scholia bT clearly state there would have been no need for the scholiastto state that Hectorrsquos epigram was composed lsquoπρὸς τὴν τῶν γραμμάτων εὕρεσινrsquohad it not been believed at least by some that Hector envisaged an actual in-scription Hence this remark together with the use of the verb epigraphei inthe bT scholia confirms that the scholiastsrsquo contemporaries could well conceiveHectorrsquos words as an actual sepulchral inscriptionsup1⁴

Modern scholars too have recognized the epigrammatic character of Hec-torrsquos utterance conducting studies in terms of the function of the passage withinthe Iliadic narrative the origin of epigrammatic intimations in epics and genre-specific characteristics of the passagesup1⁵ In a forthcoming essay Jenny StraussClay investigates epicrsquos awareness of writing revisits previous scholarship andtackles the vexed issues of literacy in Homer Her persuasive conclusion isthat lsquo[Hectorrsquos epitaph] attests not only to the existence of writing but also toa sophisticated understanding of its potential how writing can be exploitedand even subverted and manipulated in shaping a narrative In addition itsgoal coincides with the aim of the Iliad itself the conferring of kleos on the her-oes of long agorsquo If Hectorrsquos epitaph attests the existence of an epitaphic traditionknown to Homer and bears testimony to Hectorrsquos particular spin (Strauss Clayrsquosexploitation subversion and manipulation) then like in a game of ping-ponglet us take a look at its possible impact on the epigrammatic habit of the Archaicperiod if Hectorrsquos words were understood in antiquity as an epikedeion did theyleave any trace in the early epigrammatic material

The reasons for the ancient conceptualization of 789ndash90 as a sepulchralepigram are transparent the form of a hexametric two-liner for an inscribed ep-itymbion is very common in the archaic period and this will change only in mid-sixth century BC under the influence of elegy (and the emergence of Panathe-naea) when elegiac distichon will become a prevalent formsup1⁶ In terms of con-

Ivana Petrovic points out to me that scholia T might also be implying here that Homer knewabout epigram as a genre but since he is referring to a time when script was not yet inventedthis would render Hectorrsquos statement an anachronism Furthermore the scholium might be im-plying that Homer composed epigrams before they were even invented according to the tradi-tion that viewed Homer as the originator of all literary genres I can offer only a selection of relevant literature here on these issues in general see Scodel and Elmer (with observations on the relative chronology of the Homeric passages viz theemergence of sepulchral epigram in the Archaic period) On its function in the Iliadic narrativeBing ndash Nagy ndash and epitymbic language appropriated by theepics from the Near-east along with the script FH generic characteristics Thomas On the formal characteristics of archaic and classical epigram see Petrovic ndash On thecircumstances of the change to elegiac disticha as a dominant form see Wallace ndash

50 Andrej Petrovic

tent the Iliadic passage contains a master-model of early epitymbic expressionline one contains the statement that X is dead and line two denotes the circum-stances under which X died The formulas and the language employed by Hectorcorrespond closely to inscriptions on tombs of warriors of the Archaic and Clas-sical period name of the deceased in the genitive followed or preceded by τόδεσῆμα praise of the heroic death (ἀριστεύοντα) and an outline of the circumstan-ces of his deathsup1⁷

For these reasons several scholars pointed to one particular inscriptionalepigram that seems to be picking up on Hectorrsquos words Hans-Martin Lumppwas as far as I can see the first one to argue that the late seventh-century BCsepulchral epigram from Corcyra the well-known Arniadas epigram containsa direct allusion to the Iliadic passage (CEG 145 = FH 25)

σᾶμα τόδε Aρνιάδα χαροπὸς τόνδrsquo ὄλε|σεν Ἄρεςβαρνάμενον παρὰ ναυσ|ὶν ἐπrsquo Aράθθοιο ῥοϝαῖσιπολλὸ|ν ἀριστεύltϝgtοντα κατὰ στονόϝεσσαν ἀϝυτάν

This is the marker of Arniadas This man fierce-eyed Ares destroyedbattling by the ships beside the streams of the Aratthosachieving great excellence and the battle-roar that brings mourning(trans Bowie 2010 356ndash57)

Is this a direct allusion to Hectorrsquos words or is this epigram indebted more gen-erally to the epic tradition Taking a cue from Lumpp Anthony Raubitschek de-scribes the epigrams as being lsquoextraordinary similarrsquo to Hectorrsquos words and con-cisely states that a comparison provides a lsquogeneral overlaprsquo between the textssup1⁸The views of Paul Friedlaumlnder and Herbert B Hoffleit that the epigram lsquois themasterpiece among hellip sepulchral [epigrams] in epic mannerrsquo appear more appro-priate and are confirmed by the findings which Ewen Bowie advanced in hisanalysis of epic elements in the poemsup1⁹

As it happens χαροπός is never used as an epithet of Ares in the epics andas Christos Tsagalis points out it is in direct contrast with the usual epithetsknown from the epics and early Greek poetry more generallysup2⁰ The general over-lap between the poems seems to be exhausted in the generic marker σᾶμα τόδε

See Thomas on the narrative technique in early epigram Bowie Lumpp Raubitschek ndash (lsquoausserordentliche Aumlhnlichkeitrsquo lsquoein Vergleich [zeigt]weitgehende Uumlbereinstimmungenrsquo) FH (who consider possible influences of Eumelos) Bowie ndash lsquoit is hard notto see here some impact of performed battle poetry whether hexameter epic or hortatory elegyrsquo Tsagalis a ndash See also Hunter ndash with n for a refutation ofLumpprsquos views


the mention of Ares as a slayersup2sup1 and ἀριστεύltϝgtοντα thus rendering any closeassociation of this epigram with the Iliadic passage somewhat fragile

There is however another famous epigram adduced as a parallel but not fur-ther discussed by Raubitscheksup2sup2 which may indeed provide a very close comparisonto Hectorrsquos words This epigram both alone-standing and in its monumental contextis strongly influenced by the Iliadic ideology as Muth Petrovic recently arguedsup2sup3 Inmy view it shows particular resemblance to the passage from the seventh book ofthe Iliad This is the grave-complex of Croesus which consists of an over-life-sizedrepresentation of a naked warrior placed on a basis on which two verses of the epi-gram are inscribed in four lines I print the text in metrical transcription followedby representation of the text as inscribed on the basis (Athens ca 530 BC [CEG 27 =IG Isup3 1240 GV I 1224 SEG 24 70])

στεθι καὶ οἴκτιρον Κροίσο παρὰ σ εμα θανόντοςhόν ποτrsquo ἐνὶ προμάχοις ὄλεσε θορος Ἄρες

Halt and show pity beside the monument of dead Croesuswhom raging Ares once destroyed in the front rank of the battle(trans Baumbach A Petrovic I Petrovic 2010 14)

στεθι ∶ καὶ οἴκτιρον ∶ Κροίσοπαρὰ σεμα θανόντος ∶ ℎόνποτrsquo ἐνὶ προμάχοις ∶ ὄλεσεθορος ∶ Ἄρες

It is worth exploring the texts in isolation before we move on to a comparison of theCroesus epigram in its monumental setting with the epic passage The parallels be-tween Hectorrsquos imagined epitymbion for the anonymous opponent and the inscrip-tion from the grave of Croesus are striking the structure of the second line of eachepigram is identical The first two words which dislocate death into a timeless di-mension (hόν ποτrsquo)sup2⁴ are followed by praise of the heroic death of the warrior(ἐνὶ προμάχοις vs ἀριστεύοντα) After these the verb denoting killing follows(ὄλεσε vs κατέκτανε) and both lines end with the names of the slayers with iden-tical grammatical disposition in the verse ie as grammatical subjects θοῦρος Ἄρεςand φαίδιμος Ἕκτωρ) Furthermore in terms of diction every single word from the

On the epic parallels for this technique see below Raubitschek regards it as lsquoeng verbundenrsquo with the Iliadic passage MuthPetrovic see below On this see Young ndash Day ndash

52 Andrej Petrovic

Croesus epigram is attested in the epics together with the epithet of Ares (θοῦρος)which predominantly appears in the same sedes in Homeric versessup2⁵

But this is not where the similarities end One of the reasons Hectorrsquos wordsattracted the interest of ancient readers and modern critics is that he composed asepulchral epigram for the opponent he was about to kill as a monument (sēma)to himself rather than the deceased Thus he is modifying the most elementaryfunction of an epitymbion A focus on the slayer rather than the slain is alsopresent in the case of the Croesus epigram and not only because of the markedposition of the name of the slayer at the end of the verse Susanne Muth undIvana Petrovic have recently argued that the Croesus monument together withthe inscription on its base intentionally incites an interpretative ambiguity inits receptionsup2⁶ The supra-human representation of a naked muscular body cap-tured mid-motion is placed on a base on which the name of the god θοῦροςἌρες appears in a single line separated from the rest of the poem Its legibilityis further facilitated through use of interpunction separating the epithet fromthe name of the god As MuthPetrovic stress for a recipient ancient as wellas modern the first impulse may well be to interpret the statue as a representa-tion of the divinity rather than of the fallen warriorsup2⁷ By this token the statuewith its inscription might be taken to reflect at first glance the functional mod-ification attested also in Hectorrsquos epigram instead of being a geras thanontōn asa recipient would infer from its position and original surrounding the monu-ment appears initially to be a representation of the war-god

Upon reading the epigram however although the recipient will be promptedto adjust his understanding of the monument some similarities will persist theidentity of the representation might become less puzzling but the extraordinaryemphasis on the slayer remains Being killed by Hector like being killed by Aresis understood on its own as a source and verification of the virtue of the fallenIn such a constellation MuthPetrovic argue Croesus appears himself as a Ho-meric hero ndash as a man similar or equal to divinities who correspondingly couldbe conquered and felled only through divine agency

If the Croesus epigram reflects both epic ideology and language to the pointthat it is modeled upon Hectorrsquos imagined epitymbion as seems likely in myview then the substitution of Hector with Ares is a logical and appropriate

Ares accompanied with the epithet θοῦρος appears eleven times in the Iliad (not attested inthe Odyssey) of which it is found seven times at the end of the hexameter ( ) MuthPetrovic MuthPetrovic ndash On idealized representations of fallen warriors in archaic Atticsee Day ndash and on the reception of the Croesus epigram Lorenz ndash


one Ares as a slayer of Croesus provides a convenient and appropriate metaphorfor the death of a warrior on the battlefield which is well attested in the Iliadicnarrative when a warrior is felled by a human enemy he is described as havingbeen killed by Ares himselfsup2⁸ Furthermore Hector is represented as a (literal) in-carnation of Ares since Ares is described as entering Hectorrsquos body ndash the onlymortal whose body the god of war entered in the Iliad Ἕκτορι δ᾽ ἥρμοσετεύχε᾽ ἐπὶ χροΐ δῦ δέ μιν Ἄρης δεινὸς ἐνυάλιος πλῆσθεν δ᾽ ἄρα οἱ μέλε᾽ ἐντὸς ἀλκῆς καὶ σθένεοςsup2⁹ Hence Croesusrsquo appropriation of Hectorrsquos epigram can ren-der Hector as Ares not just for the sake of appropriate epic convention but alsobecause Hector was at least temporarily the embodiment of Aressup3⁰

c Andromache as a Sepulchral Epigram andAndromachersquos own Sepulchral Epigram

In a moving scene towards the end of the sixth book of the Iliad Hector sinisterlypredicts the fall of Troy the deaths of its defenders and the subsequent enslave-ment of his wife addressing Andromache directly with the following words(Il 6459ndash65)

καί ποτέ τις εἴπῃσιν ἰδὼν κατὰ δάκρυ χέουσανlsquoἝκτορος ἧδε γυνὴ ὃς ἀριστεύεσκε μάχεσθαιΤρώων ἱπποδάμων ὅτε Ἴλιον ἀμφεμάχοντοrsquo

ὥς ποτέ τις ἐρέειmiddot σοὶ δrsquo αὖ νέον ἔσσεται ἄλγος χήτεϊ τοιοῦδrsquo ἀνδρὸς ἀμύνειν δούλιον ἦμαρἀλλά με τεθνηῶτα χυτὴ κατὰ γαῖα καλύπτοι πρίν γέ τι σῆς τε βοῆς σοῦ θ᾽ ἑλκηθμοῖοπυθέσθαι

and once someone is to say having seen you weepinglsquoThis is the wife of Hector who kept excelling in battle

See Il and Redfield ndash Cf also Il where Diomedes states

that lussa enters Hectorrsquos body Note that the Arniadas epigram discussed above (CEG ) ap-propriates the same technique Il ndash There is a further possibility in her forthcoming paper Jenny Strauss Clay takes into account mysuggestion and remarks lsquoHowever ndash although all such matters are speculative ndash the presence of Aresattested also in the Arniadesrsquo epitaph as well as the Iliadrsquos faccedilon de parler might allow for the pos-sibility that Hector has inserted his name in the place traditionally reserved for Ares Such a possi-bility would I think strengthen the claim for the need for a written label whereby Hector identifieshimself as the slayer of the Greek whom his epigraph has consigned to anonymityrsquo

54 Andrej Petrovic

among the horse-taming Trojans when they fought about Ilionrsquoso will one say once and grief will beset you anew lacking this man here to avert the day ofslavery But let the heaped up soil cover my corpse before I should hear your shrieks as theycarry you off(trans based on Lattimore 1951)

Ruth Scodel as well as several scholars afterwards has observed that in thisscene Andromache is assigned the function of a living memorial of Hectorrsquos vir-tue and that she represents in a way a living female mnēma an encapsulationof the memory of the fallen herosup3sup1 When analysed in the context of the Iliadicnarrative this is indeed likely to be the case Hector imagines for himself onlya sepulchral mound there is no mention of a sēma he envisaged for his oppo-nent in the epigram from book seven and it is only his wife who is hoped to pre-serve the memory of his virtue

Commenting on the words Ἕκτορος ἥδε γυνή lt ὃς ἀριστεύεσκε μάχεσθαιgtscholia bT remark cursorily that the line displays epigrammatic features or epi-grammatic character ἐπιγραμματικὸν ἔχει τύπον ὁ στίχοςsup3sup2 This comment maywell be motivated by the use of the deictic following a genitive and could be in-terpreted as a variation on the formulaic expression we might expect on Hectorrsquosmonument such as Ἕκτορος τόδε σῆμα or similar as Scodel remarkssup3sup3

Nevertheless when observed in isolation and outside the Iliadic context thelines uttered by Hector could also be conceptualized as an epitymbion not nec-essarily only for himself but also for Andromache Hector does mention his ownenvisaged death but only after he has composed the lsquoepigramrsquo ndash an epigram thathe introduced with a vivid depiction of Andromachersquos enslavement and a gloomyvision of her future toilssup3⁴ Given that enslavement in Homeric ideology corre-sponds closely to social death and enslavement of aristocratic women to lsquoblame-

See the discussion in Scodel and Elmer and esp lsquoHectorrsquos auto-epitaph atndash by which he transforms Andromache into his funeral monument ndasha stēlē that is theplace of writingrsquo GraziosiHaubold commentary ad loc See b(BCE)T ad v (Erbse) Here too I would like to acknowledge the encouragementof the anonymous reviewer and simultaneously express my regret that the scope of the contri-bution does not allow me to pursue her his suggestion further lsquoPotrebbe essere utile analizzareanche lo schol ex a (che nei manoscritti egrave direttamente congiunto al b cf Erbse ap-parato) dove se capisco bene si commenta lo stile del verso omerico facendo riferimento pro-prio alla concisione e allrsquoallusivitagrave tipiche dello stile epigrammaticorsquo On this see Scodel ndash Elmer Il ndash ὅσσον σεῦ ὅτε κέν τις Aχαιῶν χαλκοχιτώνων δακρυόεσσαν ἄγηται ἐλεύθερονἦμαρ ἀπούρας καί κεν ἐν Ἄργει ἐοῦσα πρὸς ἄλλης ἱστὸν ὑφαίνοις καί κεν ὕδωρ φορέοις Μεσση-ΐδος ἢ Ὑπερείης πόλλ᾽ ἀεκαζομένη κρατερὴ δ᾽ ἐπικείσετ᾽ ἀνάγκη


less catastrophersquosup3⁵ it is in my view possible that the scholiast had in mind someof the famous epitymbia for ladies of noble birth when he remarked on the epi-grammatic character of the first line of Hectorrsquos utterance

The fact that Andromachersquos life would be characterized entirely through herrelationship to her husband is no obstacle to this interpretation I adduce twostriking examples of such depiction of queens and aristocratic women in se-pulchral epigrams The first case involves one of the most famous epitymbia ofthe Archaic period This is the epigram composed for Archedike of Lampsakosdaughter of Peisistratusrsquo son Hippias the last tyrant of Athens and wife of thetyrant of Lampsakos Aiantides As a noble-woman she is praised for havingbeen a daughter a wife and a mother of tyrants (in the neutral rather than pe-jorative sense) The epigram was quoted by both Thucydides and Aristotle andwas hence available and very likely familiar to Hellenistic (and later) scholiasts(EG Sim 26a = Petrovic 2007 Ep 12)sup3⁶

ἀνδρὸς ἀριστεύσαντος ἐν Ἑλλάδι τῶν ἐφ᾽ ἑαυτοῦἹππίου Aρχεδίκην ἥδε κέκευθε κόνιςἣ πατρός τε καὶ ἀνδρὸς ἀδελφῶν τ᾽ οὖσα τυράννωνπαίδων τ᾽ οὐκ ἤρθη νοῦν ἐς ἀτασθαλίην

Archedike daughter of the man who excelled in Hellas of his day of Hippias is covered bythis soil She who was a daughter wife sister and mother of tyrants did not raise her mindto arrogance

The second example is the sepulchral epigram for no lesser a figure than Olympiaswife of Philip II and mother of Alexander the Great quoted only by Plutarch withoutany further remarks regarding the queen in Mor 747fndash748a (Quaest Conv)

τῆσδε πατὴρ καὶ ἀνὴρ καὶ παῖς βασιλεῖς καὶ ἀδελφοίκαὶ πρόγονοι κλῄζει δrsquo Ἑλλὰς Ὀλυμπιάδα

Her father and husband and son were kings as were her brothersand ancestors Hellas calls her Olympiassup3⁷

It is difficult to determine whether this epigram was a genuine inscription or alater literary compositionsup3⁸ The deictic τῆσδε would certainly favour the formerpossibility Furthermore given that Plutarch had a keen epigraphic interest firm-

On female enslavement in Homer see the overview in Hunt ndash Th Arist Rh (=b) see also Isid Pelus and Petrovic com-mentary on epigram no For a discussion of this epigram see Fantuzzi ndash On issues of authenticity of the couplet see Carney and (Olympias)

56 Andrej Petrovic

ly believing in the reliability of inscriptional evidence and extensively praisedthe virtues of epigraphy in the very work from which the sepulchral epigram de-rives there is little that might stand in the way of its authenticitysup3⁹

Yet what matters here the most is that in this epigram toowe encounter theportrayal of queens conveyed through their relationship to the excellence of themen who surround them the sepulchral inscriptions of Archedike and Olympiasdo not encapsulate their own achievements or virtues but rather commemoratethe virtue of their closest male kin as in the case of Andromachersquos commemo-ration through Hector Thucydides famously quipped that womenrsquos greatest vir-tue was not to be talked about by men neither for good nor ill (2452) and thesesepulchral epigrams show that this was the case in their death as well ndash womenare not to be talked about save as a reason to talk about their men

Concluding remarks

Alexandrian and later scholiasts who labelled and analysed passages from theIliad as epigrammatic or sepulchral in nature are very likely to have had solidknowledge of epigrammatic collections and anthologies with their developed ge-neric typologies This may have prompted their use of terminology such asἐπικήδειον and ἐπιγραμματικὸς τύπος and epigrammatic extrapolations of Ho-meric passages ndash sepulchral epigrams were for them of course both inscription-al and literary artifacts with clearly defined generic conventions and forms

However I hope to have highlighted the possible early impact of these pas-sages on Greek Archaic sepulchral epigrams the Croesus and Archedike epi-grams seem to closely resemble Hectorrsquos lsquoepigramsrsquo the epigrams for Croesusand Archedike do not seem to be simply drawing from the linguistic and literarypool of general lsquoepicrsquo traditions but rather appear to be ideologically and for-mally chiselled after respective Homeric passages Therefore in my view the an-swer to the question of whether the Croesus and Archedike epigrams mirroranonymous authorsrsquo awareness of Hectorrsquos epigrams ought to be a blunt yes

How early does emulation of Hectorrsquos epigrams in verse-inscriptions start Wecannot know for certain whether epigrammatic sections in the Iliad entered the epicnarrative during the later period of its fixation when sepulchral epigrams were no

On Plutarchrsquos use of inscriptions generally and in the Quaestiones Convivales see Liddel ndash I wonder if Plutarch who in the Quaestiones Convivales explicitly acknowledgesfamiliarity with the work of Polemon Periegetes derived the sepulchral epigram for Olympiasfrom Polemonrsquos On the epigrams according to a city (FHG III Tndash)


longer a novelty or whether they belonged to the earlier stages in the evolution andfixation of the epics The epitaphia for Archedike and Croesus (coming from latesixth century) postdate the Peisistratid redaction of the epics⁴⁰ and are thus morelikely to reflect epic passages than to have provided models for them

Were there any earlier models that did We cannot know this In MadelineMillerrsquos beautiful novel The Song of Achilles the shadowy soul of Patroclusfinds no peace until a sepulchral inscription is set up on his tomb HomerrsquosIliad on the other hand provides us only with shadows of sepulchral inscrip-tions yet the epic echoes attested in the language and form of sepulchral epi-gram are resounding

See Nagy ndash and ndash on possible modi and chronologies of textualization

58 Andrej Petrovic

Margarita Sotiriou

Performance Poetic Identity andIntertextuality in Pindarrsquos Olympian 4

The relation of Pindarrsquos lyric tradition to the epic past has been since years asubject of philological research Frank Nisetichrsquos Pindar and Homer publishedin 1989 and one year later Gregory Nagyrsquos Pindarrsquos Homer The Lyric Possessionof an Epic Past both illustrate the function of the heroic tradition in Pindarrsquosmelic environmentsup1

In what follows I shall attempt to provide a new suggestion about Pindarrsquoscreative adaptationsup2 of the Homeric flavour in his Olympian 4 and the subtle wayin which he develops his epic model carefully preserving traditional elements ofthe Homeric athletic scenes or intentionally varying specific aspects of them inorder to serve his own epinician purpose I shall also attempt to reveal the rela-tionship between intention and expression and explore the manner in whichPindar reworks the Homeric source text in order to praise lavishly the victoras well as to present himself in public as a lsquoprimary narratorrsquo and a skillful pro-fessional lsquopanegyristrsquo

Pindarrsquos Olympian 4 celebrates Psaumis from the Sicilian state of Camarinasup3

and his Olympic victory in chariot-race (452 BC)⁴ It is a rather short ode chorallyperformed (l 9) in Olympia immediately after the end of the contest⁵

Very special thanks to Dr Ioanna Karamanou and Dr Athanasios Efstathiou for their invitationto give a paper (from which this contribution developed) at the International Conference Ho-meric Receptions in Literature and the Performing Arts organized by the Department of HistoryIonian University in Corfu (7ndash9 November 2011) I am deeply indebted to Dr Ioanna Karamanouand Dr Sophia Kapetanaki for the many important linguistic improvements that they suggested All Pindaric citations are taken from the edition of Snell Maehler For Homer I used theedition of Allen (Oxford) For further bibliography concerning Homeric reception in the epiniciansongs of Pindar cf Sotiriou On the same issue in general with the latest bibliographicalreferences see Graziosi a ndash Cf the definition of the term lsquoadaptationrsquo in Hardwick On a detailed overview of the political history of the state see Hornblower ndash Gerber Schmitz ndash Gelzer The performance place of the Ode has been since years a subject of contro-versial discussion See particularly Gerber ndash who insists on the performance of theOde during a festive procession in honour of Zeus in Camarina In favour of a choral perform-ance of the Ode instead of a solo see the convincing argumentation of Calame ndash

Ἐλατὴρ ὑπέρτατε βροντᾶς ἀκαμαντόποδοςΖεῦ˙ τεαὶ γὰρ Ὧραιὑπὸ ποικιλοφόρμιγγος ἀοιδᾶς ἑλισσόμεναί μ᾽ ἔπεμψανὑψηλοτάτων μάρτυρ᾽ ἀέθλων˙ξείνων δ᾽ εὖ πρασσόντωνἔσαναν αὐτίκ᾽ ἀγγελίαν ποτὶ γλυκεῖαν ἐσλοί˙ 5ἀλλ᾽ ὦ Κρόνου παῖ ὃς Αἴτναν ἔχειςἶπον ἀνεμόεσσαν ἑκατογκεφάλαΤυφῶνος ὀβρίμουΟὐλυμπιονίκανδέξαι Χαρίτων ἕκατι τόνδε κῶμον

χρονιώτατον φάος εὐρυσθενέων ἀρετᾶν 10Ψαύμιος γὰρ ἵκειὀχέων ὅς ἐλαίᾳ στεφανωθεὶς Πισάτιδι κῦδος ὄρσαισπεύδει Καμαρίνᾳ θεὸς εὔφρωνεἴη λοιπαῖς εὐχαῖς˙ἐπεί νιν αἰνέω μάλα μὲν τροφαῖς ἑτοῖμον ἵππωνχαίροντά τε ξενίαις πανδόκοις 15καὶ πρὸς ἁσυχίαν φιλόπολιν καθαρᾷγνώμᾳ τετραμμένον

Driver most high of thunder with unwearied foot Zeuson you I am calling for your Horaiin their circling round have sent me with song on varied lyreas a witness of the most lofty gamesWhen guest-friends are successfulgood men are immediately cheered at the sweet news 5And so son of Cronus you who rule Aetnawindy burden for hundred-headedTyphos the mightyreceive an Olympic victorand for the sake of the Games this celebrationlongest-lasting light for deeds of great strength 10For it comes with the chariot of Psaumiswho is crowned with olive from Pisa and is eager to arouse gloryfor Camarina May heaven look kindly

on his future prayersfor I praise him very earnest in his raising horsesdelighting in receiving guests from everywhere 15and devoted to city-loving Hesychiawith a sincere mind(trans Race 1990 with minor adjustments)

The mythical narrative creates the epilogue of the Ode (ll 19ndash27) The story refers tothe Argonaut Erginus (l 19)who won the race of armour at the Games put on by thewomen of Lemnoswhen the Argonauts stopped there Mocked by the Lemnians be-


cause of his grey hair during the prize-giving by the queen of the island HypsipyleErginus proudly declared himself capable to win also in other disciplines⁶

οὐ ψεύδεϊ τέγξωλόγονmiddot διάπειρά τοι βροτῶν ἔλεγχοςmiddotἅπερ Κλυμένοιο παῖδαΛαμνιάδων γυναικῶν 20ἔλυσεν ἐξ ἀτιμίαςχαλκέοισι δ᾽ ἐν ἔντεσι νικῶν δρόμονἔειπεν Ὑψιπυλείᾳ μετὰ στέφανον ἰώνmiddotlsquoοὗτος ἐγὼ ταχυτᾶτι˙χεῖρες δὲ καὶ ἦτορ ἴσον φύονται δὲ καὶ νέοις 25ἐν ἀνδράσιν πολιαὶθαμὰκι παρὰ τὸν ἁλικίας ἐοικότα χρόνον rsquo

I shall not tinge my praise with a liethe trial to the end is the (true) test for menThis it was that released son of Clymenusfrom the dishonour of the Lemnian women 20After winning the race in bronze armourand going to Hypsipyle to receive his crown he saidlsquoYou have seen me in speedmy hands and spirit are equally strong Even young menhave often grey hair 25before the time they are (normally) expected to appearrsquo

In 1994 the German scholar Thomas Schmitz drew attention to a nexus of affin-ities between the Pindaric description and the Homeric presentation of the ath-letic games in Scheria in the eighth book of the Odyssey⁷ After a banquet accom-panied by Demodocusrsquo song (ll 1ndash96) Odysseus attends the athletic gamesorganized at Alcinousrsquo palace (ll 97ndash253) Laodamasrsquo exhortation to Odysseusto take part in the games and Euryalusrsquo mockery of him forced him to demon-strate his superiority by throwing the discus far away over the pegs

τὸν δ᾽ ἀπαμειβόμενος προσέφη πολύμητις Ὀδυσσεύς˙ 152lsquoΛαοδάμαν τί με ταῦτα κελεύετε κερτομέοντες

Odysseus always thinking answered him in this waylsquoLaodamas why are you provoking me like thisrsquo

[hellip] τὸν δrsquo αὖτrsquo Εὐρύαλος ἀπαμείβετο νείκεσέ τrsquo ἄντην 158

On the Argonaut myth see schol AR ndasha (Wendel) for the Games in Lemnos seePi P and schol Pi P (Drachmann) on the legend before Pindar see further Bras-well ndash Gerber Schmitz ndash


And Euryalus answered him

[hellip]ἀλλὰ καὶ ὥς κακὰ πολλὰ παθών πειρήσομ᾽ ἀέθλωνmiddotθυμοδακὴς γὰρ μῦθος ἐπότρυνας δέ με εἰπώνltIMA ulgt185ἦ ῥα καὶ αὐτῷ φάρει ἀναΐξας λάβε δίσκονμείζονα καὶ πάχετον στιβαρώτερον οὐκ ὀλίγον περἢ οἵῳ Φαίηκες ἐδίσκεον ἀλλήλοισιτόν ῥα περιστρέψας ἧκε στιβαρῆς ἀπὸ χειρόςβόμβησεν δὲ λίθος˙ κατὰ δ᾽ ἔπτηξαν ποτὶ γαίῃ 190Φαίηκες δολιχήρετμοι ναυσίκλυτοι ἄνδρεςλᾶος ὑπὸ ῥιπῆς˙ ὁ δ᾽ ὑπέρπτατο σήματα πάντωνῥίμφα θέων ἀπὸ χειρός ἔθηκε δὲ τέρματ᾽ Aθήνηἀνδρὶ δέμας ἐικυῖα ἔπος τ᾽ ἔφατ᾽ ἔκ τ᾽ ὀνόμαζεν˙

lsquoEven so even with all I have been through I shall give your games a tryYour words are biting my heart and now you have got me goingrsquoHe jumped up with his cloak still on and grabbed a discuslarger than the others thicker and much heavierthan the one that the Phaeacians used for their contestsWinding up he let it fly and the stonelaunched with incredible force from his hand hummed as it flewThe Phaeacians ducked as the discus zoomed overheadand finally landed far beyond the other marksThe goddess Athena who looked like a man nowmarked the spot where it came down and she called out to him

[hellip]ὥς φάτο γήθησεν δὲ πολύτλας δῖος Ὀδυσσεύςχαὶρων οὕνεχ᾽ ἑταῖρον ἐνηέα λεῦσσ᾽ ἐν ἀγῶνι 200καὶ τότε κουφότερον μετεφώνεε Φαιήκεσσιmiddotlsquoτοῦτον νῦν ἀφίκεσθε νέοιmiddot τάχα δ᾽ ὕστερον ἄλλονἥσειν ἢ τοσσοῦτον ὀίομαι ἢ ἔτι μᾶσσοντῶν δ᾽ ἄλλων ὅτινα κραδίη θυμός τε κελεύειδεῦρ᾽ ἄγε πειρηθήτω ἐπεί μ᾽ ἐχολώσατε λίην 205ἢ πὺξ ἠὲ πάλῃ ἢ καὶ ποσίν οὔ τι μεγαίρωπάντων Φαιήκων πλήν γ᾽ αὐτοῦ Λαοδάμαντος

Odysseus cheered up at thisGlad to see a loyal supporter out of the fieldIn a lighter mood now he spoke to the PhaeacianslsquoMatch that if you can boys In a minuteI shall get another one out just as far or fartherAnd if anyone else has the urge to try mestep right up ndashI am angry nowndashI do not care if it is boxing wrestling or even runningCome one come all ndash except Laodamasrsquo


[hellip]πάντα γὰρ οὐ κακός εἰμι μετ᾽ ἀνδράσιν ὅσσοι ἄεθλοιεὖ μὲν τόξον οἶδα ἐύξοον ἀμφαφάασθαι˙ 215I am not weak in any athletic activityand I really know how to handle the bow[hellip]δουρὶ δrsquo ἀκοντίζω ὅσον οὐκ ἄλλος τις ὀϊστῷ 229

I am always the first to hit my man in the enemy lines no matter howmany archers are standing with me and getting shots(trans Lombardo 2000 with minor adjustments)

The verbal affinities between Pindar and his Homeric model are evident(i) While in Homer the mockery against the athlete occurs in the provocative

speeches of Laodamas and Euryalus in Pindar it is initiated by the crowdof Lemnian women (Od 8153 158 185 205 and Ol 420)

(ii) In both descriptions there is a reference to discipline Odysseus wins in dis-cus Erginus wins in race in armour They both claim that they are able towin also in other disciplines (Od 8206 also 8214 and Ol 4 24ndash25)

(iii) Both protagonists use demonstrative pronouns to highlight their triumph(Od 8202 and Ol 423)

(iv) Odysseus emphasizes his superiority in war as an archer (Od 8215ndash 18) anda spearman (Od 8229ndash31) while Erginus argues that his strength derivesfrom his spirit (l 24 ἦτορ)mdash a term that is often used in martial contexts⁸

(v) Odysseus and Erginus are probably middle-aged men In Homer the hero ad-dresses his competitors with the term νέοι (Od 8202) apparently because hewants to stress the age difference between him and the some twenty yearsyounger Phaeacians who seem to be at the same age with Telemachus Ac-cordingly Laodamas addresses him as ξεῖνε πάτερ (Od 8145)⁹ Erginus in Pin-dar expresses the same thought after testing his legs (Ol 423) he talks aboutthe power of his arms and heart Then he refers to the contrast between hisphysical power and his appearance with the following words ldquoEven youngmen have often grey hair before the time they are expected to appearrdquoWhile scholars have pointed out that the passage refers to young Erginuswho has prematurely grey hairsup1⁰ I strongly believe that the use of the Homerictext enables us to adopt an alternative interpretation of the Pindaric speechYouth is always associated with physical strength whereas old age is a syno-nym of weakness In this case the athletic test shows that older men (ie grey

Schmitz n Gerber Cf also Od ndash where Antilochus addresses Odysseus as ὠμογέρων (LSJ lsquofresh ac-tive old manrsquo) See also Stanford See for instance Schmitz ndash


haired) are often strong (ie ldquoyoungrdquo) whereas young men are often ldquoweakrdquo(ie ldquogrey hairedrdquo) Erginus is an eloquent example in support of this viewA young man can be as weak as an older one whereas an older man canbe as strong as a young one ldquoagainst the external sign of the agerdquo (l 27)Though the age reference is consciously cryptic such an interpretation high-lights a logically explained metaphorical sense of the passage The oldermen Erginus and Odysseus proved their strength against their younger com-petitors who have been as weak as the real grey haired mensup1sup1

(vi) Pindarrsquos reception of Homer also emerges from the so called πεῖρα motif(Ol 418 διάπειρα and Od 8184 πειρήσομαι ἀέθλων) indicating the proofof the physical strength in the athletic contest lsquothe trial to the end (διά-πειρα) is the true testproof for menrsquo (ἔλεγχος βροτῶν)sup1sup2 The term πεῖρα oc-curs several times throughout the eighth Book of the Odyssey in the form ofa verb (πειράω ldquoattempt endeavour try make proof or trial ofrdquo) or a nounthough it is sometimes referred to the young Phaeacians who participate inthe games the word is mainly associated with Odysseus and the proof of hisstrength during the contestsup1sup3

Pindarrsquos reworking of the motif deserves closer scrutiny Since years the majorityof commentators has claimed that the emphasis of the passage is on the ldquoperse-verancerdquo or ldquoendurancerdquo of the athlete as main factors (such as πόνος μόχθοςκάματος τόλμα) leading him to success according to his mythical exemplasup1⁴ Un-deniably Pindarrsquos use of the Homeric pattern has an important bearing on thequestion about the way he receives the epic material in a verbal and a conceptuallevel However I believe that the relation of the lyric creator to his source is nomore conventional as Schmitz and others have suggested It rather goes beyondthe simplicity of a verbal affinity or a phrasal echo which just confirms themeaning of the mythical narrative In that sense a second more crucial and rath-er cryptic level of Homeric reception in Ol 4 is detected through this motif whichhas not been sufficiently explored My purpose therefore is to investigate thismotif within the structural thematic and performative context of the Ode

Bowra Mader Krischer Schol Ol andashc b (Drachmann) Διάπειρα is a synonym of πεῖρα (Schol Nem eDrachmann) and in a way even stronger than merely πεῖρα (Τhom Mag Ecl δ ) In Plutarch(Thes ) in oratory ([D] Aeschin ) as well as in historiography(Hdt ) the term διάπειρα bears the meaning of lsquocrucial experiment trial proofrsquo Od In that sense Odysseus Erginus and Psaumis have proved their superiority during the ath-letic contest


Surprisingly the motif is not included in the mythical narrative of the Odesup1⁵ In-stead it is incorporated in an enunciative self-reference about Pindarrsquos encomiastictask and the principles of his art which functions as a proem to the mythical nar-rative (ll 17ndash18 οὐ ψεύδεϊ τέγξω λόγονmiddot διάπειρά τοι βροτῶν ἔλεγχος lsquoI shall nottinge my praise with lies the test till the end is the proof for the menrsquo)

Two other rather similar first person declarations occur in the poemsup1⁶ Atthe proem (ll 1ndash3) Pindar mentions that he has been personally sent here (μ᾽ἔπεμψαν hellip μάρτυρrsquo ἀέθλων) with his song as a witness to the games insteadof merely sending his song as a gift to the victorsup1⁷ The background of theimage is Homeric Twice in the Hymns (612ndash 13 and 3189ndash196) the Horaedaughters of Zeus and Themis are presented as dancing along with HarmoniaHebe and Aphrodite to the accompaniment of choral song and lyresup1⁸

Ὧραι κοσμείσθην χρυσάμπυκες ὁππότrsquo ἴοιενἐς χορὸν ἱμερόεντα θεῶν καὶ δώματα πατρός (612ndash13)

Adorned [hellip] with golden necklaces like those that grace the Horai wearing golden tiaraswhen they fly to the dance of the gods and their fatherrsquos house

Μοῦσαι μέν θrsquo ἅμα πᾶσαι ἀμειβόμεναι ὀπὶ καλῇὑμνεῦσίν ῥα θεῶν δῶρrsquo ἄμβροτα[hellip]αὐτὰρ ἐϋπλόκαμοι Χάριτες καὶ ἐΰφρονες ὯραιἉρμονίη θrsquo Ἥβη τε Διὸς θυγάτηρ τrsquo Aφροδίτηὀρχεῦντrsquo ἀλλήλων ἐπὶ καρπῷ χεῖρας ἔχουσαιmiddot (3189ndash96)

The Muses respond as one their rich voicessinging the immortal gifts of the gods[hellip] Then the rich-haired Graces gracious HoraiHarmonia Hebe and Zeusrsquo daughter Aphroditeall dance together joining hands at their wrists

(trans Rayor 2004 with minor adjustments)

The mythical narrative is inserted in the form of direct speech (oratio recta) According toDornseiff this technique indicates Pindarrsquos literary model as activating the audien-cersquos awareness of the source text in order to impart them information that is essential for theirknowledge and understanding Carey ndash lsquoin Pindar as distinct from other choral lyric poets references to thepoet are distributed throughout the poemrsquo Gerber ndash It is not necessary to assume that the poet has been actually present inthe location of the games The statement can be equally a rhetorical stance for the poetrsquos prom-inence in praising lavishly the victor and his success On the relationship between Horae and Graces see further Hes Op ndash Th ndashCypr fr Bernabeacute Cf also Orph H ndash Their cult in ancient Greece is discussed in Pirenne-Delforge ndash


The next lines (ll 4ndash5) are also devoted to Pindarrsquos personal relationship toPsaumis and their friendship in conjunction with his encomiastic tasksup1⁹ Thanksto Psaumisrsquo liberality the poet finds his place among other guests of thatcelebrationsup2⁰ Pindar frequently describes his task with terms such as ἀγγελίανor ἀγγέλλειν lsquoa conventional mode of discourse associated with athletic compe-tition the formal announcement of the athletersquos victoryrsquosup2sup1 Zeus is then invokedby the speaker lsquoto receive this victorious procession at Olympia a longest-shin-ing light of mighty deedsrsquo (ll 6ndash10) in order to sing Psaumisrsquo athletic aretā(ll 10ndash13) The sentence stops at a semi-colon and the point goes on with a caus-al ἐπεί (l 14) in the form of an emphatic first person statement (the second one ofthe poem) justifying Pindarrsquos encomiastic task lsquofor I praise him for his horse-manship hospitality and the civic harmony in the statersquo

At this point we come to the third and final first person statement of the Ode (l17 οὐ ψεύδεϊ τέγξω λόγον) In a brief personalized moral judgment introduced by anasyndeton Pindar stresses the truthfulness of his praise enhancing in this manner aprominent aspect of his personal style in artsup2sup2 The sentence stops at a semi-colonand the speaker goes on to the next clause to justify his declaration lsquobecause Ipraise him for his values I shall tell (you) the truth for (I tell you) the test tillthe end is the proof for the menrsquosup2sup3 The poet addresses his public not only to revealthe meaning of the following myth (l 19 ἅπερ) but also to establish once again thetechnique which he follows the medium of his poetrysup2⁴ Speaking of himself as aprofessional for the third time Pindar stands in the centre of his procession (l 9)in order to bring in public the message of glory thus securing the continuity ofhis addresseersquos fame This message embodies the epinician αἶνος which is in fact

Race ( ndash) noted that the poet is not the only one to personally feel joy at Psaumisrsquoachievement but ldquoin general all good men should take delight in his hostrsquos victoryrdquo Bundy Wells ndash Carey Cf also Pratt ndash who claims that Pindar always associates truthwith his own praise and lying with the blame of slanders Cf Denniston ndash who claims that one of τοιrsquos nuances is to reveal lsquothe speakerrsquosemotional or intellectual state (present or past) [hellip] With a proverb or general reflection far com-moner in serious poetry than in comedy or prose τοι is used to point the applicability of a uni-versal truth to the special matter in hand it forces the general truth upon the consciousness ofthe individual addressed ldquoDonrsquot forget pleaserdquo rsquo Cf the function of τοι according to Denniston lsquoits primary function is to bringhome to the comprehension of the person addressed a truth of which he is ignorant or tempo-rarily oblivious to establish in fact a close rapport between the mind of the speaker and themind of another personrsquo See also τοι in Pi I (in his address to the victor) and Ol (ad-dressing his own θυμός)


the justification of the truthsup2⁵ The common denominator of the first person state-ments in the poem is the reference to the public lsquoGood menrsquo (l 5 ἐσλοί ie thelocal people of the small Camarina or the panhellenic audience at Olympia) are de-lighted to hear the message of Psaumisrsquo victory as do the lsquomortalsrsquo (l 18 βροτῶν)who also expect Pindar to communicate the glorious event

Therefore the διάπειρα motif though Homeric in nature is refigured with re-gard to its function It is consciously placed at the peak of a series of the per-formative lsquoIrsquo right at the beginning of the mythical narrative which enables Pin-dar to reveal to the audience his professional profile as a lyric creator lsquohisdistinct identityrsquosup2⁶ The motif belongs then to the programmatic content ofthe poem at the hic et nunc of the epinician performance As with Odysseus Er-ginus and Psaumis Pindar proves his own superiority to the public He presentshimself as a lsquopersona projected by the poemsrsquosup2⁷ a speaker in singular accompa-nied by a group of dancers (l 9) whose task is to announce with truthfulnessPsaumisrsquo success and establish it through a mythical example

What is particularly significant for our interpretation is the manner in whichHomer presents Odysseus throughout his work Not only does the hero appear asan athlete who gains victories in different disciplines (discus spear archery) inthe athletic games in Scheria and later in Ithacasup2⁸ but also as a story-teller askillful narrator who communicates his past adventures to the Phaeacianssup2⁹This aspect of the hero is particularly interesting mainly because Odysseus un-like other Homeric professional singers such as Phemius or Demodocus is oftendepicted as a trickster an arch-liar whose descriptions often combine true andfictional elements of his past (on Odysseusrsquo refigurations see also Alexandrouand Petrakou in this volume)sup3⁰ It is exactly this aspect of Odysseus that Pindarwants to suppress and the combination of διάπειρα with the truth as a prelimi-nary remark in his narrative helps to convey such a view As a lsquoprimary narratorrsquohe aims at distinguishing himself from the Homeric Odysseus by providing im-

Nagy observes that the term sums up a moral message demonstrating the author-ity of its creator Cf also Race n Carey opcit In Il Odysseus appears as a spearman Odysseus narrates his wanderings and experiences to the Phaeacians in the four books of hisAπόλογοι (Od ndash) As regards this aspect of the function of the Homeric text in Pindar I amdeeply indebted to Lucia Athanassaki for our fruitful and stimulating private discussion on the sub-ject See Pucci Goldhill esp ch De Jong with further literature in n For Odysseus as a lying narrator cf also the interesting discussion of Pratt ndash


mediately the necessary guarantees about the truthfulness of his storysup3sup1 Eventu-ally he anticipates the false conclusions of his audience and then narrates hisstory suggesting analogies between past and present according to the commonepinician practice

Concluding remarks

The appropriation of Homer in Pindarrsquos Olympian 4 is developed in two levelsThe first one concerns the verbal affinities to the epic source and serves primarilyto praise the victor by comparing him with heroes of the pastsup3sup2 Pindarrsquos han-dling of Erginusrsquo myth is entirely Homeric in diction and subject-matter Glimp-ses of the Odyssey provide his audience with the factual data that define the cele-brated victory and enhance Psaumisrsquo glory by likening his accomplishment tothe exploits of the Homeric heroes Epic is refigured within Pindarrsquos mediumwhile Erginus (from the Argonaut myth) and Odysseus (from the Homeric Odys-sey) are treated as equivalent or lsquoparallel variantsrsquo to highlight the same idea thecomparison between the heroic past and the presentsup3sup3

The second level of Homeric reception is more crucial and complex It con-cerns the adaptation of a specific element of the Homeric narrative The so-calledπεῖρα motif sup3⁴ is now developed into one of Pindarrsquos prominent communicativestrategies The motif constitutes a medium of his epideictic rhetoric within a de-fined performative context Διάπειρα then belongs to lsquothe current composer-audi-ence interactionrsquo In a way it indicates Pindarrsquos lsquospeech-planrsquo according to theethnographic analysis of Wellssup3⁵ Thus the motif is not simply employed topraise the victor as it is till now commonly assumed but primarily to detectin public Pindarrsquos professional task and to underline the epinician bond betweenhim and his patron Like other terms in the Ode such as μαρτυρία ἀγγελία andαἶνος διάπειρα refers not only to the victor but also to the poet himself and to hislsquoovert and visiblersquo professional role while he comments openly upon his storysup3⁶

For Odysseus as lsquosecondary narratorrsquo among other Homeric characters see de Jong ndash GraziosiHaubold argued that Pindarrsquos epinicia must be explored as lsquoelaborateattempts to link the (suitably doctored) past and the present circumstance in which he performsrsquo Nagy ndash Behind the variation of the πεῖρα motif its function is revealed which mainly concerns theperformative context of the poem Wells ndash Pfeijffer ndash


Combined with the virtue of truthfulness in the frame of a gnomic authoritativedeclaration διάπειρα establishes the true message of victory while the poet at-tempts to lsquoconvincersquo his public by conveying the importance of the narratedeventsup3⁷ The matter is then not only about the narration of a story but alsoabout its reception by the public (διάπειρά τοι βροτῶν ἔλεγχος)sup3⁸

From a narratological point of view Pindar differentiates himself from theHomeric Odysseus He anchors himself in the present occasion of the celebra-tion creating ēthos Being conscious about the expectations of his audiencethe poet aims at persuading about the truth of his attitude and praise by narrat-ing the story of a similar situationsup3⁹ The Homeric reflection of the (δια)πειραmotif infuses Pindarrsquos speech with authority It is a poetic strategy showcasinga multilayered adaptation of the epic source text and the manner in which itis reworked to meet the needs of a lyric performance

Pfeijffer Carey It seems like the poet intrudes into his own story in order to add to it credibility and value TheOde is lsquoHomericrsquo not only in terms of its narrative but also with regard to its introduction which ismade in Homeric colours In the form of a gnomic authoritative declaration the Homeric πεῖραmotifcombined with the truth signals not only the mythical exemplum but the narrator as well Nagy mentions lsquoThe presence of heroic narrative in Pindar is the continuation ofa living tradition not the preservation of references to lost epic texts Recognizing the Homericsource text is essential for the understanding of the denotation of the text and for the appreci-ation of the poem as a meaningful work of artrsquo


Chris Carey

Homer and Epic in Herodotusrsquo Book 7

Herodotusrsquo relationship with Homer already a commonplace in antiquitysup1 isboth complex and shifting It is a clicheacute but like most clicheacutes true that Herodo-tus overtly place himself at a crossroads in European literary history While hisbroadly rationalizing approach to his world and his insistence on explainingcausation align him with developments in contemporary Ioniasup2 his programmat-ic opening also firmly aligns him with the epic herorsquos quest for and the epic nar-ratorrsquos bestowal of kleos aphthiton undying renown

῾Ηροδότου Ἁλικαρνασσέος ἱστορίης ἀπόδεξις ἥδε ὡς μήτε τὰ γενόμενα ἐξ ἀνθρώπων τῷχρόνῳ ἐξίτηλα γένηται μήτε ἔργα μεγάλα τε καὶ θωμαστά τὰ μὲν ῞Ελλησι τὰ δὲ βαρβάροισιἀποδεχθέντα ἀκλέα γένηται τά τε ἄλλα καὶ διrsquo ἣν αἰτίην ἐπολέμησαν ἀλλήλοισι

This is the exposition of the research of Herodotus of Halicarnassus so that events may not belost to mankind through time nor great and marvellous deeds some performed by Greeks andothers by barbarians may not lose their glory including the reason why they went to war witheach othersup3

The debt to epic is overtly advertised at the level of form It appears as a genericdebt in the archaizing dialect which Herodotus shares with other Ionian logogra-phers and in the presence of words otherwise attested only in poetry and as a spe-cifically Homeric debt in the pervasive presence of direct speech a feature whichAristotle singled out as especially associated with the Iliad and the Odyssey⁴ Moregenerally in locating the Persian wars within the larger context of hostilities be-tween East and West he associates his narrative closely with the Trojan War asthe salient predecessor of the westward aggression of 490 and 480 BC At thesame time as so often when one creative work engaged with another the encoun-ter with epic always carries an implied or explicit distancing⁵ Thus HerodotusrsquolsquoHomericrsquo dialect is resolutely Ionic it is a Kunstsprache but not the epic Ionic-

[Longin] De sublim μόνος ῾Ηρόδοτος ῾Ομηρικώτατος ἐγένετο Στησίχορος ἔτι πρότερον ὅτε ᾿Αρχίλοχοςhellip For Herodotusrsquo relationship with contemporary intellectual trends see in general Thomas Translations of Herodotus are based on the Loeb of ΑD Godley ndash with revisions ofmy own those of Homer ultimately are based on the Loeb of AT Murray ndash with myown (often radical) revisions Other translations are my own unless otherwise indicated Poet a See on this especially Pelling

Aeolic Kunstsprache And when he explicitly approaches Homer Herodotus point-edly distances himself from and questions the authority of the Homeric text

This complex relationship is omnipresent in Herodotus But it is not uni-formly present There are highs and lows of interaction Herodotusrsquo use ofHomer and of epic more generally reaches its highest point in book 7 which en-gages with the Homeric text to a degree unparalleled in the History My presentpurpose is simply to chart this engagement

The engagement with Homer first surfaces explicitly at sect20 with the assertionthat the invasion of 480 exceeded all of the early East-West confrontations puttogether

στόλων γὰρ τῶν ἡμεῖς ἴδμεν πολλῷ δὴ μέγιστος οὗτος ἐγένετο ὥστε μήτε τὸν Δαρείου τὸνἐπὶ Σκύθας παρὰ τοῦτον μηδένα φαίνεσθαι μήτε τῶν Σκυθέων ὅτε Σκύθαι Κιμμερίους διώ-κοντες ἐς τὴν Μηδικὴν χώρην ἐσβαλόντες σχεδὸν πάντα τὰ ἄνω τῆς ᾿Ασίης καταστρεψάμενοιἐνέμοντο τῶν εἵνεκεν ὕστερον Δαρεῖος ἐτιμωρέετο μήτε κατὰ τὰ λεγόμενα τὸν ᾿Ατρειδέων ἐς῎Ιλιον μήτε τὸν Μυσῶν τε καὶ Τευκρῶν τὸν πρὸ τῶν Τρωικῶν γενόμενον οἳ διαβάντες ἐς τὴνΕὐρώπην κατὰ Βόσπορον τούς τε Θρήικας κατεστρέψαντο πάντας καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν ᾿Ιόνιον πόντονκατέβησαν μέχρι τε Πηνειοῦ ποταμοῦ τὸ πρὸς μεσαμβρίης ἤλασαν αὗται αἱ πᾶσαι οὐδrsquo ἕτεραιπρὸς ταύτῃσι γενόμεναι στρατηλασίαι μιῆς τῆσδε οὐκ ἄξιαι

This was by far the greatest of all expeditions of which we know The one that Darius ledagainst the Scythians is nothing compared to this nor is the Scythian expedition whenthey invade Median territory in pursuit of the Cimmerians and conquered and held almostall the upper lands of Asia (for which Darius afterwards attempted to punish them) nor ac-cording to the reports the expedition led by the sons of Atreus against Troy nor the expedi-tion of the Mysians and Teucrians who before the Trojan war crossed the Bosporus into Eu-rope conquered all the Thracians and came down to the Ionian sea driving southward as faras the river Peneus Not all these nor all the others added to them equal this single expedition

Though Herodotus gives a list of the earlier invasions only one receives a com-ment on its source That is the Trojan War where (in a milder way than his sus-picion of Homer in book 2)⁶ he qualifies the reference to Troy with a disclaimerabout the tradition The comment is revealing Troy and epic are the main com-petitors for his theme and the passage insists that in scale and significance Her-odotusrsquo story dwarfs that of Homer The position of this assertion is highly signif-icant It is placed very early in (what for us is) book 7 of the History immediately

῾Ελένης μὲν ταύτην ἄπιξιν παρὰ Πρωτέα ἔλεγον οἱ ἱρέες γενέσθαι Δοκέει δέ μοι καὶ῞Ομηρος τὸν λόγον τοῦτον πυθέσθαιmiddot ἀλλrsquo οὐ γὰρ ὁμοίως ἐς τὴν ἐποποιίην εὐπρεπὴς ἦν τῷἑτέρῳ τῷ περ ἐχρήσατο μετῆκε αὐτόν δηλώσας ὡς καὶ τοῦτον ἐπίσταιτο τὸν λόγον

This is the way the priests narrate the arrival of Helen to the court of Proteus I think thatHomer heard of this account but seeing that it was not so well suited to epic poetry as the taleof which he made use he rejected it while showing that he knew it

72 Chris Carey

after the ratification of the decision to go to war but before the army begins tomobilize As such it serves as a second prooimion introducing a new and climac-tic phase in the narrative This book follows the specifically Athenian aristeia atMarathon in book 6which is the climax of the pre-invasion narrative In contrastto Marathon presented by Herodotus as a Persian punitive expedition againsttargeted enemies the invasion in book 7 is a threat to the whole of Greece Her-odotus has already signalled Dariusrsquo escalation of his ambitions from targetedtisis to a more general intention to take Greece⁷ and the prospect of a Persianconquest of Greece had figured as an implied counter-factual as early as book3 when Atossa playing the familiar role of tempter tries to divert Darius fromthe Scythian campaign to an attack on Greece⁸ But in the case of Xerxes the tar-get is from the start the whole of Greece And more than Greece For Herodotusthe ultimate goal is Europe⁹ This is for Herodotus a conflict on a scale unprece-dented in the history of the world not all the East-West conflicts combined equalit As such it is an epic contest and one which surpasses all epic narrative

In fact of course this prooimion is simply making explicit an engagementwith Homer visible to the original audience in the preceding narrative Thedream which tempts Xerxes draws on an established narrative role for dreamsin epic lyric and drama (and indeed in real life) as the prompters to actionOne text lurking in the background is almost certainly Aeschylusrsquo Persianswhose influence is palpable throughout book 7 But far more important as an in-fluence is the epic background The generic affinity with epic is visible in the be-haviour of the dream Unlike those dreams where people see something whileasleep (the more usual form in Herodotus) this dream is a figure who comesand stands over the sleeping Xerxes in the manner of epic apparition dreamssup1⁰

ndash ndash ταῦτα μὲν ἐπὶ τοσοῦτο ἐλέγετο μετὰ δὲ εὐφρόνη τε ἐγίνετο καὶ Ξέρξην ἔκνιζε ἡ ᾿Αρταβά-νου γνώμηmiddot νυκτὶ δὲ βουλὴν διδοὺς πάγχυ εὕρισκέ οἱ οὐ πρῆγμα εἶναι στρατεύεσθαι ἐπὶ τὴν ῾Ελλάδαδεδογμένων δέ οἱ αὖτις τούτων κατύπνωσε καὶ δή κου ἐν τῇ νυκτὶ εἶδε ὄψιν τοιήνδε ὡς λέγεται ὑπὸΠερσέωνmiddot ἐδόκεε ὁ Ξέρξης ἄνδρα οἱ ἐπιστάντα μέγαν τε καὶ εὐειδέα εἰπεῖνmiddot ldquoμετὰ δὴ βουλεύεαι ὦΠέρσα στράτευμα μὴ ἄγειν ἐπὶ τὴν ῾Ελλάδα προείπας ἁλίζειν Πέρσῃσι στρατόν οὔτε ὦν μεταβουλευό-μενος ποιέεις εὖ οὔτε ὁ συγγνωσόμενός τοι πάραmiddot ἀλλrsquo ὥσπερ τῆς ἡμέρης ἐβουλεύσαο ποιέειν ταύτηνἴθι τῶν ὁδῶνrdquo τὸν μὲν ταῦτα εἴπαντα ἐδόκεε ὁ Ξέρξης ἀποπτάσθαι

The discussion went that far then night came and Xerxes was pricked by the advice of Ar-tabanus Giving over the night to reflection he concluded that to send an army against Hellas wasnot his affair He made this second resolve and fell asleep then (so the Persians say) in the night hesaw a vision like this it seemed to Xerxes that a tall and handsome man stood over him and saidldquoAre you then changing your mind Persian and not intending to lead an expedition against Hellas


But there is a very specific intertext here in the account of the dream sent by Zeusto Agamemnon in book 2 of the Iliad a text which is regularly cited in thiscontextsup1sup1 The presence of other dreams in both the Iliad and the Odyssey indi-cates that they were a regular narrative motif in epic texts So we should avoidthe automatic assumption that an intertext which strikes us immediately withour very small sample of early Greek poetry would have been as obvious to aGreek with a whole tradition potentially available But in this case the similar-ities are striking and numerous enough to rule out coincidence

The position immediately invites comparison In both cases after a narrated orimplied interval in the hostilities a renewal of the fighting is prompted by a divinedream In Homer the dream is explicitly sent by Zeus This is a more tricky situationfor Herodotus to manage The historian never adopts the omniscient stance of theepic poet his account comes from researchsup1sup2 not as a gift from the Muses So divineorigin cannot be a narrative fact But the narrativewhile carefully avoiding anythingwhich might count as an explicit authorial validation of the dream figure stronglyinvites us to take it seriously as something supernatural This is achieved both withthe amount of space devoted to the narrative and with the subtle shift in focaliza-tion Though we begin with explicit distancing of author from story through the ref-erence to Persian sources (7121 λέγεται ὑπὸ Περσέωνsup1sup3) the demurrer is not repeat-ed Instead we are offered authorial statements of fact and a degree ofcircumstantial detail which further invites beliefsup1⁴

although you have proclaimed the mustering of the army It is not good for you to change yourmind and there will be no one here to pardon you for it but continue along the path you resolvedupon yesterdayrdquo With these words the figure seemed to Xerxes to flit away

For Herodotean parallels see 1341 381 21391 1413 5561 Stein (1889 ad loc) speaks oflsquodas nach homerischer Art gedachte Traumbildrsquo Macan 1908 remarks lsquothe analogy with thedream of Agamemnon Il 2 ad init has been often pointed outrsquo Immerwahr (1954 34) neveractually justifies his brisk lsquoit is also not very enlightening to compare the dreams to the famousdream of Agamemnon of Iliad 2rsquoWest (1987 264) is a little less brisk but ignores the similarity innarrative context and purpose (of the dream) See n17 below Il ndash The most succinct statement of method is μέχρι μὲν τούτου ὄψις τε ἐμὴ καὶ γνώμη καὶἱστορίη ταῦτα λέγουσά ἐστι τὸ δὲ ἀπὸ τοῦδε αἰγυπτίους ἔρχομαι λόγους ἐρέων κατὰ [τὰ] ἤκουονmiddotπροσέσται δέ τι αὐτοῖσι καὶ τῆς ἐμῆς ὄψιος

So far is said by my own autopsy and judgment and inquiry In what follows I will recordEgyptian accounts according to what I have heard and will add something of what I myselfhave seen See OphuisenStork ad loc The tacit narrator validation of the dream is marked by the narrative shift from subject impres-sion here (ἐδόκεε) to authorial statement ( ἔλεγε ἦλθε with Macan) and back ()

74 Chris Carey

The status of the dream is also boosted by the form taken by the dream fig-ure who has superhuman stature and beauty This is not unique (it happens inthe case of Hipparchus in book 5sup1⁵) But here the sense that we are in the pres-ence of something superhuman is further emphasized by the test which refutesthe rationalist incredulity of Artabanus As Harrison notessup1⁶ these doubts areclearly introduced into the narrative specifically to be quashed by the sequel Fi-nally its immediate context also aligns it with Homer Both are intimately tied tocouncils Agamemnonrsquos dream prompts two meetings a council of the elite anda general agora of the army Xerxesrsquo dream visions are interspersed with meet-ings of his council (this time three) Finally both are false The falsity of the Ilia-dic dream is explicit Zeus misleads Agamemnon with a dream which offers in-stant success though the aim is in fact to further the impact of Achillesrsquowithdrawal from battle Again it is more difficult for the historian to flag the in-tent to deceive and scholars have often been less ready to see the dream to Xerx-es as aimed at deceiving But the apparition emphatically tells Xerxes that thealternative to the expedition is ruin and diminution when in fact it is the expe-dition which will be ruinoussup1⁷ The dream means to deceivesup1⁸

However while visibly drawing on Homer the text also visibly goes beyondHomer Agamemnon receives a single dream vision Xerxesrsquo dream figure comesnot just once but three times There are two dreamerssup1⁹ And there are three coun-cils not two There is a process of expansion here which gives the Herodoteannarrative an element of hyperbole in comparison with its antecedent commen-surate with the claim which follows that this campaign was unprecedented inscale A unique expedition like this requires divine prompting on a scale unpre-cedented even in epic

The other visibly Homeric element is the expanded catalogue Catalogues ofcombatants are a recurrent and distinguishing feature of the invasion narrativeIt is interesting here to compare the account of Marathon Though a catalogue onthe Greek side is ruled out by the simple fact that only Athenians and Plataeansfight a Persian catalogue was always a possibility and Marathon receives noneIn contrast the invasion narrative is rich in catalogues They recur at 81ndash2 (Ar-

Harrison Contra egWest ndash lsquoDespite the widespread assumption that these dreams are sentto mislead the king there is no reason to question their message that it would be personally disas-trous for Xerxes to change his mind at this pointrsquo Nothing in the text suggests the latter and the netresult (contrary to the dream) is humiliation for Xerxes in the narrative if not in real life See especially Harrison ndash Dodson rightly refers to lsquothe dreams of Xerxes and Artabanusrsquo


temision) 43ndash48 (Salamis) and finally 928ndash32 (Plataea) But the present is byfar the longest Since only the Iranian contingents listed play any part in the sub-seqent account of the fightingsup2⁰ the list mainly serves to retard the narrative inorder to create suspense and to continue Herodotusrsquo emphasis on the unprece-dented scale of the army descending on Greece But again the epic intertext isan important part of the rhetoric For the detailed catalogue of forces at Doriscusthe obvious antecedent was the catalogue of ships in Iliad book 2 Again ofcourse we need to bear in mind that with so much more epic available to authorand audience intertexts which we perceive unhesitantly may have had less sali-ence There must have been many catalogues in epic war narratives But equallywe should note that the scale of Homerrsquos list invites comparison and that theEast-West axis of the conflict gives Iliad 2 a salience which is not the result ofmodern Homerocentrism nor of the accident of survival

There are of course some obvious differences Herodotus carefully integra-tes his catalogue into his narrative by locating it in the marshalling of the troopsat Doriscus So it has a natural role in his narrative He also lists his Greeks whenthey enter his narrative as fighters So there is no mechanical insertion of the Ho-meric motif Herodotus is also at pains to vary his model Thus where the Ho-meric text gives first place to the Greeks both in position and in scale (the Greeksin Homer receive 276 lines the Trojans 61) Herodotus reverses the relationshipHis Greeks as the more familiar combatants and the smaller force receive rela-tively little space and enter the narrative later (7202ndash03) while his Asiatics re-ceive in total approximately one sixth of the book

But as well as varying his model Herodotus outdoes it in the way he choosesto present his AsiaticsWhere Homer notes only in passing the polyglot nature ofhis Trojans and their alliessup2sup1 in a narrative which generally assimilates them cul-

Burn

Il ndashΝάστης αὖ Καρῶν ἡγήσατο βαρβαροφώνωνοἳ Μίλητον ἔχον Φθιρῶν τrsquo ὄρος ἀκριτόφυλλονΜαιάνδρου τε ῥοὰς Μυκάλης τrsquo αἰπεινὰ κάρηναAnd Nastes again led the Carians barbarian speakerswho held Miletus and the mountain of Phthires with its boundless leavesand the streams of Maeander and the steep peaks of MycaleCf Il31ndash9αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ κόσμηθεν ἅμrsquo ἡγεμόνεσσιν ἕκαστοιΤρῶες μὲν κλαγγῇ τrsquo ἐνοπῇ τrsquo ἴσαν ὄρνιθες ὣςἠΰτε περ κλαγγὴ γεράνων πέλει οὐρανόθι πρόmiddotαἵ τrsquo ἐπεὶ οὖν χειμῶνα φύγον καὶ ἀθέσφατον ὄμβρονcorr κλαγγῇ ταί γε πέτονται ἐπrsquo ὠκεανοῖο ῥοάων

76 Chris Carey

turally to each other and to the Greeks Herodotus is at pains to emphasize di-versity as well as scale Not only do these forces come from everywhere in theempire they are consistently exotic (with few exceptions) and often as differentfrom each other as they are from the Greeks It is in fact very unlikely that mostof these troops were marshalled by Xerxes or set foot in Greece and (as observedalready) almost all of them disappear from the subsequent narrative It is prob-able that the bulk of the troops were the Iranian core of the Persian army thePersians Medes and Saka (known to the Greeks as Scythians) Herodotusseems to be following a Persian source for the composition of the army contin-gents from the empire as a whole rather than a muster list for the invasion of480 This reflects in part the difficulty he experienced in obtaining informationspecific to the expedition He admits that he has no detailed source for scaleof the individual componentssup2sup2 and this in turn invites us to conclude that hedid not have access to a list of the forces engaged in the campaign But in fillingthe gap he has been influenced by Aeschylusrsquo understanding of the Persian armyas one which empties the empire of men and draws on peoples from everyregionsup2sup3 The effect (apart from increasing the emphasis throughout the narrative

corr ἀνδράσι Πυγμαίοισι φόνον καὶ κῆρα φέρουσαιmiddotἠέριαι δrsquo ἄρα ταί γε κακὴν ἔριδα προφέρονταιοἳ δrsquo ἄρrsquo ἴσαν σιγῇ μένεα πνείοντες ᾿Αχαιοὶἐν θυμῷ μεμαῶτες ἀλεξέμεν ἀλλήλοισινNow when they were marshalled each with their leadersthe Trojans advanced with clamour and cries like birdslike the clamour of cranes before heavenwho when they have fled wintry storms and rain beyond measurewith clamour fly toward the streams of Oceanbringing slaughter and death to the Pigmy menand in the early dawn offer grim battleBut the Achaeans advanced in silence breathing courageeager at heart to defend each other

ὅσον μέν νυν ἕκαστοι παρεῖχον πλῆθος ἐς ἀριθμόν οὐκ ἔχω εἰπεῖν τὸ ἀτρεκές (οὐ γὰρλέγεται πρὸς οὐδαμῶν ἀνθρώπων) σύμπαντος δὲ τοῦ στρατοῦ τοῦ πεζοῦ τὸ πλῆθος ἐφάνη ἑβδο-μήκοντα καὶ ἑκατὸν μυριάδες

I cannot give the precise number that each group contributed to the total for there is no one whotells us but the total of the whole land army turned out as one million and seven hundred thousand A Pers ndash πᾶσα γὰρ ἰσχὺς ᾿Ασιατογενὴςοἴχωκε νέον δrsquo ἄνδρα βαΰζεικοὔτε τις ἄγγελος οὔτε τις ἱππεὺςἄστυ τὸ Περσῶν ἀφικνεῖταιmiddot[hellip] θούριος Ξέρξης κενώσας πᾶσαν ἠπείρου πλάκα


on the dramatic disparity between the Greek and Persian forces) is again to stressthe unprecedented nature of the invasion So once more Herodotus uses Homericmotifs to recall and at the same time distance himself from Homer

Again it is worth stressing that this is not Herodotusrsquo only catalogue But ithas no equal in what precedes and even the catalogue of combatants in the cli-mactic battle of Plataea in book 9 is much smaller in scale and lacking in thecumulative exoticism of this catalogue This catalogue also advertises its Homer-ic origin in a way that the subsequent catalogues do not in its structural similar-ity to that of the Iliad it lists both contingents and commanders where subse-quent catalogues are happy to list contingents

There is one further aspect of the narrative of the decision to go to warwhich is worth stressing Xerxes too is shaped by Herodotus on the model ofthe epic hero with all its ambiguity in the grandeur of his ambitions and themotives which take him to war He is invited by Mardonius the ultimate tempterto think of the renown which he will win if he conquers Greecesup2⁴ as well as theterritory and the opportunity for revenge He himself stresses in council thatglory is one of the things he seeks In conversation with Mardonius he praisesthe life of action and risksup2⁵ in a manner which (as Angus Bowie has noted)would be fitting in the mouth of a Homeric herosup2⁶ And Herodotus stresses(not entirely correctly) that his decision to build the canal was down to hismegalophrosynēsup2⁷ The desire for glory was Persian as well as Greek And the

For the whole strength of Asiahas gone and yelps around the young manand no messenger or horsemanreaches the city of the Persians[hellip] Rushing Xerxes emptying the whole plain of the mainland ἀλλrsquo εἰ τὸ μὲν νῦν ταῦτα πρήσσοις τά περ ἐν χερσὶ ἔχειςmiddot ἡμερώσας δὲ Αἴγυπτον τὴν ἐξυ-βρίσασαν στρατηλάτεε ἐπὶ τὰς ᾿Αθήνας ἵνα λόγος τέ σε ἔχῃ πρὸς ἀνθρώπων ἀγαθὸς καί τις ὕστερ-ον φυλάσσηται ἐπὶ γῆν τὴν σὴν στρατεύεσθαι

For now you should do what you have in hand then when you have tamed the arrogance ofEgypt lead your armies against Athens so that you may have fair fame among men and othersmay beware of invading your land in future μεγάλα γὰρ πρήγματα μεγάλοισι κινδύνοισι ἐθέλει καταιρέεσθαι

Great causes are usually achieved with great risks Bowie ὡς μὲν ἐμὲ συμβαλλόμενον εὑρίσκειν μεγαλοφροσύνης εἵνεκεν αὐτὸ Ξέρξης ὀρύσσεινἐκέλευε ἐθέλων τε δύναμιν ἀποδείκνυσθαι καὶ μνημόσυνα λιπέσθαι παρεὸν γὰρ μηδένα πόνον λαβ-όντας τὸν ἰσθμὸν τὰς νέας διειρύσαι ὀρύσσειν ἐκέλευε διώρυχα τῇ θαλάσσῃ εὖρος ὡς δύο τριήρεαςπλέειν ὁμοῦ ἐλαστρεομένας

As far as I can determine by reasoning Xerxes ordered this digging out of pride wishing todisplay his power and leave a memorial though with no trouble they could have drawn their

78 Chris Carey

epic hero is not the only influence at work since Herodotusrsquo account of Xerxesrsquodecision also draws on Aeschylusrsquo version of his psychology in the Persians Butthe values of the epic hero as formulated resoundingly by Homer are there aspart of the (complex) presentation of Xerxes

αὐτίκα δὲ Γλαῦκον προσέφη παῖδrsquo ῾ΙππολόχοιοmiddotΓλαῦκε τί ἢ δὴ νῶϊ τετιμήμεσθα μάλισταἕδρῃ τε κρέασίν τε ἰδὲ πλείοις δεπάεσσινἐν Λυκίῃ πάντες δὲ θεοὺς ὣς εἰσορόωσικαὶ τέμενος νεμόμεσθα μέγα Ξάνθοιο παρrsquo ὄχθαςκαλὸν φυταλιῆς καὶ ἀρούρης πυροφόροιοτὼ νῦν χρὴ Λυκίοισι μέτα πρώτοισιν ἐόνταςἑστάμεν ἠδὲ μάχης καυστείρης ἀντιβολῆσαιὄφρά τις ὧδrsquo εἴπῃ Λυκίων πύκα θωρηκτάωνmiddotοὐ μὰν ἀκλεέες Λυκίην κάτα κοιρανέουσινἡμέτεροι βασιλῆες ἔδουσί τε πίονα μῆλαοἶνόν τrsquo ἔξαιτον μελιηδέαmiddot ἀλλrsquo ἄρα καὶ ἲςἐσθλή ἐπεὶ Λυκίοισι μέτα πρώτοισι μάχονταιὦ πέπον εἰ μὲν γὰρ πόλεμον περὶ τόνδε φυγόντεαἰεὶ δὴ μέλλοιμεν ἀγήρω τrsquo ἀθανάτω τεἔσσεσθrsquo οὔτέ κεν αὐτὸς ἐνὶ πρώτοισι μαχοίμηνοὔτέ κε σὲ στέλλοιμι μάχην ἐς κυδιάνειρανmiddotνῦν δrsquo ἔμπης γὰρ κῆρες ἐφεστᾶσιν θανάτοιο

ships across the isthmus he ordered them to dig a canal from sea to sea wide enough to float twotriremes rowed abreast

Like μεγαλοφροσύνη μηδένα πόνον λαβόντας captures the ambiguity of Herodotusrsquo presenta-tion for it hovers somewhere between needless labour and the readiness of the Pindaric athleteto undergo ponos for the sake of renown (O[5]15 69ndash11 87 922ndash3 1091ndash3 114 P873ndash80N132ndash3 41ndash2 548ndash9 624 714ndash16 1024 30ndash31 I145ndash6 445ndash7 522ndash5 57ndash9 610ndash11) Hero-dotusrsquo objection that it would have been feasible to drag the ships overland across the peninsula isonly superficially persuasive As Macan notes ad loc the Greeks occasionally moved small forcesshort distances in the way (Th 23 281 482) but it would be an enormous task to use this methodto move (and reinforce) a large fleet on a major expedition (despite Herodotusrsquo μηδένα πόνον λαβ-όντας) The canal would offer advantages for provisioning as well as movement of warships if itwas deep enough for barges or small cargo vessels Herodotus is not however entirely wrong TheChalouf stēlē (DZc Brosius 2000 no 52 p47 Kuhrt 2007 no 11 6 pp 485ndash6) says lsquoKing Dariussays I am a Persian From Persia I seized Egypt I ordered this canal dug from a river that is calledNile and flows in Egypt to the sea which begins in Persia Therefore this canal was dug as I hadordered and ships went from Egypt through this canal to Persia as I wishedrsquo The Egytian canalwas evidently a source of pride for Darius (as well as practical politics) and Xerxes was probablymotivated in part by a desire to emulate his father (as Stein 1889 notes)


μυρίαι ἃς οὐκ ἔστι φυγεῖν βροτὸν οὐδrsquo ὑπαλύξαιἴομεν ἠέ τῳ εὖχος ὀρέξομεν ἠέ τις ἡμῖν(Il 12309ndash28)

At once he spoke to Glaucus son of HippolochuslsquoGlaucus why is it you and I are honoured above otherswith pride of place and meats and filled wine cupsin Lycia and all men look on us as if we were immortalsand we have our allocated land by the banks of Xanthusgood land orchard and vineyard and fields for growing wheatSo now it is our duty in the forefront of the Lyciansto take our stand and go to meet blazing battleso that a man of the close-armoured Lycians may say of usldquoIndeed these are no inglorious men who are lords of Lyciathese kings of ours who feed upon the fat sheepand drink the exquisite sweet wine but there is noblevalour in them since they fight in the forefront of the LyciansrdquoFriend supposing you and I escaping this battleCould go on to live on forever ageless immortalI would not myself be fighting in the foremostnor would I send you into battle where men win gloryBut now seeing that the spirits of death stand close about uscountless and no man can turn aside or escape themlet us go on and give someone cause to boast or he to us(trans Lattimore 1951 adapted)

Like the other motifs it aligns the invasion with the themes of epic and stressesboth its significance and the climactic nature of the last three books There ishowever an irony in all of this Although I have stressed the unique salienceof epic in book 7 and the book does have a neat wholeness to it in the narrativearc that takes us from the decision to invade through to the first major encounterthe account of the invasion has to be read as a fluent whole the books are notfree-standing Xerxes will in the end prove to be entirely unheroicWhere the pre-Salamis narrative places emphasis on Greek fears and the Greek readiness toflee the decisive victory at Salamis transfers these emotions to Xerxes His re-sponse to defeat is to enact a flight which reverses the morale ratio betweenGreek and Persiansup2⁸

Ξέρξης δὲ ὡς ἔμαθε τὸ γεγονὸς πάθος δείσας μή τις τῶν ᾿Ιώνων ὑποθῆται τοῖσι ῞Ελλησι ἢαὐτοὶ νοήσωσι πλέειν ἐς τὸν ῾Ελλήσποντον λύσοντες τὰς γεφύρας καὶ ἀπολαμφθεὶς ἐν τῇ Εὐ-ρώπῃ κινδυνεύσῃ ἀπολέσθαι δρησμὸν ἐβούλευε (8971)

See ndash of the Greeks

80 Chris Carey

When Xerxes understood the calamity which had taken place he feared that some of the Ion-ians might advise the Hellenes or that they might decide themselves to sail to the Hellespontand destroy the bridges and he would be trapped in Europe and in danger of destruction heresolved on flight

The epic stance in book 7 is in part a preparation for this peripeteiaThe scale of the invasion is not the only reason for the dense indebtedness to

Homer in book 7 The other reason is the nature of the culminating battle of thebook at Thermopylae The tradition which Herodotus inherited already stressedthe dramatic disparity of the forces and the courageous choice made by theGreek fighters This is all there in the epigram for the fallen set up at the sitewith its emphasis on overwhelming odds (72281)

μυριάσιν ποτὲ τᾷδε τριακοσίαις ἐμάχοντοἐκ Πελοποννάσου χιλιάδες τέτορες

Against three million here foughtFour thousand from the Peloponnese

The poetic tradition had expanded this aspect Simonidesrsquo fragmentary lyric cel-ebration of the dead rings a number of changes on the epic notion of kleos ap-thiton immortal renown (PMG 531)

τῶν ἐν Θερμοπύλαις θανόντωνεὐκλεὴς μὲν ἁ τύχα καλὸς δrsquo ὁ πότμοςβωμὸς δrsquo ὁ τάφος πρὸ γόων δὲ μνᾶστις ὁ δrsquo οἶκτος ἔπαινοςmiddotἐντάφιον δὲ τοιοῦτον οὔτrsquo εὐρὼςοὔθrsquo ὁ πανδαμάτωρ ἀμαυρώσει χρόνοςἀνδρῶν ἀγαθῶν ὅδε σηκὸς οἰκέταν εὐδοξίαν῾Ελλάδος εἵλετοmiddot μαρτυρεῖ δὲ καὶ ΛεωνίδαςΣπάρτας βασιλεύς ἀρετᾶς μέγαν λελοιπὼςκόσμον ἀέναόν τε κλέος

Of those who died at Thermopylaethe fate is glorious fine is the destinythe tomb an altar for lamentation there is remembrance their pity is praiseA shroud like this not mouldnor all-conquering time will eraseThis precinct of brave men received as dweller renownthroughout Greece Witness is Leonidasking of Sparta who left behind the great ornament of valourand glory without end

The link with the heroic quest for kleos becomes explicit in Herodotusrsquo accountof the decision of Leonidas to send away the allies They had no enthusiasm for


the fight while for him it was not kalon to withdraw Herodotusrsquo own commenton the decision associates it firmly with the value system of the epic poems

ταύτῃ καὶ μᾶλλον τὴν γνώμην πλεῖστός εἰμιmiddot Λεωνίδην ἐπείτε ᾔσθετο τοὺς συμμάχους ἐόνταςἀπροθύμους καὶ οὐκ ἐθέλοντας συνδιακινδυνεύειν κελεῦσαί σφεας ἀπαλλάσσεσθαι αὐτῷ δὲἀπιέναι οὐ καλῶς ἔχεινmiddot μένοντι δὲ αὐτοῦ κλέος μέγα ἐλείπετο καὶ ἡ Σπάρτης εὐδαιμονίη οὐκἐξηλείφετο (72202)

I however firmly believe that when Leonidas perceived that the allies were dispirited and un-willing to share all risks with him he told then to depart For himself however it was not goodto leave if he remained he would leave a name of great glory and the prosperity of Spartawould not be erased

And again

ταῦτά τε δὴ ἐπιλεγόμενον Λεωνίδην καὶ βουλόμενον κλέος καταθέσθαι μούνων Σπαρτιητέωνἀποπέμψαι τοὺς συμμάχους μᾶλλον ἢ γνώμῃ διενειχθέντας οὕτω ἀκόσμως οἴχεσθαι τοὺςοἰχομένους (72204)

Considering this and wishing to win glory for the Spartans alone Leonidas sent away the al-lies rather than have them leave in disorder because of a difference of opinion

This sense of Leonidas as both distinct and superlative is prepared by his (re)-entry into the narrative at 7204

τούτοισι ἦσαν μέν νυν καὶ ἄλλοι στρατηγοὶ κατὰ πόλις ἑκάστων ὁ δὲ θωμαζόμενος μάλιστακαὶ παντὸς τοῦ στρατεύματος ἡγεόμενος Λακεδαιμόνιος ἦν Λεωνίδης ὁ ᾿Αναξανδρίδεω τοῦΛέοντος τοῦ Εὐρυκρατίδεω τοῦ ᾿Αναξάνδρου τοῦ Εὐρυκράτεος τοῦ Πολυδώρου τοῦ ᾿Αλκαμέ-νεος τοῦ Τηλέκλου τοῦ ᾿Αρχέλεω τοῦ ῾Ηγησίλεω τοῦ Δορύσσου τοῦ Λεωβώτεω τοῦ᾿Εχεστράτου τοῦ ῎Ηγιος τοῦ Εὐρυσθένεος τοῦ ᾿Αριστοδήμου τοῦ ᾿Αριστομάχου τοῦ Κλεοδαίουτοῦ ῞Υλλου τοῦ ῾Ηρακλέος hellip

There was a general for each contingent but the one most admired and the leader of thewhole army was a Lacedaemonian Leonidas son of Anaxandrides son of Leon son of Eur-ycratides son of Anaxandrus son of Eurycrates son of Polydorus son of Alcamenes son ofTeleclus son of Archelaus son of Hegesilaus son of Doryssus son of Leobotes son of Eches-tratus son of Agis son of Eurysthenes son of Aristodemus son of Aristomachus son of Cleo-daeus son of Hyllus son of Heracles

Though he commands a conventional Greek army Leonidas is set apart not justby the elementary fact that he alone of the Greeks is singled out for naming atthis point (unlike the Persian catalogue)sup2⁹ but by the elaborate genealogy and

The effect is repeated in the announcement of his death at where after noting that

82 Chris Carey

by his presentation as an object of aweamazementadmirationsup3⁰ In his singu-larity he resembles Xerxes (71872)

ἀνδρῶν δrsquo ἐουσέων τοσουτέων μυριάδων κάλλεός τε εἵνεκα καὶ μεγάθεος οὐδεὶς αὐτῶν ἀξιο-νικότερος ἦν αὐτοῦ Ξέρξεω ἔχειν τοῦτο τὸ κράτος

Of all those tens of thousands of men for beauty and grandeur there was not one worthierthan Xerxes himself to hold that command

The way the spotlight singles out both leaders presents the encounter almost asa duel one which (at least at the level of kleos) Leonidas will win

It is of course true that Leonidas is not simply assimilated to the Homerichero There are complications to his motivationsup3sup1 which reflect the fact thatthese events belong to contemporary history not epic Herodotus was too firmlyaware of the unrecoverability of the past to be seduced by a facile assimilation ofthe war to the heroic worldsup3sup2 But it is equally true that Leonidas is presented inglorious isolation by the narrative despite the fact that until they run out ofweaponry the Spartans fight a recognizably contemporary (if slightly unconven-tional) battle against the Persians not a series of individual encounters of thestylized Homeric kind And it is also true that the Greeks saw at the time andcontinued to see in Thermopylae a remarkable example of courage and devotionboth to country and to duty

The dialogue with epic is also visible in the account of the fighting Thedeath of Leonidas occasions the first of two instances of the epic motif of thefight over a prize corpse The second is the fight over the corpse of Masistiosat Plataea in book 9 (223ndash232) Even here however book 7 is distinctive inthat Herodotus has the fighting ebb and flow four times with the Greeks inthe ascendant until the arrival of Ephialtes

Ξέρξεώ τε δὴ δύο ἀδελφεοὶ ἐνθαῦτα πίπτουσι μαχόμενοι ltκαὶgt ὑπὲρ τοῦ νεκροῦ τοῦ Λεωνί-δεω Περσέων τε καὶ Λακεδαιμονίων ὠθισμὸς ἐγίνετο πολλός ἐς ὃ τοῦτόν τε ἀρετῇ οἱ ῞Ελ-ληνες ὑπεξείρυσαν καὶ ἐτρέψαντο τοὺς ἐναντίους τετράκις Τοῦτο δὲ συνεστήκεε μέχρι οὗοἱ σὺν ᾿Επιάλτῃ παρεγένοντο (72251)

Leonidas died ἀνὴρ γενόμενος ἄριστος Herodotus withholds the names of the other Spartanswho died with him while insisting that he knows the names He is also selected for separate mention in Simonides PMG cited above Pelling notes that even in deciding to lay down glory for Sparta Leonidas acknowl-edges that the alternative risks having his mixed force quarrel and disperse Real life is moregrimy than the heroic ideal See also Baragwanath who notes the way his suspicionsof Theban medizing undercut the heroic atmosphere She also notes () the way Leonidas likemany characters in the History seems to mirror the intellectual curiosity of the narrator See especially


Two brothers of Xerxes fought and fell there There was a great struggle between the Persiansand Lacedaemonians over Leonidasrsquo body until the Hellenes by their prowess rescued it androuted their enemies four times The battle went on until the men with Epialtes arrived

It is difficult not to sense a contest such as the fight over Patroclus behind the his-torical narrativesup3sup3 Fighting over bodies was not just a literary device of course Andbattles ebb and flow especially hard-fought battles like this one The body of acommander has a value which justifies a fight to deny it to the enemy just as itscapture has enormous implications for morale This is not invention The questionhowever is (as often) not lsquowhat happenedrsquo but lsquowhat are we told and howrsquo Thenarrator is free to include or exclude to extend and contract to elaborate or notand this kind of narrative detail is normally withheld by Herodotus Its inclusionhere recalls narrative moments in Homer or epic more generally and gives Leonidassomething of the stature of a Homeric warrior The impression is enhanced by theplay with Leonidasrsquo name The effect of the word play is to summon up the lionof the Homeric simile the ideal symbol of the warrior at his most courageousand lethal The play lurks behind the oracle at 72204

ὑμῖν δrsquo ὦ Σπάρτης οἰκήτορες εὐρυχόροιοἢ μέγα ἄστυ ἐρικυδὲς ὑπrsquo ἀνδράσι Περσεΐδῃσιπέρθεται ἢ τὸ μὲν οὐχί ἀφrsquo ῾Ηρακλέους δὲ γενέθληςπενθήσει βασιλῆ φθίμενον Λακεδαίμονος οὖροςmiddotοὐ γὰρ τὸν ταύρων σχήσει μένος οὐδὲ λεόντωνἀντιβίηνmiddot Ζηνὸς γὰρ ἔχει μένοςmiddot οὐδέ ἕ φημισχήσεσθαι πρὶν τῶνδrsquo ἕτερον διὰ πάντα δάσηται

Il ndashοὐδrsquo ἔλαθrsquo ᾿Ατρέος υἱὸν ἀρηΐφιλον ΜενέλαονΠάτροκλος Τρώεσσι δαμεὶς ἐν δηϊοτῆτιβῆ δὲ διὰ προμάχων κεκορυθμένος αἴθοπι χαλκῷἀμφὶ δrsquo ἄρrsquo αὐτῷ βαῖνrsquo ὥς τις περὶ πόρτακι μήτηρπρωτοτόκος κινυρὴ οὐ πρὶν εἰδυῖα τόκοιοmiddotὣς περὶ Πατρόκλῳ βαῖνε ξανθὸς ΜενέλαοςhellipNor did Atreusrsquo son Menelaus dear to Aresfail to note Patroclus slain by the Trojans in the fightHe went through the front ranks armed in flaming bronzeand bestrode him as its mother stands over a calflowing plaintively for her first-bornwho has not known motherhood beforeSo over Patroclus strode fair-haired MenelausCf Boedeker 2003 34ndash36

84 Chris Carey

For you inhabitants of spacious Spartaeither your great and glorious city is wasted by Persian menor if not that then the boundary of Lacedaemonwill mourn a dead king from Heraclesrsquo lineThe might of bulls or lions will not check himwith opposing strength for he has the might of Zeus I affirmhe will not stop until he rends one of these utterly

It also emerges at 72252 with the mention of the lion at his tomb Herodotus didnot invent this The lion predates him and indicates that the etymological playwith the first two syllables of his name was traditional But he did choose to in-clude the implied symbolism of Leonidas as lion

The rapprochement with the Homeric hero may also apply the treatment of thebody by Xerxes where Herodotus goes out of his way to emphasize the departurefrom Persian behaviour in his treatment of a brave enemysup3⁴ Here we are on weakerground since an incident like this could scarcely have been omitted irrespective ofthe engagement with epic But the epic abuse which comes to mind is the mistreat-ment of the body of Hector in Homer We cannot say whether this parallel wouldhave occurred to all or most or even any of Herodotusrsquo original audience But theparallel was an apt one since both died fighting bravely for a lost cause

The epic background also seems to lie behind a detail of timing (sect223) in Her-odotusrsquo battle narrative The timing of the final attack is noted by a detail whichlike the Homeric simile takes us into the normal world of peaceful activitiessup3⁵ inthe midst of bloodshed

Ξέρξης δὲ ἐπεὶ ἡλίου ἀνατείλαντος σπονδὰς ἐποιήσατο ἐπισχὼν χρόνον ἐς ἀγορῆς κου μάλισ-τα πληθώρην πρόσοδον ἐποιέετοmiddot καὶ γὰρ ἐπέσταλτο ἐξ ᾿Επιάλτεω οὕτωmiddot

Xerxes poured a libation at sunrise and after holding back for a while till the time the marketfills he made his advance This was Ephialtesrsquo instruction

ταῦτα εἴπας Ξέρξης διεξήιε διὰ τῶν νεκρῶν καὶ Λεωνίδεω ἀκηκοὼς ὅτι βασιλεύς τε ἦνκαὶ στρατηγὸς Λακεδαιμονίων ἐκέλευσε ἀποταμόντας τὴν κεφαλὴν ἀνασταυρῶσαι δῆλά μοι πολ-λοῖσι μὲν καὶ ἄλλοισι τεκμηρίοισι ἐν δὲ καὶ τῷδε οὐκ ἥκιστα γέγονε ὅτι βασιλεὺς Ξέρξης πάντων δὴμάλιστα ἀνδρῶν ἐθυμώθη ζώοντι Λεωνίδῃmiddot οὐ γὰρ ἄν κοτε ἐς τὸν νεκρὸν ταῦτα παρενόμησε ἐπεὶτιμᾶν μάλιστα νομίζουσι τῶν ἐγὼ οἶδα ἀνθρώπων Πέρσαι ἄνδρας ἀγαθοὺς τὰ πολέμια

Having spoken in this way Xerxes passed over the place where the dead lay and hearing thatLeonidas had been king and general of the Lacedaemonians he gave orders to cut off his head andimpale it It is plain to me by this piece of evidence among many others that while Leonidas livedking Xerxes was more incensed against him than against all others otherwise he would never havedealt so outrageously with his dead body for the Persians are beyond all men known in the habit ofhonoring valiant warriors Cf for instance Il ndash


Perhaps closer still than the simile is the time indicator at Il1186ndash91

ἦμος δὲ δρυτόμος περ ἀνὴρ ὁπλίσσατο δεῖπνονοὔρεος ἐν βήσσῃσιν ἐπεί τrsquo ἐκορέσσατο χεῖραςτάμνων δένδρεα μακρά ἅδος τέ μιν ἵκετο θυμόνσίτου τε γλυκεροῖο περὶ φρένας ἵμερος αἱρεῖτῆμος σφῇ ἀρετῇ Δαναοὶ ῥήξαντο φάλαγγαςκεκλόμενοι ἑτάροισι κατὰ στίχαςmiddot

But at the time a woodman prepares his mealin the glades of a mountain when he has tired his armsfelling tall trees and weariness comes upon his spiritand desire of sweet food seizes his mindat that time the Danaans by their valour broke the enemy linescalling to comrades in the ranks

The effect in the present case is to add here an element of pathos in reminding usof the continuity of normal life now about to be lost forever to the Greekfighterssup3⁶ There is a good antecedent for this in the climactic duel in Iliad 22as Hector races for his life where we are taken back to the peaceful activitiesof Troy in a world which he is about to leave

κρουνὼ δrsquo ἵκανον καλλιρρόωmiddot ἔνθα δὲ πηγαὶδοιαὶ ἀναΐσσουσι Σκαμάνδρου δινήεντοςἣ μὲν γάρ θrsquo ὕδατι λιαρῷ ῥέει ἀμφὶ δὲ καπνὸςγίγνεται ἐξ αὐτῆς ὡς εἰ πυρὸς αἰθομένοιοmiddotἣ δrsquo ἑτέρη θέρεϊ προρέει ἐϊκυῖα χαλάζῃἢ χιόνι ψυχρῇ ἢ ἐξ ὕδατος κρυστάλλῳἔνθα δrsquo ἐπrsquo αὐτάων πλυνοὶ εὐρέες ἐγγὺς ἔασικαλοὶ λαΐνεοι ὅθι εἵματα σιγαλόενταπλύνεσκον Τρώων ἄλοχοι καλαί τε θύγατρεςτὸ πρὶν ἐπrsquo εἰρήνης πρὶν ἐλθεῖν υἷας ᾿Αχαιῶντῇ ῥα παραδραμέτην φεύγων ὃ δrsquo ὄπισθε διώκωνmiddot(Il 22147ndash57)

They came to the fair-flowing springs the two sourcesof the river Scamander which bubble upOne of these flows with warm water and all about smokeRises from it as from a burning firebut the other even in summer is like hailor snow or the ice that forms on waterHere hard by the springs are the broad washing-troughsfine of stone where the wives and fair daughters of Troy

This point I owe to Simon Hornblower

86 Chris Carey

used to wash their bright clothesbefore in the time of peace before the Achaeans camePast these they sped the one in flight and the other pursuing behind

Alongside such specific and general glances toward Homer and Troy Herodotusalso draws on other epic cycles to shape his narrative Especially important is themarch of the Seven against Thebes From the Thebaid onward the campaign ofthe Seven was the archetypal ill-fated expedition It was pursued in direct oppo-sition to the will of the gods as expressed in portents

ἤτοι μὲν γὰρ ἄτερ πολέμου εἰσῆλθε Μυκήναςξεῖνος ἅμrsquo ἀντιθέῳ Πολυνείκεϊ λαὸν ἀγείρωνmiddotοἳ δὲ τότrsquo ἐστρατόωνθrsquo ἱερὰ πρὸς τείχεα Θήβηςκαί ῥα μάλα λίσσοντο δόμεν κλειτοὺς ἐπικούρουςmiddotοἳ δrsquo ἔθελον δόμεναι καὶ ἐπῄνεον ὡς ἐκέλευονmiddotἀλλὰ Ζεὺς ἔτρεψε παραίσια σήματα φαίνων(Il 4376ndash81)

He came once to Mycenae not in warbut as a guest with godlike Polynices to gather forcesfor they were going to war against the sacred walls of Thebesand prayed our people to give picked men to help themThe people were minded to let give thembut Zeus dissuaded them showing unfavourable omens

The expedition even had its own prophet Amphiaraus who read the signs andwarned the army of ruin to come In Herodotus too the march of Xerxes is rich insigns large and small indicating the hostility of the gods This creates a complexnarrative in which the recurrent drumbeats are unprecedented scale (the riversdrunk dry) and unnoticed pointers to defeat The sense of impending destructionis there from the moment Xerxes commits to the expedition Modern scholarshipfocuses not unreasonably on the lying dream which sends Xerxes to war But thetext stresses that he has an alternative There is a dream which Xerxes and hisadvisers misinterpret which points (for an audience which knows the outcome)to final defeat (719)We find it in portents on the way the cautionary tale impliedby the fate of Marsyas (7263) the stele of Croesus at the beginning of the nar-rative of the march which shows the limits of the Lydian territory long since ab-sorbed into the next empire that of the Persians (7302) the eclipse (misdated byHerodotus) which occurs as the Persians leave Sardis (7372) the disastrous ex-periences in the Troad (742ndash3) the unnatural birth and inverted animal behav-iour encountered in Asia (757) and the strangely selective diet of the Greek lionswhich devour only the creatures unknown in Greece (7125ndash6) Some of thesesigns are made explicit to Xerxes while others speak to the reader over the


head of the human participants in the action Perhaps the most interesting of thesigns is the pair which frame Xerxesrsquo visit to Troy

καὶ πρῶτα μέν οἱ ὑπὸ τῇ ῎Ιδῃ νύκτα ἀναμείναντι βρονταί τε καὶ πρηστῆρες ἐπεσπίπτουσι καίτινα αὐτοῦ ταύτῃ συχνὸν ὅμιλον διέφθειραν ᾿Απικομένου δὲ τοῦ στρατοῦ ἐπὶ ποταμὸν Σκά-μανδρον ὃς πρῶτος ποταμῶν ἐπείτε ἐκ Σαρδίων ὁρμηθέντες ἐπεχείρησαν τῇ ὁδῷ ἐπέλιπε τὸῥέεθρον οὐδrsquo ἀπέχρησε τῇ στρατιῇ τε καὶ τοῖσι κτήνεσι πινόμενος ἐπὶ τοῦτον δὴ τὸν ποταμὸνὡς ἀπίκετο Ξέρξης ἐς τὸ Πριάμου Πέργαμον ἀνέβη ἵμερον ἔχων θεήσασθαι θεησάμενος δὲκαὶ πυθόμενος ἐκείνων ἕκαστα τῇ ᾿Αθηναίῃ τῇ ᾿Ιλιάδι ἔθυσε βοῦς χιλίαςmiddot χοὰς δὲ οἱ μάγοιτοῖσι ἥρωσι ἐχέαντο ταῦτα δὲ ποιησαμένοισι νυκτὸς φόβος ἐς τὸ στρατόπεδον ἐνέπεσε

And firstly when they had halted for the night at the foot of Ida a storm of thunder and lightningfell upon them killing a great number right there When the army had come to the river Scaman-der which was the first river after the beginning of their march from Sardis that fell short and wasnot sufficient for the army and the cattle to drinkmdashwhen Xerxes arrived at this river he ascendedto the citadel of Priam having a desire to see it After he saw it and asked about everything therehe sacrificed a thousand cattle to Athena of Ilium and the Magi offered libations to the heroesAfter they did this a panic fell upon the camp in the night

As he camps near Ida thunderstorms destroy part of his army Arriving at Troy hemakes offerings to the heroes the aftermath is a panic in the army by night andthe implication of the text is that the offerings are rejected Here Herodotusdraws together the two epic traditions the ill-fated army marching to destructionagainst the will of the gods and in defiance of the signs and the Graeco-Asiatictensions of which the Trojan War was the most celebrated These signs are rein-forced for the reader by authorial prolepses such as the reference to Artayktes atthe first mention of the bridge (733) Artayktes was eventually executed by theAthenians at a spot overlooking the bridges and explicitly for his abuses in rela-tion to the cult of Protesilaus The mention of this comes just before Xerxes com-mits against the Hellespont an act which Herodotus himself condemns as lsquobar-barous and sinfulrsquo (7352) and it invites us to look toward the end even as weadmire the greatness of the Persian engineering

The final gesture toward this tradition (perhaps) comes in the death of Me-gistias who like Amphiaraus at Thebes is a prophet who fights in the knowledgethat his cause is doomed (72191 2283)sup3⁷ Here the motif (if it is present and notjust in my imagination) is transferred to the other doomed army the Spartans

τοῖσι δὲ ἐν Θερμοπύλῃσι ἐοῦσι ῾Ελλήνων πρῶτον μὲν ὁ μάντις Μεγιστίης ἐσιδὼν ἐς τὰἱρὰ ἔφρασε τὸν μέλλοντα ἔσεσθαι ἅμα ἠοῖ σφι θάνατον ἐπὶ δὲ καὶ αὐτόμολοι ἦσαν οἱ ἐξαγγείλαντεςτῶν Περσέων τὴν περίοδονmiddot

I was the seer Megistias examining the sacrifices who first told the Hellenes at Thermopylaethat death was coming to them with the dawn Then deserters came who announced the circuitmade by the Persians

88 Chris Carey

The engagement with epic in this section of the narrative has a densitymarked both by the sheer number of features and the degree of elaborationwhich each (or at least some of them) receives This reflects in part its pivotalposition The constant play with epic is not just an embellishment (though itdoes embellish) but a way of marking the escalation in the action and empha-sizing the factors which made the new theme to which he now turns unique andthe unusual scale of its demands on the narrator But the engagement is alsotriggered by the sharpness with which this book sets out some of the key themesof the war as a whole because of the non-negotiable facts of chronology The firstencounter of Greeks with barbarians in this invasion ndash at Thermopylaendash was onewhich juxtaposed seemingly unstoppable mass with individual and collectivecourage of an unusual sort Between them they set the scene for a narrativewhich gave Herodotus the opportunity more explicitly than anywhere else toevoke the status of epic in general and Homer in particular to emphasize the su-periority of his theme and to claim equivalent or greater status for his narrativeThere is throughout the book a vacillation between mirroring ideas motifs andmoments from Homer and visibly going beyond the original Though Herodotuscan be dismissive of Homer on occasion the iconic status of the Homeric epicswas an inescapable fact by the time he was writing This status is in fact of fun-damental importance for Herodotusrsquo project which is both to claim the Homericlegacy and simultaneously compete with the status of the original both in termsof genre and in terms of his own individual narrative

72283 Μνῆμα τόδε κλεινοῖο Μεγιστία ὅν ποτε ΜῆδοιΣπερχειὸν ποταμὸν κτεῖναν ἀμειψάμενοιμάντιος ὃς τότε Κῆρας ἐπερχομένας σάφα εἰδὼςοὐκ ἔτλη Σπάρτης ἡγεμόνας προλιπεῖν

This is a monument to glorious Megistias whome the Medeswho crossed the Spercheius river slewa seer who knowing well his coming doomrefused to abandon the leaders of Sparta


Part III Homeric echoes in philosophicaland rhetorical discourse

Athanasios Efstathiou

Argumenta HomericaHomerrsquos Reception by Aeschines

Following a broadly traditional scheme of reading oratorical texts as pieces ofliterature pursuing persuasion poetic quotations which are found withinspeeches and originated at the bulk of Greek poetic tradition build argumentsby themselves or most commonly support oratorrsquos argumentation through appro-priate use The purpose of this paper is to discuss the Homeric material adaptedor appropriated by Aeschines in his speeches in such a way as to support his ar-gument with the widely accepted authority of Homer Aeschinesrsquo use of Homerforms part of a mid-4th century phenomenon when poetry is mainly used espe-cially in public speeches Poetic quotations are used by Demosthenes in hisspeeches On the Crown and On the Embassy by Aeschines in his three extantspeeches (ie Against Timarchus On the Embassy Against Ctesiphon) as wellas by Lycurgus in his speech Against Leocrates Aeschines well-known as a for-mer actor of tragic plays quotes in his speeches a good deal of poetic passagesfrom Hesiod from Euripides and especially from Homer he recites by himself orasks the clerk to do so in case of long passages (coming only from the Iliad) run-ning up to eighteen linessup1

It is evident that the main way people got to know literature in the period of late5th and the first half of 4th century BC was oral performances and not written texts(on Homeric orality see also Papaioannou I Petrovic and Michelakis in this vol-ume) Moreover it seems supportive to the idea of oral learning of poetry that Soc-rates within his discussions and dialogues quotes poetry very often for exampleHomer but he is based not on his reading of certain poets but on oral recitationssup2

In the short dialogue of Plato Ion the homonymous rapsodist (Pl Ion 530andash531a) isa winner of the Homer contest in Epidaurus Ion boasts that he can recite very longHomeric passages or even that he knows everything about Homer and no otherpoet Aristotle himself while quoting a lot of seemingly Homeric excerpts in his

I am grateful to Professor Chris Carey for his valuable comments on this paper As for the Homeric quotations of the pre-Aristarchan period which are accounted to twenty-nine separate writers quoting portions they amount to about lines The most inter-esting issue is the plus-verses which are not more than nine to eleven lines For the originalinvestigation see Ludwich ff See RussoFernaacutendez-GalianoHeubeck and Steiner on Od cfPl La andashb Chrm a with Od (κακός δrsquo αἰδοῖος ἀλήτης) Hoekstra ndash esp ndash

works (eg in the Rhetoric and in the Nicomachean Ethics) recalls them from mem-ory or rather based on solid knowledge of the widespread epic tradition he re-shapes epic material in order to present it as Homericsup3

Finally Aeschines himself confirms childrenrsquos learning of poetsrsquo thoughts byheart in their early age in order to use them when they become of age (3135) Inthat case the discussion concerns Hesiod but a close reading of Aeschinesrsquo com-ments on Hesiodrsquos advice brings forth an element of casual approach from thepart of Aeschines saying that lsquoHe (scil Hesiod) says somewhere (που) sincehe attempts to instruct the masses and advise the cities that they should not tol-erate corrupt politiciansrsquo

Using Homer as a supportive material for his arguments Aeschines follows hisown batch of methodological principles which we need to single out in order tocome close to the intertextual relation developed between the two texts and to as-sort the various levels of reference to the original or primary text which is Homer

Eventually it is the primary text which is of high importance It seems to en-counter a case of lsquoliterary palimpsestrsquo when similarly in manuscript transmissionwe come across a palimpsest the interest always goes to the original text covered bya new one So one needs to look closely at the cited passage so as to decide whatkind of citation we have and then to collate the two texts the primary text and thereporting source in order to signify the differences between them It is obvious thatthe reporting source has a specific agenda according to which the intermediary au-thor makes selection of specific texts to support its content

Thus the selection of the primary text made by the intermediary author of-fers the opportunity to examine closely the purpose of the orator to use a specificpoetic example the intratextual⁴ function of the original text within the report-ing source and thus the expectation of the orator for its persuasive power Evi-dently poetry quoted in various ways is applied by Aeschines to the current sit-uation in such a way as to create a new effect supporting his political proposalsand enhancing his claims Sometimes the way of quoting a primary text (directquotation paraphrase summary of the primary text etc) the particular selec-tion of excerpts and the use of this citation within the reporting text can be char-acterized as a mere padding when the quotation does not enhance the quality ofthe secondary text adds almost nothing to the authorrsquos argument and simplycreates a cumulative effect this is the case of Aeschinesrsquo repeating the samepoints when in advance he summarizes the content of the cited text he com-

See Haslam For more on intratexuality see SharrockMorales


ments on this and finally he himself or the clerk reads out the quotation (eg1143 with 1144 also 1145 f)

Moreover intervention by the reporting author ranges from a selective cita-tion of the primary text to a heavy distortion of it To reconstruct the procedure ofquoting a primary text we have to start with the ascertainment that the secon-dary author makes use of what is needed for his specific argumentation strategythe selection of the cited text may lead us to understand the method and thecauses for the inclusion of these particular texts The orator Aeschines in thiscase having designed his broad argumentation strategy makes proper selec-tions from the original source and usually forms excerpts from the originaltext so as to cite what only matters for the immediate purpose⁵

Quoting from memory is often a common cause of distortion this habit reflectsconfidence or implies the popularity of a text used in education or recited orally inpublic festivals (eg Homeric poems) or even points out the lack of supportivemeans to form a citation properly (eg no access to the papyrus containing the text)

However defective memory in case of an original like Homer sometimes co-exists with heavier intervention with use of alternative formulaic phrases or eveninvented formulas transposition of verses with due syntactical modificationswhich may be found in the wide spectrum of the intertextual relation of thetwo texts In such a case it is important for the study of the primary text andits transmission to treat the excerpt in isolation from its context thus decontex-tualizing it Decontextualization is also necessary when the reporting sourcetends to make generalizations based on the primary texts A scholar workingon such texts is not facilitated to resemble the original content from which theprimary text derives Certainly in a thorough study of two texts original and con-duit together with decontextualization we may use contextualization which isimportant to trace the intermediary authorrsquos intervention upon the primarysource by taking into account the social political economic and cultural factorssurrounding the conduit text

Aeschines as a secondary source quoting Homer interferes with our perceptionof the primary text in a variety of ways It is evident that the focus of Aeschines (asin the cases of the citing authors) determines what is cited and why and this in turnshapes our perception of the cited text The selection of the particular cited text re-veals the literary preferences of the orator and his audience

See also Perlman


a The speech Against Timarchus⁶

The speech Against Timarchus is an accusation presented by Aeschines in theAthenian court against his opponent Timarchus a close political friend of De-mosthenes in 345 BC It is a case in which Timarchusrsquo credentials as a publicspeaker (rhētōr) in the Ecclesia are contested before being involved in public pol-icy in the Assembly⁷

Aeschinesrsquo prosecution of Timarchus was intended to block Demosthenesrsquoattack on Aeschines (in the case On the False Embassy) and through him his as-sociates and their overall policy

The main issue which Aeschines has to work on and form an argument is hisopponentrsquos scandalous private life that is Timarchusrsquo allegedly sexual homoeroticpreferences in connection with his habit to sell himself which was incompatibleand illegitimate for an Athenian citizen Thus the sale of sexual gratification wasby itself the issue and could bring an automatic penalty of disfranchisement incase that an individual so barred pursued to exercise citizen rights

In the refutatio part (paragraphs 117ndash76) Aeschines opts for anticipatingseveral possible arguments which his opponents may present among them wemust single out his discussion of Phēmē (lsquoreportrsquo) in paragraphs 125ndash31 andthe use of poetry and especially Homer in paragraphs 141ndash54 the latter followsthe crucial debate on noble or chaste love in Athenian culture (paragraphs 132ndash40)⁸ Aeschines in this speech as Lycurgus in the speech Against Leocrates do notconfine themselves in legal arguments but tend to use poetry as literary evi-dence supplementing their rhetorical means of persuasion⁹

The three speeches of Aeschines are abbreviated as follows Against Timarchus= On theFalse Embassy= Against Ctesiphon= when one of these speeches is discussed I do not usethe number of the speech only the number of the paragraph Democracy provided the special legal procedure of dokimasia tōn rhētorōn (lsquoscrutiny of publicspeakersrsquo) purporting to remove from influence those citizens who were proved to be unworthyOn this procedure see recently Efstathiou ndash In this speech Aeschines quotes Hesiod once while Euripides is quoted three times tragedy unknown Stheneboea (fr ndash K) Phoenix (fr K) See also Perlman


b Reference to Phēmēan invented Homeric quotation

In paragraphs 125ndash 131 Aeschines attempts to move from evidence to rumourmaking noise by using mainly the mockery of Timarchusrsquo sexual activity heneeds Phēmē to be divine and thus worthy of respect

Thus Aeschinesrsquo references to Phēmē presented as being sprung fromHomer are followed by an unidentified Euripidean verse (128) which commentson Phēmērsquo s ability to show forth the good man even if he is hidden in the in-teriors of the earth Aeschines claims that Euripides supports even further hisown view according to which Phēmē is a goddess and he does so by attributingto Euripides the view that Phēmē makes known not only the living men by re-vealing their own characters but also the dead people This statement is neitherof poetic form nor of identifiable poetic originsup1⁰ Finally this Phēmērsquos poetic an-thology culminates with Hesiodrsquos two verses coming from Op763 f (see 129)which comes to a conclusion on Phēmērsquos divinity further supported by theidea that Phēmē never dies if many men utter it

Therefore this quasi-Homeric quote on Phēmē presented by Aeschines in 128

[hellip] καὶ τὸν Ὅμηρον πολλάκις ἐν τῇ Ἰλιάδι λέγοντα πρὸ τοῦ τι τῶν μελλόντων γενέσθαιmiddotφήμη δrsquo εἰς στρατὸν ἦλθε [hellip]

You will find that Homer often says in the Iliad before some event which is about to happenlsquoReport came to the hostrsquosup1sup1

can only be compared with an Iliadic poetic two-verse passage which does notmention Phēmē but Ossa lsquorumourrsquo (Il 293ndash94) who calls the Greeks to assembly

ἰλαδὸν εἰς ἀγορήνmiddot μετὰ δέ σφισιν ὄσσα δεδήειὀτρύνουσrsquo ἰέναι Διὸς ἄγγελοςmiddot οἳ δrsquo ἀγέροντο

with them blazed Zeusrsquo messenger urging them on while they gathered togethersup1sup2

The poetic phrase which Aeschines quotes instead seems to have no real connec-tion with the context and adds almost nothing to his own argument the refer-ence to Phēmē seems superficial Moreover the phrase a semi-formula half of

See E fr inc K All cited passages from Aeschines follow the translation of Carey with adjustments All cited Iliadic passages follow the translation of Murray Wyatt with adjustments


an hexameter verse although it recalls roughly the meaning of the Iliad (293ndash94) is far from being Homeric

Trying to trace this poetic quote we soon realize that it may belong to a lostcorpus of early epic poetry and Homerrsquos name is used as populardenominationsup1sup3 Alternatively it could be an invention of Aeschines himselfwho tries to support his statements with Homerrsquos authority The passage displayshis cavalier but also the commonly encountered way of using poetsrsquo thoughts ina form of quasi-quotations or paraphrases within his speeches (cf also 3135)

Although the habit of rough quoting by recalling the original from memory re-flects confidence the issue also hints at the nature of the ancient bookwhich in theform of papyrus involves a certain amount of difficulty and imperfection for the pro-cedure of citing a text unrolling a papyrus to consult a written text was not the easi-est thing to do while a commonly encountered phenomenon of absence of pagenumbers made the job of accurate quoting particularly hardsup1⁴

Thus we could perceive this kind of quotations as sprung from an immanentknowledge created by oral recitations of Homeric or other epic songs It seems con-vincing that the poems which were later included in the Epic Cycle were formed by along-lasting interactive oral process embracing and reshaping a slew of traditionalmaterial confirmed by more or less consistent bardic performancessup1⁵

c Achilles and Patroclus lovers or friendsA distinction on chaste or unlawful sexualrelations

The most important literary material for the argumentative arsenal of all the con-testants of Timarchusrsquo trial is the relationship of Achilles and Patroclus Bothsides attempt to exploit it in their own terms and strategic demands in orderto form an argument against the opponent Aeschines first starts from the loveaffair of Harmodius and Aristogeiton the invocation of the two distinguishedheroes of democracy purports to support Aeschinesrsquo interpretation of the friend-

See also Perlman with n where among others he refers to Thucydides(ndash) in that case Thucydides quotes from the Hymn to Apollo which has been com-posed by Homer See also Carey forthcoming Tsagalis b xi ff and Burgess where it is noted that lsquo[hellip] the Cycle wouldhave been prefigured by rhapsodic performance of material from different epics (not necessarilythe ones of the Epic Cycle)rsquo


ship of Patroclus and Achilles as an erotic relationship thus Aeschines skilfullymanages to sanction the eros of Patroclus and Achilles through a widely accept-ed democratic stereotype

Aeschines reaches 133 where the main issue the relationship of Patroclusand Achilles is brought forth he argues that their friendship was caused byeros while in 135 he has to anticipate the opponentsrsquo claims on his own historyas the lover of young men which seem to become more bitter by referring to himas a poet of erotic poetry inspired by passion In the end Aeschines must play onthe same terrain and he does that at 136 by acknowledging the notion of honour-able-chaste love admitting his love affairs of the past while he acknowledgessome of the erotic poems as his but not the rest which may be fabricated bythe opponents for obvious reasons Finally he comes to a definition of chastelove and love sold for money making a clear distinction between them (137)

In 141 the passage runs as follows

᾿Επειδὴ δὲ ᾿Αχιλλέως καὶ Πατρόκλου μέμνησθε καὶ ῾Ομήρου καὶ ἑτέρων ποιητῶν ὡς τῶν μὲνδικαστῶν ἀνηκόων παιδείας ὄντων ὑμεῖς δὲ εὐσχήμονές τινες προσποιεῖσθε εἶναι καὶ ὑπερ-φρονοῦντες ἱστορίᾳ τὸν δῆμον ἵνrsquo εἰδῆτε ὅτι καὶ ἡμεῖς τι ἤδη ἠκούσαμεν καὶ ἐμάθομεν λέξο-μέν τι καὶ ἡμεῖς περὶ τούτων ᾿Επειδὴ γὰρ ἐπιχειροῦσι φιλοσόφων ἀνδρῶν μεμνῆσθαι καὶ κατα-φεύγειν ἐπὶ τοὺς εἰρημένους ἐν τῷ μέτρῳ λόγους θεωρήσατε ἀποβλέψαντες ὦ ᾿Αθηναῖοι εἰςτοὺς ὁμολογουμένως ἀγαθοὺς καὶ χρηστοὺς ποιητάς ὅσον κεχωρίσθαι ἐνόμισαν τοὺς σώφρο-νας καὶ τῶν ὁμοίων ἐρῶντας καὶ τοὺς ἀκρατεῖς ὧν οὐ χρὴ καὶ τοὺς ὑβριστάς

But since you have come to mention of Achilles and Patroclus and of Homer and other poetsas though the jury were men without education while you represent yourselves as men of su-perior rank whose erudition allows you look down on the people to show you that we toohave already acquired a little knowledge and learning we too shall say a word on this subjectFor since they undertake to cite wise men and take refuge in tales expressed in verse lookmen of Athens at those who are acknowledged to be good and edifying and see how farapart they considered chaste men lovers of their equals and those whose love is illicitmen who recognize no limits

Teaching the mass by quoting poets becomes a risky matter since the orator maybe offensive when putting on a show and enlivening his speech the speaker pre-senting himself as over clever as a man of distinctive erudition above the aver-age Athenian therefore above the jurors can cause harm to himself Noteworthyhere in 141 there is the term ἱστορία used by Aeschines which may be equivalentto paideia lsquoeducationrsquo or even lsquogeneral or encyclopaedic knowledgersquosup1⁶ The termis possibly used with the latter of the proposed meanings highlighting the arro-

On ἱστορία see also the discussion in Fowler and n


gant posture of his opponents justified by their pretension of comprehensive-en-cyclopaedic knowledge

A delicate balance is demanded from rhētores using poetry in their speechesthe Athenians expected from them a highly qualified speaking and thinkingtheir sincere advice while they felt particularly cautious towards expertise pro-fessionalism and preparation all of them pointing to a kind of deceptivecommunicationsup1⁷ Sophistry and its notable product deception usually connect-ed with various forms of trickery and delusion of the audience fabricated bymagic arts and alien methods became a topos in the context of public oratoryThe description of the opponent as γόης (lsquowizardrsquo) and βάσκανος (lsquosorcererrsquolsquoslandererrsquo) points to a deceptive speaking with dangerous results for thedēmos Demosthenes as Aeschines argues represents the prototype of sophisticspeaker who controls his speech in an absolute way his sophistry allows him tospeak only according to his targets and purposes speaking the truth only whenhe intends to create a favourable result That is a depiction of a professional so-phist performing an art with deceptive potential and no moral or other con-straints in order to achieve his end to persuade people Thus distinguishedknowledge of poetry in a sophistic way of speaking might hide deception andeven more may be associated with un-Athenian identity and behaviour since ev-erything originating in sophists could be exotic and of foreign origin thus alienand incompatible to the Athenian identitysup1⁸

All in all Aeschines taking the necessary precautions against the risk to looklike a highly educated public speaker using tricks and poetry in his speech a realwiseacre tries to do his best by adopting the first person plural in order to presenthimself as one of audience and jurors in detail he accepts the value of Homericpoetry which is going to be used by his opponents although he declares that hehas taken aback to hear that his opponents have managed to rally even Homerrsquosspirit as the verb μέμνησθε may meansup1⁹ even more by associating himself withthe audience he hits upon the opponents with a charge for arrogant and slightingbehaviour towards the jurorssup2⁰ In 142 Aeschines refers to Homer making an attempt

Ober Strauss ndash esp ndash For the concept of deception in Athenian public speaking see Hesk ndash and Hesk ff Burkert ndash esp Bowie ndash The verb here may mean lsquoyou after all now have discovered or rather you have now broughtAchilles Patroclus the poets and especially Homer into playrsquo thus pointing again to sophisticmanipulation See also Ober ndash for Demosthenesrsquo attempt to denote that his knowledge of po-etry is not superior to that of his audience see and


to begin his argumentative procedure from the widely accepted acknowledgement ofhis value as a poet which is an easy point to make

The text precisely states

λέξω δὲ πρῶτον μὲν περὶ Ὁμήρου ὃν ἐν τοῖς πρεσβυτάτοις καὶ σοφωτάτοις τῶν ποιητῶν εἶναιτάττομεν ἐκεῖνος γὰρ πολλαχοῦ μεμνημένος περὶ Πατρόκλου καὶ Aχιλλέως τὸν μὲν ἔρωτα καὶτὴν ἐπωνυμίαν αὐτῶν τῆς φιλίας ἀποκρύπτεται ἡγούμενος τὰς τῆς εὐνοίας ὑπερβολὰς κατα-φανεῖς εἶναι τοῖς πεπαιδευμένοις τῶν ἀκροατῶν

I shall start with Homer whom we rank among the oldest and wisest of the poets Although heoften speaks of Patroclus and Achilles he keeps love and the name of their friendship con-cealed since he thinks that the exceeding strength of their affection is manifest to the culti-vated among his hearers

Thus Aeschines enumerates Homerrsquos real and indisputable qualities by sayingthat he is classified among the senior and wisest poets Homer as an intellectualauthority could perfectly confirm the relationship between Patroclus andAchilles although as Aeschines notes Homer avoids identifying their friendshipas love According to Aeschines Homer does not mention the name of love dueto lsquocultivated sensitivityrsquosup2sup1 since it was manifested that such an affection be-tween them could be easily understood as love by the well-educated hearersnamely the most of the jurors as he has already pointed out in 141

The long-standing discussion on the nature of the relationship betweenAchilles and Patroclus as accounted in the Iliad starts from the interpretationof Homerrsquos text and followed by consecutive attempts of later authors to reworkthe Iliadic text a lasting process which pervades antiquity Certainly Homerdoes not depict Patroclus and Achilles as lovers at least in an explicit mannerAeschines argues that even Homer although he believes that their relationshipwas an erotic one for his own reasons ndash he does not specify whichmdash he avoidsnaming it as such Homerrsquos silence on homoerotic relationship followed by Hes-iod and Archilochus makes us believe that in the Archaic period homosexualbehaviour was not institutionalized and was not acceptable in Greek societiesHowever the ravishing of Ganymede lsquothe most beautiful of the mortalsrsquo to beZeusrsquo cupbearer may point to Zeusrsquo homosexual desire (see Ibycus fr 289) ifit is combined with Dawnrsquos rape of Tithonos as well as Aphroditersquos affair withAnchises they are all brought forth in the same context of erotic passion

In the Classical period Aeschylusrsquo trilogy Myrmidones Nereides and Phry-gians was made a subject for discussion in Platorsquos Symposium 180a wherePhaedrus appears to say that

The expression comes from Dover


ὅθεν δὴ καὶ ὑπεραγασθέντες οἱ θεοὶ διαφερόντως αὐτὸν ἐτίμησαν ὅτι τὸν ἐραστὴν οὕτω περὶπολλοῦ ἐποιεῖτο Αἰσχύλος δὲ φλυαρεῖ φάσκων ᾿Αχιλλέα Πατρόκλου ἐρᾶν ὃς ἦν καλλίων οὐμόνον Πατρόκλου ἀλλrsquo ἅμα καὶ τῶν ἡρώων ἁπάντων καὶ ἔτι ἀγένειος ἔπειτα νεώτεροςπολύ ὥς φησιν ῞Ομηρος

Therefore the gods admired him (scil Achilles) so much that they gave him distinguished honoursince he took so much care of his lover Aeschylus talks nonsense in saying that Achilles was inlove with Patroclus Achilles was more beautiful not only than Patroclus alone but than all theheroes being still beardless and moreover much the younger as Homer says

Obviously Phaedrus based on Homer (Il 11786) rightly claims that Achilles wasyounger than Patroclus while he argues that the relationship was one of love be-tween Achilles as erōmenos and Patroclus as erastēs devotion highlights passionsince Achilles was ready to die in avenging Patroclusrsquo deathsup2sup2 Coming back to Ae-schylusrsquo fragments (frr 135 136 Radtsup2sup3) we realize that the language used when re-ferring to the two companions is explicit enough for their homoerotic relationship

ltrsquoΑΧΙΛΛgt σέβας δὲ μηρῶν ἁγνὸν οὐκ ἐπῃδέσωὦ δυσχάριστε τῶν πυκνῶν φιλημάτων

(Myrmidones fr 135 Radt)

And you felt no compunction for (sc my) pure reverence of (sc your) thighsmdashO what an ill return you have made for so many kissesμηρῶν τε τῶν σῶν εὐσεβὴς ὁμιλία(Myrmidones fr 136 Radt)god-fearing converse with your thighssup2⁴

On the other hand Xenophonrsquos Socrates in Smp 831 opts for a real friendshipdeveloped between the two mensup2⁵

Eventually apart from the issue concerning the kind of relationship which wasdeveloped between Achilles and Patroclus Aeschinesrsquo view of both the nature ofthis relationship and of Homerrsquos real opinion may represent the dominant attitudeof the Athenian society of the period Aeschinesrsquo representation of Homeric valuesand ideas tends to restore the Athenian society of his period making conclusions on

It has been stated by Weil ( xii) that the discussion of the relationship between Achillesand Patroclus in Platorsquos Protagoras shows us that Aeschines knew the text of Plato as Fisher( ) rightly comments this topic may be discussed widely in oral debates in which Ae-schines must have participated Radt Both fragments as translated by Dover for fr see also LobelRobertsWege-ner See also Dover ndash and Clarke ndash Poole ndashOgden


the education he had received but also the education of the audience the culturalatmosphere in Athens towards the last decades of the fourth century in generalterms it is a matter of Homeric reception within antiquity which allows us tofind connections between Homeric material and creativity the orator by usingHomer in his speeches appears as an intelligent reader whose views correspondwith those of the ordinary person he undertakes the duty to interpret and finallyappropriate the poetic material in order to offer it to the publicsup2⁶

Moreover conventions of speaking and reticence of language may be anissue when the orator has to give an account of such a thorny matter whichwas the homoerotic relationship of the most important hero of Greek historyAchilles The hero comes out of the idealizing framework of Homeric epicsbut for Aeschinesrsquo own rhetorical needs it must function as a prototype of homo-erotic relationship applied to the case of Timarchus Even though Aeschinesneeds to present the relationship in this particular way he skips the Aeschyleanversion which would have been particularly supportive of his own thesis optingfor a specific reading of Homer which focuses on the emotional aspect of desirerather than the physical dimension he also has to be careful in interpreting atext presented before an educated audience and not breaking with traditionsof restraint in public speaking as well as maintaining decorum of language Ex-plicit words excessive obscenity reference to distasteful matters may offend theaudience Aeschines has at least to pretend that he respects the audience byusing the right language being a man of ethical valuessup2⁷

In 143 the Athenian orator moves to another point he tries to corroborate hisclaim that the relationship between the two men was clearly a passionate lovesince Achilles accepted the duty to take care of Patroclus

The text runs as follows

λέγει γάρ που Aχιλλεὺς ὀδυρόμενος τὸν τοῦ Πατρόκλου θάνατον ὡς ἕν τι τοῦτο τῶν λυπη-ροτάτων ἀναμιμνῃσκόμενος ὅτι τὴν ὑπόσχεσιν τὴν πρὸς τὸν πατέρα τὸν Πατρόκλου Μενοί-τιον ἄκων ἐψεύσατοmiddot ἐπαγγείλασθαι γὰρ εἰς Ὀποῦντα σῶν ἀπάξειν εἰ συμπέμψειεν αὐτὸν εἰςτὴν Τροίαν καὶ παρακαταθεῖτο αὑτῷ ᾧ καταφανής ἐστιν ὡς διrsquo ἔρωτα τὴν ἐπιμέλειαν αὐτοῦπαρέλαβεν

HardwickStray See Alex De Figuris Walz παρέχει δὲ καὶ ἔμφασιν ἤθoυς χρηστoῦ Theon (Prog Walz) commenting on the same technique he says that the dignity of the speech is gained whenthe speaker does not express shameful things in a straightforward way but by using allusionsTheon names this technique of Aeschines ἀρρητoπoιία (lsquospeaking of unspeakable thingsrsquo) Her-mogenes (Id Rabe) expresses his doubt about this technique and thinks that lsquoif you givean advance indication of what you are doing [hellip] you will not be as persuasive and you will ap-pear to be someone who enjoys slanderrsquo (trans by Wooten )


Homer says somewhere that Achilles in the course of his lament for Patroclusrsquo death mentions asone of his greatest painful memories that he has unwillingly betrayed his promise given to Patro-clusrsquo father Menoetius he had declared he would bring the son safe back to Opus if the fatherwould send him along with him to Troy and entrust him to his care And this makes it quite evi-dent that it was because of love that he had taken responsibility for his care

Aeschines in this paragraph tries to give a prose account a paraphrase of theforthcoming quotation of Il 18324ndash29 which follows in 144 this paraphrase an-ticipating the direct quotation of the Iliadic passage purports to predispose theaudience in such a way as to focus on the points which Aeschines singlesoutsup2⁸ Worthy of note is the way of introducing the Homeric text using the adverbof place with indefinite meaning που (lsquosomewherersquo) this mode of rough quotingbrings into discussion the issue of citations from memory common even for well-known authors like Aristotle

Achillesrsquo unspeakable sorrow due to Patroclusrsquo death caused him doubleharm firstly because he lost his love companion and secondly because he un-willingly had broken his promise to Menoetius father of Patroclus that hewould bring his son back safe to Opus if he entrusted him to Achilles Ae-schinesrsquo personal view of the subject is expressed in the phrase ᾧ καταφανήςἐστιν ὡς διrsquo ἔρωτα τὴν ἐπιμέλειαν αὐτοῦ παρέλαβεν ie that the duty of Achillesto take care of Patroclus makes evident the erotic nature of their affectionthough the syllogism is based on a logical fallacy

In 144 Aeschines continues his argument by referring directly to Il 18324ndash29 it is the same point which comes back the betrayal of Achillesrsquo promise tobring Patroclus back to Opus safely

ὦ πόποι ἦ ῥrsquo ἅλιον ἔπος ἔκβαλον ἤματι κείνωιθαρσύνων ἥρωα Μενοίτιον ἐν μεγάροισινφῆν δέ οἱ εἰς ᾿Οπόεντα περικλυτὸν υἱὸν ἀπάξειν῎Ιλιον ἐκπέρσαντα λαχόντά τε ληΐδος αἶσανἀλλrsquo οὐ Ζεὺς ἄνδρεσσι νοήματα πάντα τελευτᾶιἄμφω γὰρ πέπρωται ὁμοίην γαῖαν ἐρεύθειν

Alas vain words I uttered that daywhen I assured the hero Menoetius in his hallsI told I would surely bring his glorious son back to Opus againas sacker of Troy having taken the due share of spoilBut Zeus does not fulfil to men all intentsfor it is fated that both (scil Achilles and Patroclus) of us make red one spot of earth

See also ndash where Aeschines in a similar way anticipates the testimony of Amyntorthe sole witness called upon in the case On the False Embassy


Nowhere in the Iliadic text is there any hint to the relationship between the twomen certainly as Homer avoids naming their relationship as love somethingwhich Aeschines himself has noticed (142) it would not be expected to goeven further by saying that Achillesrsquo acceptance of the duty to take care of Patro-clus points to a homoerotic love relationship

The text of the Iliad which is quoted by Aeschines in 144 is almost identicalwith the text transmitted by the mss the only difference is that Aeschines givesthe verb ἐρεύθειν while mss (especially Bibl Brit Add ms 17210 6th c AD PBibl Brit inv 107 1stndash2nd c AD testimonia cetera and mss Z and Ω)sup2⁹ opt forἐρεῦσαι the exact reference to the fate of Achilles and Patroclus is better servedby an aorist infinitive and also the syntax with πέπρωται needs a future expres-sion as predicate the infinitive of present tense found in Aeschinesrsquo text may beinfluenced by τελευτᾶι of verse 328 however from 328 to 329 there is a shift fromgeneral to specificsup3⁰

Coming to 145 we encounter Aeschinesrsquo summary of an extensive section ofbook 18 of the Iliad the dialogue of Achilles and Thetis which starts from v 65 ffThe main parts of this section from the Iliad are the arrival and departurespeeches of Thetis (73ndash77 and 128ndash37) the two speeches of Achilles (79ndash93and 98ndash 126) and certainly the crucial announcement of Achillesrsquo fate by Thetis(95ndash96) Achillesrsquo decision to avenge Patroclusrsquo death brings Thetis to tears andleaves no room for optimism (90ndash93) Thetis declares that Achillesrsquo fate wouldbe speedy and his death prompt following Hectorrsquos death (95ndash96)

Aeschines on the other hand focuses on Achillesrsquo grief his solid faith withthe dead friend which forced him to avenge his death and to prefer death in-stead of survival Thetisrsquo appeal to Achilles to abandon his plan is left unfulfil-led His noble strength of purpose was such that he hastened to punish hisfriendrsquos killer and though everyone urged him to bathe and take food heswore that he would do none of them until he brings Hectorrsquos head to Patroclusrsquotomb However detailed description and elements of brutality concerning Hec-torrsquos death are omitted from Aeschinesrsquo idealizingsup3sup1 account (cf Il 1891ndash93)

In 146 Aeschines presents a short prose version of Il 2365 ff the appearanceof Patroclusrsquo ghost to Achilles (65ndash68) preceding Patroclusrsquo speech (69ndash92) Ae-schinesrsquo account in 146 ends up with a summary of scattered Homeric versesὥσπερ καὶ ἐτράφησαν καὶ ἐβίωσαν ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ οὕτω καὶ τελευτησάντων αὐτῶν

Reference to the sigla of MWestrsquos edition of the Iliad (ndash) this edition is followedthroughout For the use of πέπρωται with the infinitive of aorist see also E Alc [A] PV DC The term is used by Fisher


τὰ ὀστᾶ ἐν τῇ αὐτῇ σορῷ κείσεται (lsquoin just the same way that they had grown upand lived together in death too their bones should lie in the same cofferrsquo) hissummary comes from 2377ndash91 especially v 84 ἀλλrsquo ὁμοῦ ὡς τράφομέν περἐν ὑμετέροισι δόμοισιν and 91 ὣς δὲ καὶ ὀστέα νῶϊν ὁμὴ σορὸς ἀμφικαλύπτοιclosely echoing the wording of the Homeric verses Again Aeschinesrsquo main pur-pose is to underline the strong bond of the two men in life and death hinting at apassionate love Two techniques are used by Aeschines here repetition and an-ticipation The above stated idea expressed by these verses identical or in an ad-justed form permeates almost all Homer-based arguments of Aeschines aimingat a cumulative effect Moreover it is Aeschinesrsquo usual technique of anticipationby which he comments in his own way on a forthcoming quotation of Homerictext (in this case in 149) attempting to predispose the audience (see below 147)

In paragraph 147 Aeschines moves from summarizing the Homeric scenesand ideas sprung from Iliad book 18 to a prose paraphrase of an allegedly Ho-meric passage the introductory lines of Patroclusrsquo ghost speech when Achilleswas sleeping by the funeral pyre Patroclus is referred to be saying in directspeech the following

οὐκέτι περὶ τῶν μεγίστων ὥσπερ τὸ πρότερον καθεζόμενοι μετrsquo ἀλλήλων μόνοι ἄπωθεν τῶνἄλλων φίλων βουλευσόμεθα

We are not going to sit together alone anymore as in the old days apart from our friends anddeliberate on the most serious matters

Aeschines enriches this paraphrasis of the Homeric text with his comment on thecore meaning of the passage which in his opinion is the loss of loyalty and af-fection the most characteristic virtues of the relationship between the two men(τὴν πίστιν οἶμαι καὶ τὴν εὔνοιαν ποθεινοτάτην ἡγούμενος εἶναι)sup3sup2 He probablyaims at a lsquoromanticrsquo presentation of affection loyalty and mutual exclusivenessfeaturing the relationship of the two men This seemingly Homeric quotationgiven in an anticipatory way purports to predispose the audience and recognizethroughout the forthcoming direct quotation of 18333ndash35 (in 148) the pointswhich Aeschines singles outsup3sup3

Indeed in 148 the Athenian orator calls upon the clerk to read the actual Ho-meric verses concerning the vengeance of Hector (Il18333ndash35) This quotationbelongs to Achillesrsquo lament in which he promises Patroclus to honour his burialwith the armour and head of his killer Hector together with the sacrifice oftwelve Trojans and the long-lasting lamentation of captive women

I believe that he (Patroclus) considers that the loss most keenly felt is loyalty and affection See also n above


λέγε πρῶτον τὰ περὶ τῆς Ἕκτορος τιμωρίαςἀλλrsquo ἐπεὶ οὖν φίλrsquo ἑταῖρε σεῦ ὕστερος εἶμrsquo ὑπὸ γαῖανοὔ σε πρὶν κτεριῶ πρίν γrsquo Ἕκτορος ἐνθάδrsquo ἐνεῖκαιτεύχεα καὶ κεφαλήν μεγαθύμου σεῖο φονῆος

Read the verses first about the vengeance on Hectorsup3⁴But since dear comrade I shall go beneath the earth after youI will not bury you until I bring herethe armour and head of Hector the killer of you the great-hearted

The Homeric text runs as follows

νῦν δrsquo ἐπεὶ οὖν Πάτροκλε σέrsquo ὕστερος εἶμrsquo ὑπὸ γαῖανοὔ σε πρὶν κτεριῶ πρὶν Ἕκτορος ἐνθάδrsquo ἐνεῖκαιτεύχεα καὶ κεφαλὴν μεγαθύμου σεῖο φονῆοςmiddot(Il 18333ndash35)

But now Patroclus since I shall go beneath the earth after youI will not bury you until I bring here the armour and head of Hectorthe killer of you the great-hearted

Divergences from Homerrsquos text are the following (i) major alteration change of awhole phrase in v 333 the vocative Πάτροκλε has been replaced by the addressφίλrsquo ἑταῖρε Obviously it is a deliberate alteration emphasizing the erotic rela-tionship between the two mensup3⁵ The suggestion which has been promptedthat may have been caused by slip of memory falls down since the phrase isunique in surviving epic poetrysup3⁶ (ii) Minor alterations concerning grammaticalor metrical alternatives in v 334 the use of the Ionic or Attic contracted futureκτεριῶ instead of the ancient form κτερίωsup3⁷ and the particle γrsquo

The important conclusion again is that Aeschines for his argumentativeneeds reforms his Homeric quotation with slight alterations so as to make itmean something quite different from what Homer implies in the Iliad

Paragraph 149 is devoted to the direct quotation of Il 2377ndash91 This time it isnot Aeschines himself who reads the poetic quotation but the clerk of the courtwho is called by the orator to read out what Patroclus says

ἀναγίγνωσκε δὴ τὰ περὶ τοῦ ὁμοτάφους αὐτοὺς γενέσθαι καὶ περὶ τῶν διατριβῶν ἃς συν-διέτριβον ἀλλήλοις

Il ndash Van der Valk ndash II ndash Edwards ndash Chantraine I


77 οὐ γὰρ ἔτι ζωοί γε φίλων ἀπάνευθεν ἑταίρωνβουλὰς ἑζόμενοι βουλεύσομενmiddot ἀλλrsquo ἐμὲ μὲν κὴρἀμφέχανε στυγερή ἥπερ λάχε γεινόμενόν περmiddotκαὶ δὲ σοὶ αὐτῷ μοῖρα θεοῖς ἐπιείκελrsquo Aχιλλεῦ

81 τείχει ὕπο Τρώων εὐηγενέων ἀπολέσθαι81a μαρνάμενον δηίοις ῾Ελένηςsup3⁸ ἕνεκrsquo ἠυκόμοιο81b ἄλλο δέ τοι ἐρέω σὺ δrsquo ἐνὶ φρεσὶ βάλλεο σῇσινmiddot

μὴ ἐμὰ σῶν ἀπάνευθε τιθήμεναι ὀστέrsquo Aχιλλεῦ83a ἀλλrsquo ἵνα περ σε καὶ αὐτὸν ὁμοίη γαῖα κεκεύθῃ83b χρυσέῳ ἐν ἀμφιφορεῖ τόν τοι πόρε πότνια μήτηρ84 ὡς ὁμοῦ ἐτράφεμέν περ ἐν ὑμετέροισι δόμοισιν

εὖτέ με τυτθὸν ἐόντα Μενοίτιος ἐξ Ὀπόεντοςἤγαγεν ὑμέτερόνδrsquo ἀνδροκτασίης ὕπο λυγρῆςἤματι τῷ ὅτε παῖδα κατέκτανον Aμφιδάμαντοςνήπιος οὐκ ἐθέλων ἀμφrsquo ἀστραγάλοισι χολωθείςmiddotἔνθα με δεξάμενος ἐν δώμασιν ἱππότα Πηλεὺςἔτρεφέ τrsquo ἐνδυκέως καὶ σὸν θεράποντrsquo ὀνόμηνενmiddot

91 ὣς δὲ καὶ ὀστέα νῶιν ὁμὴ σορὸς ἀμφικαλύπτοι

In modern editions of the Iliad (see West ad loc) v 83b is edited as v 92

92 χρυσέος ἀμφιφορεύς τόν τοι πόρε πότνια μήτηρNow read out what Patroclus says in the dream about their burial together and the pursuitsthey once had in life with one anotherNever more in life shall we sit apart from our dear comradesand take counsel together No the hated fatehas gapped around me the fate which was appointed me at my birthAnd for you yourself too godlike Achilles it is fatedto die beneath the walls of the noble Trojansfighting with the enemy for fair-haired Helenrsquos sakeMore shall I tell you and fix it in your heartLet not my bones be laid apart from your own Achillesbut that you and I may lie in common earthin the golden casket your queenly mother gave youjust as we were reared together in your chambershomewhen as a small child still Menoetius from Opusbrought me to your house because of sad man-slayingon that day when I slew Amphidamasrsquo sonin childish wrath all unwitting angered over diceThere in his halls Peleus the knight welcomed mekindly reared me and called me your companionSo to let the same vessel cover our bones

The type ῾Ελήνης in Diltsrsquo text must be an orthographic error


The above lengthy direct quotation from Homer (2377ndash91) seems to stand quiteapart from the Homeric text as it is transmitted by the mss we encounter signif-icant variations such as (i) major additions a) of the verse 81a (μαρνάμενον δηί-οις ῾Ελένης ἕνεκrsquo ἠϋκόμοιο) made by two Homeric formulaic parts found else-where (μάρνασθαι δηίοις in Il 9317 11190 205 17148hellip and ῾Ελένης ἕνεκrsquoἠϋκόμοιο in Il 9339) b) of the verse 83a ἀλλrsquo ἵνα περ σε καὶ αὐτὸν ὁμοίη γαῖακεκεύθῃ which retains a somehow formulaic character resembling Il 18329ἄμφω γὰρ πέπρωται ὁμοίην γαῖαν ἐρεῦσαι (ii) a transposition of verse since Ae-schinesrsquo quotation stops at v 91 the transposition of v 83b in effect correspondsto v 92 of Homerrsquos text with some due amendments χρυσέῳ ἐν ἀμφιφορεῖ τόντοι πόρε πότνια μήτηρ (iii) major alterations the latter part of v 82 σὺ δrsquo ἐνὶφρεσὶ βάλλεο σῇσιν replaces the Homeric formula καὶ ἐφήσομαι αἴ κε πίθηαιαἴ κε πίθηαι is found in Il1207 21293 and Od1279 (iv) minor alterations in v77 Aeschines (lsquoand some of the city- textsrsquo DidA)sup3⁹ prefers the wording οὐγὰρ ἔτι ζωοί γε while the mss read oὐ μὲν γὰρ ζωοί γε

In 150 Aeschines opts for quoting five other Iliadic verses coming from1895ndash99 Again he asks the clerk to read the verses marked in the lsquoAeschinianrsquoversion of the text

ὡς τοίνυν ἐξῆν αὐτῷ σωθῆναι μὴ τιμωρησαμένῳτὸν τοῦ Πατρόκλου θάνατον ἀνάγνωθι ἃ λέγει ἡ Θέτις

95 ὠκύμορος δή μοι τέκος ἔσσεαι οἷrsquo ἀγορεύειςmiddotαὐτίκα γάρ τοι ἔπειτα μεθrsquo Ἕκτορα πότμος ἑτοῖμοςΤὴν δrsquo αὖτε προσέειπε ποδάρκης δῖος Aχιλλεύςmiddotαὐτίκα τεθναίην ἐπεὶ οὐκ ἄρrsquo ἔμελλον ἑταίρῳ

99 κτεινομένῳ ἐπαμῦναι ὅ μοι πολὺ φίλτατος ἔσκενNow to show that he could have been saved if he had not avengedPatroclusrsquo death read out what Thetis sayslsquoSwift will fall your fate my child from what you sayFor immediately after Hector your doom is waitingrsquoTo her in turn made answer swift-footed divine AchilleslsquoLet me die straight-away since it seems I was not to rescuemy friend from death he who was far dearest to mersquoIl 1895ndash 100

95 ldquoὠκύμορος δή μοι τέκος ἔσσεαι οἷrsquo ἀγορεύειςmiddotαὐτίκα γάρ τοι ἔπειτα μεθrsquo Ἕκτορα πότμος ἑτοῖμοςrdquoτὴν δὲ μέγrsquo ὀχθήσας προσέφη πόδας ὠκὺς Aχιλλεύςmiddotldquoαὐτίκα τεθναίην ἐπεὶ οὐκ ἄρrsquo ἔμελλον ἑταίρῳκτεινομένωι ἐπαμῦναιmiddot ὃ μὲν μάλα τηλόθι πάτρης

100 ἔφθιτrsquo ἐμέο δrsquo ἐδέησεν ἀρῆς ἀλκτῆρα γενέσθαι

Richardson referring to Did= Didymus and A= Marc gr (olim ) saec x


Comparing Aeschinesrsquo text to Il 1895ndash99 we can specify the following varia-tions (i) selective quotation Aeschines quotes the first two lines (95ndash96) fromthe dialogue of Thetis and Achilles and then chooses only vv 98ndash99 fromAchillesrsquo extensive answer (in Il 1898ndash 126) (ii) major alterations a) the latterpart of v 99 ὅ μοι πολὺ φίλτατος ἔσκεν is Aeschinesrsquo invention b) in v 97 amajor change has been made by Aeschines introducing the phrase αὖτε προ-σέειπε ποδάρκης δῖος instead of μέγrsquo ὀχθήσας προσέφη πόδας ὠκύς

Homerrsquos Iliad 1895ndash99 provides a very useful material for Aeschines to com-pose an argument in poetic form this time which corroborates his thesis It is theresult of an apt reworking of the Homeric text with slight changes in wording anduse of two variant phrases a) ὅ μοι πολὺ φίλτατος ἔσκεν and b) αὖτε προσέειπεποδάρκης δῖος The first phrase emphasizes the close relationship betweenAchilles and Patroclus alluding to a homoerotic bond while the second one isused to fit the current situation and context the original phrase μέγrsquo ὀχθήσαςmight have caused a misunderstanding since it could have taken to point tothe anger of Achilles towards Thetis which is really not the case Leavingaside vv 100 f from the Iliad and making these alterations Aeschines turns hisquotation neatly and gives an impression of completeness

Socrates in Platorsquos Apology 28cndashd supporting the decision to abandon hisway of life uses the same episode from the Iliad as an exemplum for heroic think-ing and behaviour However this does not prove in any sense that Aeschinesknew and used Platorsquos text Homer would have been well known to the Atheni-ans of the fourth century through numerous oral recitations

This conspectus of the readings of both texts (original and conduit) may leadus to several conclusions focusing on the changes which Aeschines has made

Aeschinesrsquo quotations diverge quite significantly from the text transmittedby the Homeric mss he adds alters and transposes verses However especiallyin 149 which gives scope for further investigation it is most unfortunate that thisspecific manuscript (papyrus fragments noted as P12 in Westrsquos edition) does notcontain vv 2ndash84 to give us a safe idea how Aeschinesrsquo quotations (and especial-ly the plus-verses 81a 83a and 83b)⁴⁰ can be connected with the pre-Aristarchantradition of the text⁴sup1 The long-standing scholarly discussion on the value of

As for the plus-verse a again the old papyrus P (=P Grenf P Hib P Heidndash)does not help this plus-verse does not exist in later papyri (as P and Ωms) either but thisis out of the question in the pre-Aristarchan tradition on P see also West ndash As we were fortunate enough to check [Plu] Consol ad Apoll c where Il ndashb(with two plus-verses) is quoted in that case we were helped by the papyrus edited by Grenfelland Hunt ( ) which came into light to verify Plutarchrsquos quotation for more detail Allen ndash esp


plus-verses and minus-verses found in quotations of ancient authors seems to beinconclusive

Dueacute after a thorough analysis of Aeschinesrsquo variants and based also on Aldodi Luzio⁴sup2 supports the inclusion of these verses in the text arguing that we canlsquofind ways of including them in a multi-text that embraces the fluidity of the tex-tual traditions of the Iliad and Odysseyrsquo⁴sup3 which certainly helps us by creating afull picture of the variants but still does not separate out the different traditionspointing to the pre-Aristarchan tradition

However a critical approach of the Homeric excerpts cited by Aeschinesforces us to make a decision on these readings through rhetorical judgementmainly due to the lack of other evidence from the pre-Aristarchan period suchas papyrus fragments Lapse of Aeschinesrsquo memory as a cause to all these varia-tions must be excluded and on this point I agree with Dueacute⁴⁴ By examining thecited texts in comparison to the original text the way in which they rhetoricallyfunction within the overall corpus of the reporting text how they fit to variousarguments marshalled by Aeschines we may conclude that the changes mightmore safely represent his personal version of the text rather than a distinct tra-dition of the Homeric text most of the departures from the Homeric text (see ed-ition by West) may have been made to form or better to create a text that bestsupports Aeschinesrsquo argument in which the relationship of Patroclus andAchilles was one of chaste homoerotic love Aeschinesrsquo job was quite difficultsince Homerrsquos presentation of the relationship at issue was quite differentand this was well understood by the Athenian society of the fourth centuryBC The twofold target to use Homer but also to adapt his ideas in such away as to serve his rhetorical purpose was for Aeschines a challenging job givinghim the opportunity to function like an experienced reader who has to play witha text its wording its phrasing its poetic formulaic identity and structure with afinal target to produce his own version in a convenient form All his changes hadto abide by the ideas of fourth-century society on homoerotic relations Ae-schines provided the clerk of the court with this lsquointerpolatedrsquo version of thetext after having marked it with the relevant passages It is a text for officialuse in the court but not lsquoofficialrsquo by itself Poetry used in court may be regardedrhetorically and procedurally as a kind of witness (see Arist Rh 1375b28 ff) ob-taining a really authoritative character teaching poetry and teaching law from

Di Luzio ndash Dueacute ndash quotation from Dueacute


the rostrum were two parallel and equally important procedures in the Atheniancourt Ford has proved⁴⁵

Moreover the Homeric text cited by Aeschines in the speech Against Ti-marchus seems to be the text delivered during the hearing of the case it is prob-ably not a product of later revision simply because it is organically connectedwith the arguments of the orator⁴⁶ the way the speech is structured in 141ndash54is Aeschinesrsquo way it is really the way in which Aeschines also predisposes theaudience with comments before the clerk reads out a testimony or a document(eg in the speech On the False Embassy the testimony of Amyntor follows a pro-leiptic exposition given by Aeschines in six paragraphs [63ndash68] or in the samespeech paragraph 60 where Aeschines presents a partial possibly modifiedquotation of the Alliesrsquo dogma given in an anticipatory way in order to corrob-orate his own arguments)

In all these cases Aeschines reworks a text of Homer and makes slight modi-fications trying to support his case At the same time he avoids significant devia-tions

d The Speech Against Ctesiphon

In this political trial presented before the law court in 330 the accused Ctesi-phon who was a political friend of Demosthenes had to defend himself Hewas also helped by Demosthenes who acted as his synēgoros the reason forthe prosecution of Aeschines against Ctesiphon was the latterrsquos proposal mdashille-gal according to Aeschinesmdash suggesting that the city should offer a crown to De-mosthenes as a reward for his lifetime service and efforts offered to the city

However the real target of Aeschinesrsquo accusation was political since he hadto dispute over Ctesiphonrsquos justification of the award which was based on a longargumentation that Demosthenes has showed concern for and loyalty to the cityall his life Thus Aeschines moves to a real evaluation of Demosthenesrsquo politicalcareer attempting to impose his unfavourable view for Demosthenesrsquo political re-cord The prosecution was not successful for the part of Aeschines who failed toget the one-fifth of the votes He was then fined and he left Athens

We encounter in this speech of Aeschines an indirect quotation or allusion tothe Homeric text through the epigram of the Stoa of Hermai in paragraph 185⁴⁷

Ford ndash Van der Valk II Dueacute and n It is also Hesiod (Op ndash) that is quoted in


In 190 an epigram in honour of the democrats from Phyle is also quoted Thepurpose of setting up these three stēlai was to honour Cimonrsquos victory at Eionin 476 (Hdt 7107 Th 1981) Aeschines by quoting these inscriptions demandsto support his case that Demosthenesrsquo asking to be crowned by the dēmosdoes not comply with the glorious Athenian past Athens promotes collectiveand not personal deeds

ἐπὶ δὲ τῷ τρίτῳ ἐπιγέγραπται Ἑρμῇmiddotἔκ ποτε τῆσδε πόληος ἅμrsquo Aτρείδῃσι Μενεσθεὺςἡγεῖτο ζάθεον Τρωικὸν ἂμ πεδίονὅν ποθrsquo Ὅμηρος ἔφη Δαναῶν πύκα χαλκοχιτώνωνκοσμητῆρα μάχης ἔξοχον ἄνδρα μολεῖνοὕτως οὐδὲν ἀεικὲς Aθηναίοισι καλεῖσθαικοσμητὰς πολέμου τrsquo ἀμφὶ καὶ ἠνορέηςἔστι που τὸ τῶν στρατηγῶν ὄνομα οὐδαμοῦ ἀλλὰ τὸ τοῦ δήμου(Aeschin 3185)

And on the third of Hermai is inscribed

When Menestheus from this city led his men on the holy plain of Troy to join Atreusrsquo sonsHomer once said of the linen clad Danaanshe was supreme in ordering the battleFittingly then shall the Athenians be allhonoured and calledmarshals and leaders of war heroes in combat of armsrdquoIs the name of the generals anywhere Nowhere just the name of the people

The inscription recalls a passage from Il 2552ndash54

τῶν αὖθrsquo ἡγεμόνευrsquo υἱὸς Πετεῶιο Μενεσθεύςτῶι δrsquo οὔ πώ τις ὁμοῖος ἐπιχθόνιος γένετrsquo ἀνήρκοσμῆσαι ἵππους τε καὶ ἀνέρας ἀσπιδιώταςmiddot

The leader of those (scil the Athenians) was Menestheus son of PeteosLike him was no other man upon the earth forthe marshalling of chariots and of warriors that bear the shield

In fact we have a case of a two-stage reception of Homer first the reception ofthe Iliad by the Athenians in the 470s producing this epigram and second thereception of the epigram and indirectly of the Iliad by Aeschines in his speech

The third inscription mentioned here by Aeschines makes reference to theAthenian contingent for the Trojan War Menestheus appearing as son of Peteosin this text was the Athenian army leader his role in the Trojan War was prob-


ably minor⁴⁸ Theseus is totally absent from the Homeric passage although thereference to Athens only and not to Marathon Aphidna Eleusis Thoricos maymean that this concerns an age after the synoecism attributed to Theseus

The content of both texts (Il 2552ndash54 and Against Ctesiphon 185) presents aclose similarity the wording resembles in a way the Homeric original (egκοσμῆσαι in Homer κοσμητῆρα and κοσμητάς in the inscription cited by Ae-schines) Nevertheless the addition of the two verses οὕτως οὐδὲν ἀεικὲς [hellip]καὶ ἠνορέης which overstates Athenian virtues may be a slight distortion ofthe Iliadic text

This inscription is in effect an attempt of a retrospective reworking of Hom-errsquos verses concerning Athensrsquo engagement with the Trojan War It is simply theassociation technique employed in this lsquoStoa of the Hermairsquo in such a way as toplace the recent prominent victory against Persia within a broader historical con-text including the War against Troy

Eventually concerning the question of the edition of the Homeric text in the ageof Peisistratus the issue of Athensrsquo role in the Trojan War may help draw conclu-sions on the overall interpolations by the Athenians Moreover as a corpus thethree inscriptions of the lsquoStoa of Hermairsquo of the early Classical age point to a dynam-ic or creative reception of Homer by the Athenians once they quote their engage-mentmdash though not eminentmdashin the Trojan War backing their deeds of the recentpast What really interests the city in the 470s is a sole reference to their presencein Troy enriched by the authority of Homer overlooking the minor character ofthis participation This may be the reason why they do not distort the source somuch since it is again a matter of rhetorical use

Important to this discussion on the inscription of the lsquoStoa of Hermairsquo is that thetext quoted by Aeschines in 3185 is also used with the same order and almost thesame wording by Plutarch (Cimon 7) followed by Plutarchrsquos phrasing immediatelyafterwards (Cimon 8)⁴⁹ Although Wade-Gery supports the idea of a multiple sourcefor Plutarchrsquos text (including Hypereides and Demothenes Against Leptines 112) Plu-tarchrsquos conclusion that ταῦτα καίπερ οὐδαμοῦ τὸ Κίμωνος ὄνομα δηλοῦντα τιμῆςὑπερβολὴν ἔχειν ἐδόκει τοῖς τότrsquo ἀνθρώποις (lsquoalthough these inscriptions nowherementioned the name of Cimon his contemporaries regarded them to be an honourof distinction for himrsquo) connects the two texts Aeschinesrsquo and Plutarchrsquos veryclosely⁵⁰ However it is beyond the scope of our discussion to go to a more detailed

For more detail see Kirk ndash ndash For the divergences of Plutarchrsquos text from Aeschines see Wade-Gery See Wade-Gery ndash esp ndash see also Jacoby ndash where it isnoted that Aeschines copied them from D (Against Leptines) recently Robertson ndash Petrovic ndash


analysis of these epigrams making comments on the lsquoStoa of Hermairsquo and the bulkof inscriptions that may have been kept there

Nevertheless I feel quite confident that Aeschines presenting these threeepigrams within his text had made a selection among more than three epigramsreversing the order and making the epigram from Eion first and the Menestheusepigram third The typical motif of lsquoour ancestors our fathers ourselvesrsquo usedalso in funeral orations is probably reversed here (see Th 2361ndash4)⁵sup1

e Thersites the symbolic language of rhetoric

Θερσίτης δrsquo ἔτι μοῦνος ἀμετροεπὴς ἐκολώιαὃς ἔπεα φρεσὶν ἧισιν ἄκοσμά τε πολλά τε εἴδημάψ ἀτὰρ οὐ κατὰ κόσμον ἐριζέμεναι βασιλεῦσινἀλλrsquo ὅ τί οἱ εἴσαιτο γελοίιον Aργείοισινἔμμεναιmiddot αἴσχιστος δὲ ἀνὴρ ὑπὸ Ἴλιον ἦλθεmiddotφολκὸς ἔην χωλὸς δrsquo ἕτερον πόδα τὼ δέ οἱ ὤμωκυρτώ ἐπὶ στῆθος συνοκωχότεmiddot αὐτὰρ ὕπερθενφοξὸς ἔην κεφαλήν ψεδνὴ δrsquo ἐπενήνοθε λάχνηἔχθιστος δrsquo Aχιλῆϊ μάλιστrsquo ἦν ἠδrsquo Ὀδυσῆϊmiddotτὼ γὰρ νεικείεσκεmiddot τότrsquo αὖτrsquo Aγαμέμνονι δίωιὀξέα κεκληγὼς λέγrsquo ὀνείδεαmiddot τῶι δrsquo ἄρrsquo Aχαιοὶἐκπάγλως κοτέοντο νεμέσσηθέν τrsquo ἐνὶ θυμῶιαὐτὰρ ὃ μακρὰ βοῶν Aγαμέμνονα νείκεε μύθωιmiddot(Il 2212ndash24)

Only Thersites still kept chattering unmeasured in speechbeing adept at disorderly wordswith which to revile the kings recklessly in no due orderwhatever he thought would raise a laugh among the Argivesthe ugliest of men who came to IlionHe was bandy-legged dragging the foot with two rounded shouldershunching together over his chest and above themhis head was pointed and a sparse stubble flowered on itHateful was he to Achilles above all and to Odysseusfor both of them he was in the habit of reviling but nowwith shrill cries he uttered abuse against noble Agamemnon With him were the Achaeansexceedingly angry and indignant in their heartsThus shouting loudly he reviled Agamemnon

καὶ εἰ μέν τις τῶν τραγικῶν ποιητῶν τῶν μετὰ ταῦτα ἐπεισαγόντων ποιήσειεν ἐν τραγῳδίᾳτὸν Θερσίτην ὑπὸ τῶν Ἑλλήνων στεφανούμενον οὐδεὶς ἂν ὑμῶν ὑπομείνειεν ὅτι φησὶνὍμη-ρος ἄνανδρον αὐτὸν εἶναι καὶ συκοφάντηνmiddot αὐτοὶ δrsquo ὅταν τὸν τοιοῦτον ἄνθρωπον στεφανῶτε

Cf Loraux ndash


οὐκ ltἂνgt οἴεσθε ἐν ταῖς τῶν Ἑλλήνων δόξαις συρίττεσθαι οἱ μὲν γὰρ πατέρες ὑμῶν τὰ μὲνἔνδοξα καὶ λαμπρὰ τῶν πραγμάτων ἀνετίθεσαν τῷ δήμῳ τὰ δὲ ταπεινὰ καὶ καταδεέστεραεἰς τοὺς ῥήτορας τοὺς φαύλους ἔτρεπονmiddot Κτησιφῶν δrsquo ὑμᾶς οἴεται δεῖν ἀφελόντας τὴν ἀδο-ξίαν ἀπὸ Δημοσθένους περιθεῖναι τῷ δήμῳ(Aeschin 3231)

And if any of the tragic poets who are to bring on their plays afterwards in a tragedywere to represent Thersites as crowned by the Greeks no one of you would tolerate it becauseHomer says he was a coward and a slanderer (sykophantēs) but when you yourselves crownsuch a man as this donrsquot you think you are being hissed in the minds of the Greeks Your fa-thers gave a tribute for the glorious and brilliant achievements to the people but mean andunworthy acts threw upon the incompetent politicians however Ctesiphon thinks you shouldremove the stigma from Demosthenes and place it on the people

Aeschines in his attempt to evaluate not only Demosthenesrsquo political career butalso his overall personality takes refuge to Homer this time in an alternativeway he attacks Demosthenesrsquo character trying to convince the jurors that sucha personality is not worthy of being crowned to support this claim and to addmore strength and credit to this he makes a direct comparison between Demos-thenes and Thersites the infamous man mentioned by Homer in Il 2221⁵sup2 tocriticize Agamemnon being punished by Odysseus afterwards Thersitesrsquo nameis obviously a lsquospeakingrsquo name (originating in θέρσος the Aeolic form of Ionicθάρσος)⁵sup3 since it carries an apparent meaning of over-boldness recklessnessrashness Thus the comparison attempted by Aeschines purports to assimilatethe present to the past and transfer the features of unmanliness (see ἄνανδρον⁵⁴)and sycophancy (συκοφάντην⁵⁵) and even other characteristics (being nastily

Cf Aeschin where an implicit comparison between Demosthenes and Ajax is at-tempted this echoes the epic cycle in a way (cf Proclusrsquo summary of the Little Iliad) In

the tone is ironic (Demosthenes is characterized as μεγαλόψυχος καὶ τὰ πολεμικὰ διαφέρων)but the reference to the intentional wounding by Demosthenes to himself (see the case AgainstMeidias) and the overall content of the passage are leading to a conclusion that Demosthenesuses even his body (his head in this passage his mouth in the speech On the False Embassy and ) for gaining profit Kirk For the feature of unmanliness (ἄνανδρος ἀνανδρία) given to Demosthenes by Aeschines invarious occasions see also the whole context in this passage refers to an association ofpassive homosexuality and womanly clothing The term συκοφάντης hints at the social and civic sphere it may mean the person whobrings an unjust prosecution one not based on solid ground (cf also D) Despite the fre-quent references of litigants to their opponents as sycophants the meaning and etymology ofthe word remain obscure see Harvey ndash for various meanings of the word and nu-merous references In some cases it means a professional informer (Ar Ach ) in


abusive disgusting repulsive and distinguished for impropriety) from Thersitesto Demosthenes but not only these Aeschines intends to ascribe to Demos-thenes all these features coming directly from Thersites and moreover to promptan identification of both men in terms of character and posture since visible per-sonality and character must be consistent⁵⁶

However Thersitesrsquo courage is never really discussed in Homer or other epicAeschines does discuss Demosthenesrsquo courage or lack of it rewriting Thersites inthe image of Demosthenes as he himself presents him In that sense Aeschinesreworks Thersites in terms of fifth and fourth-century language and concepts

Similarly the initial statement of the paragraph lsquoif any of the tragic poets [hellip]a slanderer (sykophantēs)rsquo seems important Indeed this clearly brings forth thecultural atmosphere of the period in which proclamation of honours upon citi-zens or non-citizens for distinctive service to Athens was organized during tragicfestivals and especially City Dionysia⁵⁷ more than this within this cultural at-mosphere it is Homer who is recognized as one of the favourite authors re-worked by the tragic poets of the time through the myths and ideas which he of-fers however Homer has already established his ideas and even his characterswith a certain profile in the Athenian audience adaptation of Homeric materialwas a usual phenomenon and sometimes a routine process for classical litera-ture in the fourth century Thersitesrsquo character was reworked by Chaeremon ina tragedy entitled Achilles Thersitoktonos (lsquoSlayer of Thersitesrsquo) It seems asthough that such an unpopular character like Thersites is a risky venture if atragic poet or even an orator attempts a representation of him⁵⁸ It is also the fa-mous case of Phrynichusrsquo Capture of Miletos (see Hdt 6212) along with variousother anecdotes and vivid accounts presenting cases of conflicts between tragicperformances and Atheniansrsquo moral and political sentiments in tandem with theaudiencersquos frightened reaction⁵⁹

others a prosecutor who seeks financial reward from public action or by blackmailing his op-ponent it can also mean generally a citizen who uses his legal expertise to escape conviction See Russell Pickard-Cambridge

See also Lowry cf the vase-painting related to the Achilles Thersitoktonos (Boston Mu-seum of Fine Arts ) See further Pickard-Cambridge

ndash


f Reference to Margites

In 3160 Demosthenes is presented by Aeschines to give to Alexander the nick-name lsquoMargitesrsquo

Ἐπειδὴ δrsquo ἐτελεύτησε μὲν Φίλιππος Aλέξανδρος δrsquo εἰς τὴν ἀρχὴν κατέστη πάλιν αὖ τερα-τευόμενος ἱερὰ μὲν ἱδρύσατο Παυσανίου εἰς αἰτίαν δὲ εὐαγγελίων θυσίας τὴν βουλὴνκατέστησεν ἐπωνυμίαν δrsquo Aλεξάνδρῳ Μαργίτην ἐτίθετο ἀπετόλμα δὲ λέγειν ὡς οὐ κινηθήσε-ται ἐκ Μακεδονίας ἀγαπᾶν γὰρ αὐτὸν ἔφη ἐν Πέλλῃ περιπατοῦντα καὶ τὰ σπλάγχνα φυλάτ-τοντα Καὶ ταυτὶ λέγειν ἔφη οὐκ εἰκάζωνἀλλrsquo ἀκριβῶς εἰδὼς ὅτι αἵματός ἐστιν ἡ ἀρετὴ ὠνία αὐτὸς οὐκ ἔχων αἷμα καὶ θεωρῶν τὸνAλέξανδρον οὐκ ἐκ τῆς Aλεξάνδρου φύσεως ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τῆς ἑαυτοῦ ἀνανδρίας

But when Philip died and Alexander had come to rule Demosthenes still ldquopresenting himselfwith an imposing air he caused a shrine to be dedicated to Pausanias and involved with theCouncil in the charge of making sacrifice for good news he gave Alexander the nicknamelsquoMargitesrsquo and had the effrontery to maintain that he would not stir from Macedonia becausehe was content he said to stroll around ⁶⁰ in Pella observing the omens⁶sup1 He said this wasnot based on conjecture but on accurate knowledge that the price of valour is blood thoughhe himself having no blood in him and formed his judgement of Alexander not by Alexanderrsquosnature but by his own cowardice

This reference to Margites is clearly from a mock-epic named after the epony-mous character Margites is featured by proverbial stupidity madness andlust lack of experience immaturity indecision the name Margites is a lsquospeak-ingrsquo name coming from μάργος (see also LSJ9 sv Μαργίτης)

Demosthenesrsquo reference to Margites cannot be found anywhere in his pub-lished speeches and may have been obelized after revision However Plutarch(Dem 232) repeats the statement as follows καὶ τὸ βῆμα κατεῖχε Δημοσθένηςκαὶ πρὸς τοὺς [hellip] παῖδα καὶΜαργίτην ἀποκαλῶν αὐτὸν (lsquoDemosthenes reigned su-preme in the Assembly and wrote to the generals of the King who were in Asiaattempting to stir them up to start a war against Alexander from there while hecalled Alexander a boy and a Margitesrsquo) In addition Philotas the son of Parme-nio called contemptuously Alexander a stripling (μειράκιον) who enjoyed thetitle of king through Philotasrsquo and Parmeniorsquos efforts (see Plu Alex 485)

The word περιπατοῦντα has been regarded (see Carey n ) as sneering atAlexanderrsquos training in the school of Aristotle which was called Peripatos Tὰ σπλάγχνα φυλάττοντα is likelier to mean lsquoguarding the sacrificial entrailsrsquo hinting at hisindecision like Margites to proceed to further action although he had made all the necessarypreparations (see also above οὐ κινηθήσεται ἐκ Μακεδονίας)


It seems quite possible to have a genuine reference here and a truthful alle-gation from the part of Aeschines for the attribution of the nickname to Alexand-er by Demosthenes (cf Plu Alex 113) which is in tune with Demosthenesrsquo policyagainst Alexander especially in the first years of Alexanderrsquos reign Demos-thenes tried to form a stubborn opposition against him he firmly supportedThebes in their attempt to resist the Macedonians and made ironic and disdain-ful comments on Alexanderrsquos personality (see also Marsyas of Pella FGrH 135F3) It may be the case that Demosthenes trying to make a clear distinction be-tween Alexander and Achilles who is the prototype of heroic character and amodel that Alexander wished to imitate identifies Alexander to Margites whowas the very opposite model⁶sup2

A single reference to a comic hero like Margites without any other commentsimply means that the person referred to and more importantly the parodic epicpoem were really well-known to the Athenian audience of the mid fourth centu-ry Indeed the poem is discussed in Poetics 1448b where Aristotle argues that itmust be credited to Homer who was the first poet delineating the forms of com-edy by composing the Margites According to Aristotle Homer in the case of theMargites dramatized the laughable avoiding invective and the Margites becamea predecessor of comedy as the Iliad and the Odyssey of tragedy (1448b35ndash40)⁶sup3Moreover the pseudo-Platonic dialogue Alcibiades II (147B) makes reference tothe Margites as Homeric⁶⁴

Once again fourth-century political oratory uses epic themes and symbolswith or without reference to Homer and transfers them as rhetorica exempla⁶⁵into political discussion Moreover in the third century BC the popularity ofthe mock-epic poemMargites continues to be high since it enjoys the admirationof Callimachus (see fr 397 Pf)

See Plu Per where Alexander is presented as playing kithara a hint at his attempt toimitate Achilles For modern scholarly views on the authorship of theMargites see Jacob ndash Rot-stein esp ndash Bossi According to Eustratius on Arist EN (Comm in Arist Gr xx p Heylbut) the at-tribution of the name Margites to a poem of Homer is accepted also by Archilochus (fr B)and Cratinus (fr K-A) see Pfeiffer see also Hyp Lyc presenting Margitesas ἀβελτερώτατος for more ancient references to the Margites see West IEG

ndash IIndash See Quint Inst lsquoest in exemplus allegoria si non praedicta ratione ponanturrsquo withLausberg sect


g Reference to the Sirens

Another point in anticipation is Aeschinesrsquo reference to the Sirens though thispoint is not included in the speech On the Crown omitted possibly after revisionalthough it is equally possible that this reference could be an invention by Ae-schines to introduce his attack on Demosthenes It is an allusion to the Odyssey

Καὶ νὴ τοὺς θεοὺς τοὺς Ὀλυμπίους ὧν ἐγὼ πυνθάνομαι Δημοσθένην λέξειν ἐφrsquo ᾧ νυνὶ μέλλωλέγειν ἀγανακτῶ μάλιστα Aφομοιοῖ γάρ μου τὴν φύσιν ταῖς Σειρῆσιν ὡς ἔοικε Καὶ γὰρ ὑπrsquoἐκείνων οὐ κηλεῖσθαί φησι τοὺς ἀκροωμένους ἀλλrsquo ἀπόλλυσθαι διόπερ οὐδrsquo εὐδοκιμεῖν τὴντῶν Σειρήνων μουσικήνmiddot καὶ δὴ καὶ τὴν τῶν ἐμῶν εὐπορίαν λόγων καὶ τὴν φύσιν μου γεγενῆ-σθαι ἐπὶ βλάβῃ τῶν ἀκουόντων Καίτοι τὸν λόγον τοῦτον ὅλως μὲν ἔγωγε οὐδενὶ πρέπεινἡγοῦμαι περὶ ἐμοῦ λέγεινmiddotτῆς γὰρ αἰτίας αἰσχρὸν τὸν αἰτιώμενόν ἐστι τὸ ἔργον μὴ ἔχεινἐπιδεῖξαιmiddot(Aeschin 3228)

And by the Olympian gods of all the things which I hear Demosthenes will say the one I amabout to tell you makes me most indignant the most For he likens my natural gifts to the Si-rens He says that their hearers were not enchanted but destroyed by them and that thereforethe Siren-song has no good repute and that in like manner the smooth flow of my way ofspeaking and my natural talent have proved disastrous for those who listened to me

And yet I think this claim is one that nobody under any circumstances can properly makeagainst me it is a shame when someone makes an accusation and is not able to show theground for the accusation

Though the Sirens must have occurred in a lot of poetry in the interim the refer-ence may point to Homer without mention of Homer or can be regarded as a spe-cific detail which would point to Homerrsquos Odyssey 1239ndash54 (Circersquos foretellingaccount on the Sirens) and 158ndash200 (the episode with the Sirens) wherethese supernatural female sea-creatures (soul-birds or otherworld enchantress-es) singing with the sweetest voice lure sailors to their doom⁶⁶

Demosthenes ndashthrough Aeschinesmdash compared the sweet but destructive sound-ing of the Sirens to Aeschinesrsquo skilful and allegedly destructive speaking Thus Ae-schinesrsquo voice is at issue here a theme which could also be encountered in variousother passages in Demosthenesrsquo speeches contra Aeschines (see for example18259 308 19337 cf Demochares FGrH 75 F6c with [Plu] Mor 840e) But in19216ndash17 Demosthenes attempts to reverse the situation arguing that the jurorsrsquojob must not be dependent on the speakersrsquo talent and the quality of speechesThis idea can be found in 18287 where Demosthenes argues that he was chosen

For an account of the Sirensrsquo scene in the Odyssey and this literary motif see HeubeckHoek-stra ff


ndashand not Aeschinesmdashas a speaker for the funeral speech over the war dead afterChaeronea since the Athenians looked for a speaker to express the mourning ofhis soul and not to lament their fate with the pretended voice of an actor seealso 18291 where Aeschines is presented as λαρυγγίζων ie roaring⁶⁷

The charge in its generic form is not uncommon in rhetorical exchanges theorator is suspect of rhetorical skill and manipulation trying to captivate the ju-rors and audience with pleasurable speaking⁶⁸ Even more an actor-orator likeAeschines is able to transfer his acting experience skilful delivery gesturesand fine voice from acting stages to political stages becoming πάνδεινος (lsquodread-fulrsquo) γόης (lsquowizardrsquo) σοφιστής (lsquosophistēsrsquo) φέναξ (lsquoroguersquo)⁶⁹ this hints at theidea of deception a rhetorical motif used elsewhere in oratory with the termsψυχαγωγέω and ψυχαγωγία⁷⁰ This is also what Philocleon at AristophanesrsquoWasps (see esp 566 f) presents as entertainment and pleasures enjoyed by ajuror Philocleon among other things makes reference to Aesoprsquos funny talesand other jokes which make jurors laugh and lay aside their wrath The lastpoint on jokes is made also by Demosthenes (23206) who claims that the jurorsacquit criminals who have proved guilty if they make witty remarks in court

Eventually the motif of the Odyssean Sirens moves the discussion from law-court to theatre from argument to performance from logic to seductive meansAeschinesrsquo fine voice represents the histrionic power which enables the orator toseize the audience and leads the jurors to accept the thesis of the speaker whichis manipulated through illusion and deception But not only this the discussionon Aeschinesrsquo voice is levelled as an important argument since as Easterlinghas observed⁷sup1 it is placed at a climactic point with the perorations in bothspeeches On the Embassy and On the Crown

See Harpocration sv λαρυγγίζων meaning lsquofull throatened with mouth wide openrsquo For references to good speakers see Aeschin (a description of Leodamas the Achar-nian) and D a description of Kallistratos of Aphidna who enjoyed widespread fame asan orator see Plu Dem ff with [Plu] Mor b it was Kallistratos who inspired Dem (seePlu loccit) See Lada-Richards ndash See also Lex Vind (Nauck) sv ψυχαγωγός DH Dem For the relation between law-courts and theatre see Hall ndash OberStrauss Easterling Lada-Richards


Conclusions

In the period of 345ndash330 when the opposition between Athens and Macedonreached a high point we find three men of great significance Demosthenes Ae-schines and Lycurguswho enrich their argumentative weapons with poetryWiththe authority of Homer (together with Euripides and Hesiod) Aeschines antici-pates the main arguments of his opponent Demosthenes in the case Against Ti-marchus while Homer provides him with material to deconstruct Demosthenesrsquoimage in the case Against Ctesiphon It is worthy of note that Homer is used main-ly in these two speeches this raises issues on personal and political behaviourwhere personal life and public sphere are seen as two sides of the same coin⁷sup2

The interesting outcome is that all the poetic quotations paraphrases andsummaries are found in speeches (of the three orators mentioned) delivered ina short period of 15 years from 345 to 330⁷sup3 This is an issue (educational polit-ical or otherwise) that needs further investigation since we have a bulk ofspeeches political or not of the late fifth and the first half of the fourth centurywhich would have included poetic texts in their corpus

Consequently one may ask what forces Demosthenes Aeschines and Lycur-gus to use poetry And also was that a rhetorical variation or a new culturalphenomenon traced in this specific period To answer these questions wehave to point to the cultural features and the overall political trend of the periodespecially the third quarter of the fourth century BC including the lsquoLycurgan Erarsquo(338ndash322 BC) in this period political initiatives and significant cultural meas-ures offered Athens the opportunity to reaffirm its dominant cultural role inthe Greek world It seems that this cultural policy (Kulturpolitik) functions asan alternative to the political and military policy now in decline⁷⁴ I held thatthe encounter of poetry in oratory of this period may lead us to believe that itwas not only the revival of tragedy and the three tragedians (Aeschylus Sopho-cles and Euripides) and their plays which came to be presented again in theAthenian theatre More than this it was a revival in arts literature and generallyin culture which was spread around using theatre industry as a starting pointand influenced all kind of poetry and Homer among them This procedureseems to have already started from the period of Eubulusrsquo administration after

However poetry in general can be found in more public speeches of the same period asDemosthenesrsquo On the Crown and On the Embassy and Lycurgusrsquo Against Leocrates

See Petrovic ndash for an analogous note on the use of epigrams within oratorywhich is placed in See Hintzen-Bohlen


the Social War (355 BC) It is not accidental that both Eubulus and Lycurgus be-came heads of the cityrsquos Theoric fund

In a period of crisis as the Lycurgan era when Athens faces the question ofits independence in the future a re-evaluation of institutions traditions culturaland historical heritage is needed The Athenians seek to assure the past in orderto form a reworked identity with future perspective The term lsquointentional historyrsquoused by Gehrke and interpreted as lsquoprojection in time of the elements of subjec-tive self-conscious self-categorization which construct the identity of a group asa grouprsquo is telling of the policy adopted by Lycurgus in this period⁷⁵ Homer Hes-iod and the tragedians were surely in the agenda of the old idealized heritageworthy of modern adaptation

In his two speeches (Against Timarchus and Against Ctesiphon) Aeschinesopts for a creative reception of Homer appropriating the poetrsquos ideas and valuesthrough his modernized perspective but also tentatively with due respect to asanctioned text In the speech Against Timarchus he feels certain that he isadapting the issue of the relationship of Achilles and Patroclus to his argumen-tative needs namely speaking of chaste love as distinctively different from thesale of sexual gratification allegedly characterizing Timarchus

In the speech Against Ctesiphon again Aeschines has to play with the ideaof a glorious past with such values and principles that check the present situa-tion of the allegedly unlawful crowning of his opponent Demosthenes Homerconveys all the necessary literary material to support Aeschines ie a referenceto the Athenian contingent to the Trojan War embedded in an inscription of the470s and figures of symbolic power like Thersites the Sirens and Margites

However while the rhetorical scope was served well the citations of the Ho-meric text which are used should not be regarded as a safe indicator for thetransmission of this text Divergences from what was regarded as Homeric textin the fourth century BC were made to form freestanding excerpts and thishas been made on purpose and not to represent a distinct part of the transmis-sion of the text

All in all in the third quarter of the fourth century BC Homer (for culturalrevival) is not a text for public recitations or for educational use only it is trans-formed into a powerful rhetorical tool with influence on the dēmos

For lsquointentional historyrsquo and its interpretation see Hanink and n quoting Lura-ghiFoxhall ndash However to the above interpretation I feel that a creative process ismissing as an aspect of lsquointentional historyrsquo


Eleni Volonaki

Homeric Values in the Epitaphios Logos

a Moral values in the Homeric poems

The specific character of Homeric values has been the subject of considerable de-bate during the last half-century and more Two are the most influential approachesthat have been introduced to describe the sense of morality in the Homeric poemsfirstly Dodds made the distinction between lsquoshame culturersquo and lsquoguilt culturersquosup1 andlater Adkins advocated the lsquocompetitiversquo and the lsquocooperativersquo valuessup2 In particularAdkins argued that the Greeks from Homer onwards consistently attributed supremevalue to those virtues of which success rather than intention is the criterion and onthis view competition would count far more than co-operationsup3

Adkinsrsquo views have generally been adopted in scholarly literature⁴ althoughthey have encountered some acute criticism As Lloyd-Jones (1987 308) notedAdkins approached Greek religion from a distance in the manner of an anthro-pologist his own ethical standpoint being that lsquoduty and responsibility are thecentral concepts of ethicsrsquo⁵

Adkins favours the study of values of societies as wholes and has also equatedthe system of values as a whole with the morality of the society⁶ Long has objectedto the interpretation of many Homeric contexts as if they reflected the values of anautonomous existent society outside the poems and argues that any inferencesdrawn purely from Homer about ethical language cannot be assumed as lsquohistoricalaxiomsrsquo⁷ Hence heroic aretē as depicted in the Homeric poems should not betaken to represent accurately the life and values of any actual society Objectionsto Adkinsrsquo approach have mainly concentrated on his denial of lsquoco-operative valuesrsquoand the centrality of his thesis to Homerrsquos ethics of the so-called lsquocompetitive

Dodds ndash Adkins ndash Adkins He also maintained that the most powerful terms of value continuedin the fifth century to be what they had been in Homeric times aretē agathos and kakos used ofmen and aischron used of actions that diminished aretē As well as in general philosophical discussions of Greek ethics cf Finkelber n Adkins Adkins Long

valuesrsquo⁸ His treatment assumes a rigidity of structure in the behaviour of certainGreek moral terms for example he seems to exaggerate the extent to which agathosapplies to qualities of courage and capacity⁹

Gagarin uses the term morality to designate a sense of consideration for oth-ers not closely related to rational self-interest but not either the status of puremorality based on this approach he distinguishes three categories of rulesthe legal rules between two or more full members of a community the religiousrules which influence the behaviour of a mortal toward a god and the moralrules which influence the behaviour toward another person who isunprotectedsup1⁰ In reply Adkins disputes the distinction of these three types ofrules on the grounds that the same vocabulary of evaluation (eg aretē timēhybris etc) is used for all kinds of relationshipssup1sup1

The purpose of this paper is not to examine all the issues that have beenraised but to focus on the significance of the Homeric values of aretē (bravery)and timē (honour) as central to the representation of the herowarrior Based onthe assumption that there is a continuity in the application of heroic aretē as afundamental value of success attached to the agathos from Homer until the fifthcenturysup1sup2 we shall explore the context in which aretē and the associated Greekvalues are employed in the funeral orations of late 5th and 4th centuries BC andthe extent to which these have functioned as an inspiration for the praise of thedead As will be shown there is a shift in the emphasis placed upon the warriorrsquosheroic aretē in the funeral orations of the democratic polis when addressing thewhole of the Athenian dēmos in contrast to the aristocratic connotations reflect-ed in the Homeric poems

Aretē as a Homeric value is closely related to the warriorrsquos greatness in bat-tle It is a power necessary to and valued by the society Aretē is far more impor-

Long ( ndash) explores the link between timē which is a competitive standard andthe unfavourable evaluation of certain kinds of aggressive or unco-operative behaviour as forthe use of the adjective agathos in Homer to make the most powerful commendation as Adkinsrightly argued Long notes that only the context will decide whether in the use of agathos is theevaluative or rather the descriptive aspect which prevails For other arguments from objection toAdkinsrsquo approach cf also Lloyd-Jones ndash Schofield ndash Williams ndash ndash Cairns ndash Zanker ndash Creed ( ndash) argued that there is a tendency to use the word in relation to thesequalities in certain contexts and questions whether in these cases agathos retains the automati-cally overriding force with which Adkins invests it Gagarin ndash Adkins ndash Lloyd-Jones ( ndash) criticizes Gagarinrsquos attempt to establisha via media between Adkins and himself as not successful Generally on the continuity and persistence of Greek values cf Walcot

126 Eleni Volonaki

tant than any other social value and is firmly attached to the individual agathosdenoting the significance of his achievements in war The adjective agathoswhich corresponds to the noun aretē indicates the basic qualification requiredin order that one may be recognized as a possessor of this value which is notjust success but the very fact of participating in the competitionsup1sup3

The agathos man has been traditionally characterized as the one who canmore effectively secure the stability safety and welfare of the social groupboth in war and in peace The Homeric warrior is driven to action by a needfor social validation The noble men are honoured by their people becausethey achieve fame ndash kleos The warriorrsquos greatness in battle ensures his contin-ued prestige during his life so that his identity persists among future genera-tions by the tale of his deeds In the Iliad the heroic excellence is prominentbut it is also explored in terms of its underlying bitterness In the Odyssey thepoet moves beyond the glamour of heroism to a standard level of human condi-tion where the hero succeeds only by accepting his own weaknesssup1⁴ Thus theheroism in the two epics is based upon the success and personal achievementwithin competition

Honour is generally assumed to be a competitive value However as Frin-kelber (1998 16) points out the only Homeric formula in which the word timēoccurs is ἔμμορε τιμῆς the use of this formula and its modifications in the Ho-meric corpus show that lsquothe idea of allotment of timē rather than gaining it in faircompetition was deeply rooted in the epic traditionrsquosup1⁵ In this view timē (honour)should be regarded as a distributive rather than a competitive value moreoverthe distribution of timē (honour) in Homer appears to follow a personrsquos socialstatus which is determined by the superiority in birth and wealth On theother hand the function of agathos and aretē in Homer to commend achieve-ment and status is consistent with a standard of appropriateness which con-demns excess and deficiencysup1⁶

On balance the limits between what scholars define as lsquocompetitiversquo lsquodis-tributiversquo and lsquoco-operativersquo values are not clear-cut Most scholars howeveragree that the herorsquos aretē and timē (honour) involve prowess in war statusbirth and observation of social conventions Achievement on the battlefielddoes play a fundamental role to those who possess aretē and timē even thoughit may not necessarily constitute qualification for possessing these values In ef-fect the values of aretē and timē in the Homeric poems are closely related to the

Finkelberg On the heroism as displayed and used in the two epics cf Clarke ndash Ibid n Long


aristocratic background of the Homeric hero and the society to which he be-longed In this context kleos (glory) andreia (bravery) auto-thusia (self-sacri-fice) and hysterophēmia (posthumous fame) are essential and natural qualitiesof the agathos hero and warrior who is being allotted prizes (timē) for his excel-lence and expertise

b The praise of the dead (egkōmion)in the funeral oration

In Homeric epic the thrēnos (lament) is sung by the bard over the herorsquos bodycreating a sort of contrasted mourning between the members of the familyand the crowdsup1⁷ The heroes of epic appear to play the primary role to the familymourning since they did not regard tears as incompatible to their virility as war-riors Appeals for pity were frequent in the aristocratic epitaphs celebrating awarrior A typical example of epic lamentation comes from Iliad 23 whereAchilles is mourning in tears over the dead body of his friend Patroclus The glo-rious complement to the herorsquos lamentation is the organization of the funeralgames in respect for the dead friend In honour of Patroclus Achilles institutesthe following games the chariot-race the fight of the crestus the wrestling thefootrace the single combat the discus the shooting with arrows and darting thejavelin The funeral games essentially function as a sort of diversion from griefcelebrating Patroclusrsquo life Furthermore the funeral games of Patroclus representone of the most significant values of Greek aristocratic life individual honour

The original place of the funeral oration should be assigned between the twopoles of the lament and the eulogy which in aristocratic society expressed the rela-tionship between the living and the dead The classical city abandoned the concep-tion of mourning and the funeral oration excludes the lamentation (thrēnos) of epicand lyric poetry since it involves the relationship between a community ndashthe dem-ocratic polisndash and its dead and through these dead its connection with its presentand its pastsup1⁸ The funeral oration constitutes a eulogy containing the elements ofpraise (egkōmion) exhortation (parainesis) and consolation (paramythia) The pref-erence of praise over lamentation is stated in Platorsquos Menexenus 248c

Loraux Ibid ndash in the classical period thrēnos is regarded as simply a synonym of gōos thegeneral term for any kind of lamentation

128 Eleni Volonaki

τὰ μὲν γὰρ ἡμέτερα τελευτὴν ἤδη ἕξει ἥπερ καλλίστη γίγνεται ἀνθρώποις ὥστε πρέπει αὐτὰμᾶλλον κοσμεῖν ἢ θρηνεῖν

The end of our lives will be very noble for mankind and praise will be more appropriate thanlamentationsup1⁹

In the classical period the Athenian city left room for womenrsquos lamentationsince weeping was womenrsquos lot at the time while it chose a man to deliverthe praise of the men that it was buryingsup2⁰ As a purely military and politicalspeech the funeral oration reflected only male values and therefore rejectedthe thrēnos and any appeals for pity The democratic city was identified withits army and was able to accept the death of its men with greater peacefulnessHowever the official orator was inspired by the epic tradition so that he was me-diating in the communityrsquos relationship with its deadsup2sup1

All funeral orations reflect a democratic reading of Athenian history inHomerrsquos world funeral ceremonies were restricted to the individual aristocratbut in democratic Athens they were anonymous and collective since they repre-sented ordinary Athenian soldiers (particularly hoplites) and not their leadersThe notion of the lsquoposthumous glory and memory of the namersquo of the dead isthe most substantial in the funeral oration dominated by the rule of anonymityIn the epitaphioi the citizens are given no other name than that of Athenians anda collective glory A gap can be noticed between the catalogue of the dead andthe funeral oration between the hymn and the eulogy the funeral or heroic la-ment two dimensions coexist in the national funeral oration and should beviewed as such the religious and the political contextsup2sup2

Funeral speeches reviewed the achievements of the mythical and historicalpast of the city of Athens setting thus an example of virtue in political life Aspeaker on a burial ceremony is encouraged to say something significant and

The translation of all cited passages is based on Herrman with minor adjustments The funeral orations (epitaphioi) were delivered as part of a state burial ceremony Thucy-dides in his introduction to Periclesrsquo funeral oration () informs us of this traditional cus-tom which was presumably celebrated annually whenever there were Athenian war-dead tobury According to Thucydides and the ceremony was dated in the winter atime most appropriate for the Athenians to gather and bury their dead after the battle opera-tions had ended and the dead bodies had been brought to Athens The ceremony consisted offour stages the prothesis where the remains of the dead bodies were brought in the coffinsone for each of the ten Athenian tribes the ekphora a formal procession to the public cemeterynamed Kerameikos the burial at the demosion sēma and finally the funeral oration delivered bya chosen distinguished orator Loraux Hardwick ndash Loraux


original On the other hand he needs to satisfy audience expectations which in-volve the traditional cultural ideals such as patriotism freedom under the lawself-confidence and public democratic debatesup2sup3 All surviving speeches display acommon structure and later rhetoricians refer to these same typical elements forfuneral orations In the proem the speaker explains that his words are inade-quate to the occasion The epainos or ldquopraiserdquo section follows which includedstandard mythological and historical exploits one of which was the praise ofthe ancestors and their accomplishments In the final section the speakershould give some consolation to the relatives of the dead

The orations did not aim to inform but to apply common ideals values andattitudes of the citizens To that end they sought to resolve the conflict between acultural ideal of Panhellenic altruism and the Athenian superiority at any cost(philonikia) or desire for honour (philotimia)sup2⁴ The claims to Athenian primacyand uniqueness are frequent in the funeral orations with a hyperbolic andself-praise rhetorical emphasis transforming Athenian aggression into nobleself-sacrifice In this context the orators praise aretē and prowess of the deadAthenian soldiers in such a way that the purely historical events may be distort-ed or deliberately misinterpretedsup2⁵

c Moral values in the epitaphioi

Among the surviving epitaphioi each one is distinctive despite all the traditionalelements of structure each one serves its own goal addressing a differentaudiencesup2⁶ Moreover the epitaphioi cannot be included in one and the samegroup since they were not all delivered at a public burial nor are they alldated to the same period The central themes of all speeches are lsquonoble deathrsquoand the lsquofreedomrsquo of Greece due to the achievements of the ancestors and thedead in specific battles The achievements derived from aretē and all relevantqualities of the Athenian warriors as well as of their ancestors Our emphasiswill be placed upon these qualities and the distinctive skills that contributedto their own private but also to the common freedom and welfare (eudaimonia)

Cf Kennedy ndash Walters Ibid ndash The tone of funeral orations is both educative and deliberative (symbouleutic) since the or-ators attempt to influence public opinion for resistance and continuation of the war

130 Eleni Volonaki

d Thucydides Periclesrsquo Epitaphios 234ndash46

Thucydidesrsquo epitaphios was a reworking of the funeral oration delivered by Peri-cles at the end of the first year of the Peloponnesian war in 431sup2⁷ It had a specificpolitical goal to glorify the Athenian democracy in the time of Pericles The epai-nos begins with praise of the progonoi (ancestors) by asserting

ἄρξομαι δὲ ἀπὸ τῶν προγόνων πρῶτον δίκαιον γὰρ αὐτοῖς καὶ πρέπον δὲ ἅμα ἐν τῷ τοιῷδετὴν τιμὴν ταύτην τῆς μνήμης δίδοσθαι τὴν γὰρ χώραν οἱ αὐτοὶ αἰεὶ οἰκοῦντες διαδοχῇ τῶνἐπιγιγνομένων μέχρι τοῦδε ἐλευθέραν δι᾽ ἀρετὴν παρέδοσαν (2361)

I shall begin with our ancestors it is both just and appropriate that they should have the hon-our of the first reference on an occasion like the present They dwelt in the country withoutbreak in the succession from generation to generation and it is because of their excellencethat the state we have inherited is free

The ancestors deserve to be honoured through the funeral oration Their virtue asexcellence has guaranteed freedom for later generations Here the term aretēdoes not explicitly denote the military excellence and bravery of the ancestorsbut it does imply that their efforts on the battlefield established freedom forthat time and the future The notion of freedom in Thucydides is closely relatedto happiness and valour (2434)sup2⁸

The real subject of the praise in Periclesrsquo epitaphios is the Athenian way oflife without offering any specific examplessup2⁹ However Thucydides later exem-plifies their audacity performance of duty and feeling of shame at the momentof fighting as virtues of all Athenian warriors (2431) Aretē is also designated asthe criterion of electing public officials in particular their good deeds (2371ἔχων γέ τι ἀγαθὸν δρᾶσαι τὴν πόλιν) It becomes obvious that aretē in Thucydidesis assigned with menrsquos achievements and needs to be proved in practice either inwar or in peace

Thucydides () explains in the introduction to his history that the speeches are recon-structed on the basis of probability with an attempt to hold as closely as possible to what wasactually said He also describes how difficult it was for him to remember exactly what was saidand therefore needed to talk to witnesses about the speeches Further on the idea of freedom and its use in Thucydides cf Hornblower Pericles avoids referring to the achievements of the ancestors since BC had been a year ofinvasion and destruction the first year of the war was marked by lack of military and political suc-cess Therefore any comparison between the past and the present would open negative reactionsand criticism The remarkable rhetorical technique of Pericles lies in the way he blends the pastand the present in a lsquotimeless encomium of the cityrsquo the city of Athens is praised as a city worthdying for On the historical context of Thucydidesrsquo funeral oration see Bosworth


Orators tend to suggest that their praise is distinct in particular from that ofthe poets Thucydides rejects the need for a poetic eulogy of Athens on thegrounds that poets exaggerate and distort the truth

καὶ οὐδὲν προσδεόμενοι οὔτε Ὁμήρου ἐπαινέτου οὔτε ὅστις ἔπεσι μὲν τὸ αὐτίκα τέρψει τῶνδ᾽ ἔργων τὴν ὑπόνοιαν ἡ ἀλήθεια βλάψει ἀλλὰ πᾶσαν μὲν θάλασσαν καὶ γῆν ἐσβατὸν τῇ ἡμ-ετέρᾳ τόλμῃ καταναγκάσαντες γενέσθαι πανταχοῦ δὲ μνημεῖα κακῶν τε κἀγαθῶν ἀίδιαξυγκατοικίσαντες (2414)

We shall not need the praises of Homer or of any other rhapsodist whose poetry may pleasefor the moment but the truth of action will work against his intention We have made all of thesea and the earth accessible for our daring and we have established jointly everlasting memo-rials to our harmful and good deeds

The dead do not need the Homeric praise but their own fights have left eternalmemorials to their deedssup3⁰ The contrast here indicates that prizes for poeticcompetitions were designed for the immediate moment whereas Thucydidesrsquowork is permanent but superficially unpleasingsup3sup1 Elsewhere Thucydides alsomakes a distinction between literary genres implying for example that he is nei-ther a poet nor a logographer (1212) or that his work is not to be recited becausesuch a recitation might have been a joyless occasion (1224)sup3sup2 In this contextThucydides may not wish to devalue the Homeric praise but drawing on its re-ception as was commonly and widely accepted he rather uses it to describehis own work Thus his own praise is solely based upon historical deeds andachievements either bad or good which reveal the truth By the mid-fifth centuryHomeric eulogy has been connected with a joyful recitation giving only pleas-ure There is a shift in the emphasis of the praise by Thucydides which doesnot exaggerate for the readersrsquo pleasure but employs proofs for its credibility

καὶ τὴν εὐλογίαν ἅμα ἐφ᾽ οἷς νῦν λέγω φανερὰν σημείοις καθιστάς (2421)

The funeral for the men over whom I am now speaking should be by proofs manifestly estab-lished

On the issue whether this downgrading of Homer should be attributed to Pericles or to Thu-cydides cf Loraux Hornblower In Thucydides says that his aim is purely intellectual and that he does not intend toimprove his readers by making them morally better people like doctors who wish to make lsquotheirpatients betterrsquo Here the distinction does not involve literary genres but rather scientific ap-proaches to people

132 Eleni Volonaki

Noble death rather than a disgraceful life is a Homeric ideal reflected in thepraise of Thucydidesrsquo funeral oration Their death is presented to have occurredat a moment of glory and not fear

καὶ ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ ἀμύνεσθαι καὶ παθεῖν μᾶλλον ἡγησάμενοι ἢ [τὸ] ἐνδόντες σῴζεσθαι τὸ μὲναἰσχρὸν τοῦ λόγου ἔφυγον τὸ δ᾽ ἔργον τῷ σώματι ὑπέμειναν καὶ δι᾽ ἐλαχίστου καιροῦτύχης ἅμα ἀκμῇ τῆς δόξης μᾶλλον ἢ τοῦ δέους ἀπηλλάγησαν (2424)

Since they thought that fighting and suffering were more appropriate than yielding and sur-viving they avoided any shameful talk with their act of physical resistance and in an instanceat the height of their fortune they passed away from the scene not of their fear but of theirglory

Thucydides also argues that death occurring at a moment of patriotism andstrength is to be preferred than humiliation which follows cowardice

ἀλγεινοτέρα γὰρ ἀνδρί γε φρόνημα ἔχοντι ἡ μετὰ τοῦ [ἐν τῷ] μαλακισθῆναι κάκωσις ἢ ὁ μετὰῥώμης καὶ κοινῆς ἐλπίδος ἅμα γιγνόμενος ἀναίσθητος θάνατος (2436)

And surely to a man of spirit the degradation of cowardice must be considerably more pain-ful than the unfelt death striking him in the midst of his strength and patriotismsup3sup3

Immortal glory for the dead is a Homeric idea (hysterophēmia) which is emphati-cally used in the funeral oration It is striking that Thucydides refers to the com-mon glory which will be eternally remembered upon every occasion (2432) Be-cause they gave their lives for the common good they received ageless praiseindividually and a tomb most distinctive They donrsquot rest there instead theirglory eternally awaits any occasion for speech or action that may arise Moreoverthe glory of the dead constitutes a relief for the living (2444)

Periclesrsquo funeral oration closes with the identification of aretē as the braveryshown by excellent men and honoured by prizes ἆθλα γὰρ οἷς κεῖται ἀρετῆς μέ-γιστα τοῖς δὲ καὶ ἄνδρες ἄριστοι πολιτεύουσιν (2461) The conception of couragein the Periclean funeral oration is closely tied to Athenian democratic ideologyThucydides emphasizes that lsquoAthenian courage was grounded in rational delib-erationrsquo (2403)sup3⁴ As has been shown virtue has been presented by Thucydidesmainly as a lsquocompetitiversquo value according to Adkinsrsquo terminology though it in-volves the achievements of the whole group of warriors rather than of eachhero individually

For a discussion on the young age of the dead cf Hornblower ndash For the as-sociation of a noble and good death with happiness (eudaimonia) in life see Th Herrman


e Gorgiasrsquo Epitaphios

During the Peloponnesian War another funeral oration was composed by Gor-gias the famous sophist from Leontini (480ndash380 BC) which survives only infragments In the best preserved fragment of the funeral oration Gorgias de-scribes aretē as divine whereas the mortality of the dead as human

οὗτοι γὰρ ἐκέκτηντο ἔνθεον μὲν τὴν ἀρετήν ἀνθρώπινον δὲ τὸ θνητόν πολλὰ μὲν δὴ τὸ πρᾶονἐπιεικὲς τοῦ αὐθάδους δικαίου προκρίνοντεςhellip (DK86 B6)

In this funeral oration which was most probably written as a kind of demonstra-tion speech for students of rhetoricsup3⁵ the praise of the dead is exaggerated tosuch an extent that they are even deified Moreover the deification of theiraretē implies an excellence of achievements

Further below in the same fragment the epainos of the dead refers to theirnoble death and the sacrifice of their lives in order to benefit their country proofof their courage is that they fought against greater numbers of the enemy andendured The honourable behaviour of the dead is specified as respect towardsthe gods care for their parents and justice towards their fellow citizens Such aconduct resulted into their immortality τοιγαροῦν αὐτῶν ἀποθανόντων ὁ πόθοςοὐ συναπέθανεν ἀλλrsquo ἀθάνατος οὐκ ἐν ἀθανάτοις σώμασι ᾖ οὐ ζώντων

The emphasis placed upon their excellent behaviour both in private andpublic life is intended to offer an exemplary way of political life Thus thedead deserve the honour and praise of all the living in effect the citizens areencouraged to imitate their choice and virtue As can be seen moral and civicvalues are here interrelated for the educational purposes of a reading audience

f Lysias 2 Epitaphios for those who diedassisting the Corinthians

The epitaphios attributed to Lysias was composed during the Corinthian war of 395ndash387 for those who died lsquoassisting the Corinthiansrsquo Lysiasrsquo epitaphios presents a cleardivergence from the rest of the corpus and therefore its authorship has been con-siderably doubtedsup3⁶ Lysias however would most likely be the one to have such

It is unlikely that Gorgias actually delivered this funeral oration since he was not an Athe-nian citizen UsherNajock ndash

134 Eleni Volonaki

good reasons for lsquohighlighting the contribution played by xenoi (foreigners) in thedemocratic counter-revolution of 4032 (Lys 266)rsquosup3⁷ Moreover the funeral orationmay seem the sort of patriotic speech Lysias would be expected to writesup3⁸ Lysiashimself could not have delivered the speech since he was not an Athenian citizenand therefore this specific funeral oration must have been designed as a modelto be used for rhetorical training addressing in any case a reading audiencesup3⁹

Lysiasrsquo epainos is taken almost completely from the genos and extends oversixty sections Such a lengthy mythical-historical narrative is often considered tobe the most typical and important part of classical funeral orations⁴⁰ Lysias devel-ops the epainos chronologically according to three broad divisions the ancestors(sectsect 3ndash19) their descendants (sectsect 20ndash66) and those now being buried (sectsect 67ndash70)

In the opening of the speech Lysias states that the virtues as denoting theachievements of the dead are celebrated by the living who are mourning fortheir sufferings (22 πανταχῇ δὲ καὶ παρὰ πᾶσιν ἀνθρώποις οἱ τὰ αὑτῶνπενθοῦντες κακὰ τὰς τούτων ἀρετὰς ὑμνοῦσι) The verb hymnein (celebrate) at-tributes a heroic tone since it implies a connection with hero-cult⁴sup1 The heroicelement of the praise is complemented with the didactic purpose of the funeraloration the funeral practice consists of lsquothe celebration of the dead in songsmaking speeches at memorials for the brave men honouring the dead atthese sorts of occasions and teaching the living the deeds of the deadrsquo (23)⁴sup2In this educational context virtue is also associated with sōphrosynē (discretion)and opportunity to exercise good judgement while extending a great deal of self-control and respect to all people (257) The aretē of the dead is also connectedwith the idea of competitiveness which here serves to emphasize the limitation

Todd ndash Cf Kahn Modern scholars view Lysiasrsquo epitaphios as a typical funeral oration of the period cf Ziol-kowski ndash Herrman ndash Todd ndash Loraux ndash Cf Ziolkowski ndash Todd ( ) refers to the stereotype connected with hero-cult ὑμνοῦνται δὲ ὡςἀθάνατοι διὰ τὴν ἀρετήν (lsquothey are praised like immortals on account of their braveryrsquo) On paideusis playing an important role in epitaphioi and predicated not just of those beingburied but also of their ancestors cf ibid For the educative role of the epitaphioi cf also ἄνδρες δὲ γενόμενοι τήν τε ἐκείνων δόξαν διασώσαντες καὶ τὴν αὑτῶν ἀρετὴν ἐπιδείξαντες(lsquothese men are to be envied both in their life and in death because they were schooled in thegood qualities of their ancestors and as adults they preserved the glory of those generations anddisplayed their own virtuersquo)


of Athenian military action⁴sup3 In effect aretē has been introduced as a heroiccompetitive value rhetorically employed for educative purposes

Aretē explicitly denotes the bravery shown on the battlefield within a patrioticcontext ἄνδρες δ᾽ ἀγαθοὶ γενόμενοι καὶ τῶν μὲν σωμάτων ἀφειδήσαντες ὑπὲρ δὲ τῆςἀρετῆς οὐ φιλοψυχήσαντες (225 lsquothey proved to be brave without sparing their livesand they did not choose life over virtuersquo)⁴⁴ Aretē is also associated with freedomand as such is preferable to enslavement accompanied by reproach and wealth(233) The exaggeration that the dead exceeded their contemporaries or eventheir ancestors in virtue is consistent with the heroic representation of the warriorsand their glorious self-sacrifice (240) It is striking that virtue as bravery is identifiedwith fatherland itself for which the warriors fought and died (266) from such a dis-play of virtue the living can benefit and enjoy their life (274)

The choice of a glorious and immortal death is a common theme in funeralorations and is also used by Lysias to portray the bravery and virtue of the dead(223) As Loraux (1986 98ndash 118) argued it is characteristic of funeral speeches topraise not the lives of the citizens but their choice of death The concept of thelsquobeautiful deathrsquo of the heroic warrior is a Homeric ideal for example in Iliad 22the Greeks admire the physical beauty of the dead Hector even as they take turnsto disfigure it Moreover the Homeric hero chooses to die in honour of his home-land and comrades rather than live in shame⁴⁵ An extension of this concept isthe choice of freedom as consequent to the choice of death as Lysias states theancestral virtue was proved by the choice of a death with freedom rather than alife with slavery (262) On this view the funeral oration distances from the Ho-meric ideal of a beautiful death to emphasize the freedom of the community acity-state and the whole of Greece

g Platorsquos Menexenus 234andash249d

Socrates presents another funeral oration by Aspasia the well-known mistress ofPericles which has been incorporated in Platorsquos dialogue Menexenus the historicaldetail in the speech indicates that it was written after the Corinthian war and Lysiasrsquo

Ibid cf Lys ἀλλ᾽ ἐκείνοις μὲν ἀντὶ τῆς ἀσεβείας τὴν ἑαυτῶν ἀρετὴν ἐπεδείξαντοαὐτοὶ δὲ λαβόντες τὰ ἆθλα ὧνπερ ἕνεκα ἀφίκοντο (lsquoThey demonstrated to them their own virtuein place of impiety They themselves took the prizes for which they had comersquo) For showing bravery on the battlefield cf also on the importance of aretē for makingthe memory immortal cf for the rhetoric on aretē as a whole cf For Hectorrsquos views on the performance of duty even if this implies self-sacrifice cfIl ndash

136 Eleni Volonaki

funeral oration in 386 BC The ascription to Aspasia establishes a connection be-tween Platorsquos Menexenus and the famous Periclean funeral oration by Thucydides

Scholars differ in their interpretation of the dialogue⁴⁶ Many parallels canbe observed between Platorsquos and Thucydidesrsquo orations such as the antithesisof word and deed (logos and ergon) the tradition of the funeral oration andthe emphasis placed upon the paideia and politeia⁴⁷ There are however differ-ences between the two orations concerning the individual and collective ideal ofvirtue the vocabulary the tone and the approach of the audience⁴⁸ Despite thepolemic relationship between the two orations the Menexenus can be seen as analternative and an answer to the Periclean oration in two aspects the rhetoricand the politics It offers an analysis of the faults of rhetoric by recognizingthe falsehood of the idealized portrayal of Athens which in effect becomes ob-ject of parody in Socratesrsquo funeral oration⁴⁹ Thus Plato takes the opportunity todemonstrate how a funeral oration should be written⁵⁰ In terms of politics thecontrast between the two figures Pericles and Socrates is obvious the formerrepresents the prestige of the Athenian empire and naval power whereas the lat-ter reflects the ideals of virtue (Socratic aretē) and justice Platorsquos target is theconstruction of Pericles as a symbol and he criticizes Thucydidesrsquo portrayaland the Athenian practice particularly in the funeral oration to exemplify Peri-cles his leadership and his policy⁵sup1 Thus the appeals to the traditions of Athe-nian history are presented to offer a judgement against Periclesrsquo imperial policy

Platorsquos epainos (239a6ndash246b2) is treated in a long section that included the sto-ries of the mythical background and a survey of Athenian history from the Persianwars down to the Peace of Antalcidas in 387 BC Plato makes no distinction betweenthe deeds of the present dead and the deeds of their ancestors He praises the deadfor their virtue as they set an example to imitate in the later battles (240d) whichreflects the didactic purpose of the funeral oration They are more specifically prais-

Some view the speech as an antagonistic response to Thucydidesrsquo idealized view of Atheniandemocracy under Pericleswhereas others see it as a sort of parody that adopts an ironic tone onLysiasrsquo epitaphios For a detailed discussion of scholarly views cf Herrman ndash For an analysis of these parallels cf Kahn ndash Monoson ndash Cf Salkever ndash Cf Coventry ndash Plato praises the city of Athens as it should be praised but departures from historical accu-racy can be observed A funeral oration is certainly not a work of historical research and there-fore the historical distortions especially in details such as the role of Sparta to the Persian Warsand the supposed alliance between Athens and Sparta against Persia in the Corinthian Warshould not be looked for further analysis and explanation cf Kahn Salkever ndash Cf Monoson ndash


ed for their nobility of birth upbringing and education and their deeds (237a)Virtueis here associated with education noble nature and freedom (239andashb) as well assōphrosynē (243a lsquomoderationrsquo) Plato identifies military with civic aretē by praisingthe virtue of the warriors as causing not only the victory but also the glory and goodreputation of the city (243cndashd) The concept of justice co-existing with virtue isstressed by Plato and is consistent with his philosophical approach of aretē as a sys-tem of values that sets limitations for the common good (247a)

The choice of a glorious death rather than a shameful life is also stressed inPlatorsquos Menexenus but focuses upon the consequences for the relatives friendsand citizens (246d)⁵sup2 it is striking however that the dead are described as braveand glorious but not immortal (247d)⁵sup3

Plato refers to funeral games as a part of the funeral together with the per-formance of the oration recalling the Homeric funeral games in honour of Patro-clus (Iliad 23) and enhancing the competitive nature of moral values praised forthe dead πρὸς δὲ τούτοις ἀγῶνας γυμνικοὺς καὶ ἱππικοὺς τιθεῖσα καὶ μουσικῆςπάσης καὶ ἀτεχνῶς τῶν μὲν τελευτησάντων ἐν κληρονόμου καὶ ὑέος (249b lsquoIn ad-dition the city enacts competitions in gymnastics horses and all sorts ofmusicrsquo)⁵⁴

h Demosthenes 60 Epitaphios

In 338 Demosthenes was chosen by the Athenians to deliver the funeral orationover those Athenians who had died fighting Philip II at the Battle at Chaeronea⁵⁵Despite the dispute about the authenticity of the funeral speech it cannot be dis-carded as a non-genuine work of Demosthenes on grounds of style andstructure⁵⁶ The epitaphios had to deal with a terrible defeat which involvedan enemy who was not Greek and signalled the beginning of the end for the in-dependent Greek city-states of the classical periods In this context the epainosof the dead is not limited to their achievements on the battlefield but expands totheir virtue in life Thus aretē is presented both as a co-operative value attachedto birth education way of life and justice (603) and as a competitive value tiedto manhood bravery self-sacrifice courage and success (6017ndash 18) The co-exis-

On the theme of a lsquoglorious deathrsquo cf above the discussion on the epitaphios attributed to Ly-sias For the immortality of the dead that compasses the living parents cf Lys Cf Th D Plu Dem For a detailed analysis of the authenticity of Demosthenes cf Worthington ndash

138 Eleni Volonaki

tence of excellence and justice is reflected in the praise of the ancestors as καλοῖςκἀγαθοῖς καὶ δικαιοτάτοις εἶναι (607)

Demosthenes departs from the tradition outlined in the previously describedspeeches by praising the men as children and adults before their service as sol-diers (6015ndash24) we can thus deduct the topoi paideia and epitedeusis Sōphro-synē (moderation) was the primary focus in the education of young Athenians⁵⁷and within this context Demosthenesrsquo definition of complete virtue is placedconsisting first of learning and then of bravery (6017) In order to preventfrom any bad feelings Demosthenes states that all those who die in battlehave no share in defeat but should all equally share in victory (6019) and accus-es the Theban commanders for their performance in the battle-field (6018 22)The epainos may be directed upon the present rather than the historical pastof the Athenians but Demosthenes connects the eulogy for both the ancestorsand the dead by depicting the latter related to their ancestors by birth (6012)Demosthenesrsquo epitaphios contains the sad immediacy of the recent defeat anda gap opens between the legendary past and the present⁵⁸

It is striking that Demosthenes states in the beginning of his funeral speechthat he will avoid using the myth or heroic element in his praise of the achieve-ments of the dead (609)

ἃ δὲ τῇ μὲν ἀξίᾳ τῶν ἔργων οὐδέν ἐστι τούτων ἐλάττω τῷ δ᾽ ὑπογυώτερ᾽ εἶναι τοῖς χρόνοιςοὔπω μεμυθολόγηται οὐδ᾽ εἰς τὴν ἡρωϊκὴν ἐπανῆκται τάξιν ταῦτ᾽ ἤδη λέξω

Now I shall speak of other achievements in no way inferior to those earlier deeds in worththough they have not yet been shaped into myth or elevated to the heroic rank as they aremore recent

However at a later point of his speech Demosthenes exemplifies the qualities ofcourage and self-sacrifice through mythical paradigms in particular he men-tions Acamas who had sailed for Troy for the sake of his mother Aethra(6029) Aethra is mentioned in Il 3144 but the rest of the story is not Homeric⁵⁹The distance from the Homeric tradition may reflect Demostenesrsquo own differen-tiation from earlier versions of the myth though his use of courage and self-sac-rifice for the depiction of the dead obviously derives from the heroic code

Aeschin ndash cf Herrman Loraux This Acamas is unknown to Homer though he mentions two other individuals of the samename It was later myths that told of the rescue of Aethra after the fall of Troy by her two grand-sons not sons Acamas and Demophon


A common place in the funeral oration is the freedom of the whole of Greeceas an achievement of the virtue of the dead⁶⁰ Demosthenes also stresses thistheme by identifying the virtue of the dead with the very life of Greece (6023)The reference to individual and common achievements is enhanced by the rhet-oric of common freedom as a kind of motivation for the choice of death (6028)

δεινὸν οὖν ἡγοῦντο τὴν ἐκείνου προδοῦναι προαίρεσιν καὶ τεθνάναι μᾶλλον ᾑροῦνθ᾽ ἢ κατα-λυομένης ταύτης παρὰ τοῖς Ἕλλησιν ζῆν φιλοψυχήσαντες

They regarded it therefore as a dreadful thing to betray the principles of that ancestor andpreferred to be dead rather than through love of life to survive among the Greeks with thisequality lost

Another common rhetorical theme in funeral orations is the choice of death aglorious good noble or just death⁶sup1 Demosthenes in particular praises nobledeath over disgraceful life (6026 καὶ θάνατον καλὸν εἵλοντο μᾶλλον ἢ βίοναἰσχρόν) Shame is an important quality closely tied with life as opposed to no-bility and death⁶sup2 Demosthenes underlines the factors that have contributed tothe choice of a noble death birth education habituation to high standards ofconduct and the underlying principles of the Athenian form of government(6027 ἃ μὲν οὖν κοινῇ πᾶσιν ὑπῆρχεν τοῖσδε τοῖς ἀνδράσιν εἰς τὸ καλῶς ἐθέλεινἀποθνῄσκειν εἴρηται γένος παιδεία χρηστῶν ἐπιτηδευμάτων συνήθεια τῆςὅλης πολιτείας ὑπόθεσις) Aristocratic background has thus been merged withthe civic values of Athenian democratic ideology to praise death

Two common themes closely associated with the good death in Homeric po-etry and funeral orations are the superiority of immortal glory over physicaldeath (6027) and the hysterophēmia brought upon the families of the dead to-gether with relief and happiness (6035ndash36)

In conclusion Demosthenes applies certain ideas and terminology for aretē no-bility shame immortality and glory from an aristocratic point of view he alsopraises the civic values of Athenian democratic ideology such as freedom and com-mon good moderation with education as a prerequisite to the actual display of brav-ery

cf D Lys Hyp cf Th Lys Pl Mxd This view is further reflected in the speakerrsquos statement that the dead considered either a lifeworthy of their heritage or a noble death ()

140 Eleni Volonaki

i Hypereides 6 Epitaphios fr 1b 1ndash43

Hypereidesrsquo epitaphios in the form in which it has been transmitted to us⁶sup3 wasdelivered at a burial ceremony in 322 BC at the end of the first season of the so-called Lamian war This war was largely successful for the Greeks though thegeneral Leosthenes a friend of Hypereides was killed The speech was presentedafter the initial victory in Boeotia the siege at Lamia and the defeat of Leonnatus(612ndash 14) Later that year the Athenian fleet suffered two major losses and thearmy was defeated soon afterwards The battle was a complete failure for theGreeks More than one thousand Athenians died and two thousand were takenhostage the rest of the Greeks also suffered losses As a result the Athenianshad to submit to Macedonian terms whereas Hypereides and Demosthenesthe leading opponents of Macedonian involvement in Greek affairs were con-demned to death by the Athenian dēmos⁶⁴ Hypereidesrsquo funeral oration high-lights the Athenian policy of resistance to Macedon⁶⁵

Hypereides gives more details about the occasion of death than the earlierspeakers He underlines that Leosthenes deserves more praise than his predeces-sors whereas earlier epitaphioi praise the deeds of the dead as equivalent tothose of their ancestors⁶⁶ Hypereides brings an innovation to the traditionalthemes and structure of the epitaphioi logoi by inserting a picture of thepresent⁶⁷ He emphasizes the virtues of the Athenians of the present wishingprobably to encourage and mobilize them to fight though the war was at theend unsuccessful

Despite the innovation in content and structure of his funeral oration Hy-pereides is employing aristocratic terms to describe the deeds of the fallen sol-diers such as megaloprepeia (1 οὔτε ἄνδρας ἀμείνους τῶν τετελευτηκότωνοὔτε πράξεις μεγαλοπρεπεστέρας) ndash a virtue that motivated Athenian aristocratsto participate in liturgies⁶⁸ Aretē is generally applied in the speech to describe

Hypereidesrsquo delivery of the funeral oration is attested by Diodorus of Sicily () PsPlu-tarch (Decem Oratorum Vitae f) and PsLonginus (De Subl) cf Herrman For details about the arrest and death of Demosthenes and Hypereides cf Plu Phoc Plu Dem ndash Herrman A description of the war in which the men commemorated in the epitaphios died is uncom-mon in funeral speeches let alone the focus so exclusively on one person For the unusual el-ement of narrative cf Ziolkowski Herrman Loraux Herrman


purely military excellence and is used in the plural to denote specific virtuousaccomplishments on the battlefield (3)

ἄξιον δέ ἐστιν ἐπαινεῖν τὴν μὲν πόλιν ἡμῶν τῆς προαιρέσεως ἕνεκεν τὸ προελέσθαι ὅμοια καὶἔτι σεμνότερα καὶ καλλίω τῶν πρότερον αὐτῇ πεπραγμένων τοὺς δὲ τετελευτηκότας τῆς ἀν-δρείας τῆς ἐν τῷ πολέμῳ τὸ μὴ καταισχῦναι τὰς τῶν προγόνων ἀρετάς

Our city is worthy of praise for the choice it made a policy that suited and even surpassed theproud and noble deeds it accomplished in the past the dead men deserve praise for theircourage in battle courage that did not disgrace the valour of their ancestors

Similarly to the other funeral orations⁶⁹ Hypereides pairs intellectual ability andmartial courage As Loraux (1986 109ndash 10) has argued Hypereides here followsa time-honoured definition of aretē and this kind of narrow conception may be areaction against current trends in civic funeral orations in which aretē is equa-ted with other qualities more importantly sōphrosynē (lsquomoderationrsquo) Hyper-eides however later states that the soldiers as children have learned qualitiessuch as sōphrosynē and dikaiosynē (lsquojusticersquo) and when they went to war theydemonstrated their military skill (28 τότε μὲν γὰρ παῖδες ὄντες ἄφρονες ἦσαννῦν δ᾽ ἄνδρες ἀγαθοὶ γεγόνασιν)⁷⁰ Education (paideia) was essential to the up-bringing of the soldiers in order to demonstrate their military excellence andbravery in war⁷sup1 A common honourific phrase describing soldiersrsquo death in fu-neral orations and other patriotic literature is employed here (28) as well as insect8 (ἵνα ἄνδρες ἀγαθοὶ γένωνται) Hypereides contrasts the heroic death of the sol-diers with their childhood and presents their death on the battlefield as the de-cisive moment of their adulthood⁷sup2

For the praise of victory Hypereides uses the verb epainein whereas for thepraise of the virtue of Leosthenes and his soldiers he uses the verb egkōmiazeinThe repeated usage of egkōmion in Hypereidesrsquo funeral oration may reflect thedevelopment of the prose genre of egkōmia praising contemporary individualsand in this case Leosthenes⁷sup3

The slogan lsquofreedom for the Greeksrsquo ndasha commonplace in the funeral orationmdashdepicts the Greek alliance as a kind of reincarnation of the Greek unification

Th D For the use of aretē to denote military excellence and echo the description of the Marathonbattle cf Hyp For the interest in the education of the soldiers as reflecting contemporary institutional re-forms in mid-fourth century Athens such as the ephēbeia cf Herrman Ibid According to Arist Rh bndash the distinction between the two terms corresponds to thecontrast between virtue (epainos) and accomplishment (egkōmion) cf Herrman ndash

142 Eleni Volonaki

against the Persians in 480479 BC (16 οἳ τὰς ἑαυτῶν ψυχὰς ἔδωκαν ὑπὲρ τῆς τῶνἙλλήνων ἐλευθερίας) The choice of death is presented as associated with theconcept of freedom (24 οἵτινες θνητοῦ σώματος ἀθάνατον δόξαν ἐκτήσαντο καὶδιὰ τὴν ἰδίαν ἀρετὴν τὴν κοινὴν ἐλευθερίαν τοῖς Ἕλλησιν ἐβεβαίωσαν)This pas-sage distinguishes the soldiers from the Athenian citizens whereas in sect5 (τοῖςδὲ ἰδίοις κινδύνοις καὶ δαπάναις κοινὴν ἄδειαν τοῖς Ἕλλησιν παρασκευάζουσα)and in sect19 (καὶ τὴν μὲν ἐλευθερίαν εἰς τὸ κοινὸν πᾶσιν κατέθεσαν) a distinctionis made between Athens as a collective whole and the rest of Greece Immortality(27) and glory (42) are themes closely tied with the choice of death

A new element in Hypereidesrsquo approach of aretē is the andragathia (29 μνημο-νευτοὺς διὰ ἀνδραγαθίαν γεγονέναι 40 ὑπερβαλλούσης δὲ ἀρετῆς καὶ ἀνδραγαθίαςτῆς ἐν τοῖς κινδύνοις) In his discussion of the development of the concept of andra-gathia in the late fifth centuryWhitehead (1993 57ndash62) concludes that andragathiapraised men for lsquowhat they had done rather than who they werersquo and was oftenused to describe military valour or more specifically death on the battlefield⁷⁴ Hy-pereides links the two terms aretē and andragathia to denote both the qualities ac-quired through education as well as the deeds or the moment of death The combi-nation of the two concepts may reflect Hypereidesrsquo use of traditional and innovativeelements in his funeral as well as the development of the Athenian democratic andcivic ideology in the fourth century

Conclusion

Funeral orations display commonplaces in the praise of the dead refiguring theHomeric heroic code either in the use of terminology or in content Homeric aretēas a competitive value denoting success on the battlefield and purely military ex-cellence is prominent in the praise of funeral orations In this context the choiceof a noble glorious and immortal death of the hero is widely employed in funer-al oration to depict the bravery and glory of the Athenian warriors and citizens⁷⁵in effect heroic fame and immortality are frequently used for the praise of thedead both ancestors and current soldiers⁷⁶

Orators may use mythical paradigms in their epainos of the dead but theyappear to draw a line in rejecting the poetic epainos they focus on the history

For the use of andragathia in decrees awarding Athenian citizenship to foreigners cf Kap-paris ndash Th Lys Pl Mx d Hyp Th Lys Pl Mx c d d D


of Athens and their commendation is based upon the Athenian and civic iden-tity of the dead For Pericles as well as the other orators Athens was a model ofpolitical and military aretē Even when the funeral speech serves a Panhellenicpropaganda this is apparently linked with Athenian nationalism (eg Lys 247)the epitaphioi lay claim on the honour of the warriors for the salvation and free-dom of Greece⁷⁷

New civic and political qualities develop in the praise of funeral orationthroughout the fifth and fourth centuries in relation with the changes of theAthenian constitution Sōphrosynē and education are central to the acquisitionof virtue as well as the subsequent display of bravery and courage in life andwar in adulthood Dikaiosynē is also fundamental to the description of aretēand freedom of the city and the whole of Greece The pair of individual and com-mon achievements is stressed in funeral orations to show the superiority of thecity of Athens but also its contribution to the common good of the rest of Greece

Our close examination of the surviving funeral orations dating from the sec-ond half of the fifth century until the end of the fourth century reflects on theone hand a common praise of both moral and civic values and on the otherhand a development in structure and content of the rhetoric of praise influenc-ing respectively the didactic purpose of the funeral oration Thucydidesrsquo funeraloration focuses on the competitive civic aretē that brings success and superiorityas indicative of the Athenian democratic ideology Gorgias identifies moral andcivic values in the context of excellence in all kinds of achievements Lysias com-bines the heroic and patriotic element in the praise of citizens both in war andlife he also stresses the importance of the ancestorsrsquo virtue for justice and de-mocracy Platorsquos funeral oration emphasizes the significance of dikaiosynē (lsquojus-ticersquo) and sōphrosynē (lsquomoderationrsquo) in the education of the Athenian citizensThe role of education to the acquisition of aretē is further explored and devel-oped in the last two funeral orations which were the only two speeches actuallydelivered in the last half of the fourth century BC It is to be noted that both ora-tions by Demosthenes and Hypereides were performed on occasions of Atheniandefeat Hence one can notice a shift in the emphasis from the praise of the pastto the praise of the present Demosthenesrsquo praise focuses on the virtues in pres-ent life referring back to the childhood of the Athenian citizens Hypereidesplayed a significant role to the change of epainos of the virtues of the wholebody of the soldiers to an egkōmion of an individual Although he draws on ar-istocratic terminology and views he gives more details on the moment of death

Ibid

144 Eleni Volonaki

creating thus a picture of the present Aretē is complemented and closely tiedwith andragathia

On balance civic aretē is mainly honoured in public commemoration in fifthand fourth-century funeral orations which assumed their educative function bylinking the present of Athens to its past and future The Homeric hero is agathosbut the dead praised in the funeral oration is described as agathos gignesthaiThe term agathos gignesthai implies that the citizenrsquos aretē is not an immanentquality in a city a man must become anēr agathos he is not agathos by essenceIn contrast to the epic praise of individuality the funeral oration celebrates theanonymous group No one receives the honour of a special mention with the ex-ception of the general Leosthenes praised by Hypereides who is neverthelesstaken to represent the whole group


Ioannis Perysinakis

The Ancient Quarrel between Philosophyand Poetry Platorsquos Hippias Minor

a The Dialogue

In the Hippias Minor Hippias has just delivered a public lecture on Homer (epideix-is) and Socrates is invited by Eudicus to comment on it Hippiasrsquo position is thatAchilles is ἀληθής τε καὶ ἁπλοῦς (lsquotrue and simplersquo) while Odysseus is πολύτροπόςτε καὶ ψευδὴς (lsquoresourceful and falsersquo) The discussion originates in Iliad 9308ndash13where Achilles addresses Odysseus after the latterrsquos speech in the Embassy lsquoWith-out consideration for you I must make my answer [hellip] For as I detest the gates ofHades I detest that man who hides one thing in his mind and says anotherrsquosup1The conclusion in the first section (363a1ndash369b7) is that the true man and thefalse man are the same and therefore Achilles and Odysseus are the same Beforethat it had been accepted that lsquothe false man is the man with the power ability andthe wisdom to be false in the matters in which he is falsersquo (lsquothe false is he who hasthe wisdom and the power to speak falselyrsquo) lsquothe true man is the man with thepower ability and wisdom to speak truthfullyrsquo and lsquothe expert is ἄριστος in the mat-ters he is most capable and wisest of menrsquo

In the second section (up to 373c) Hippias denies the conclusion they havereached and Socrates quotes several Homeric passages Iliad 9312ndash13 9357ndash63Achillesrsquo first answer to Odysseus (lsquotomorrow you will see early in the morningmy ships sailing over the fishy Hellespont and on the third day I shall reach fertilePhthiarsquo) and 1169ndash71 (lsquoNow I am returning to Phthiarsquo) as well as 9650ndash55Achillesrsquo third answer to Ajax (lsquoI shall not think again of the bloody fighting untilsuch time as the son of wise Priamhellip comeshellip to the ships of the Myrmidons andtheir sheltersrsquo) All these passages he claims support the conclusion they cameto and show that Achilles is resourceful and false Hippias argues that Achillesacts involuntarily induced by the kindness of his heart (371e5ff) but this seemsto lead to the conclusion that those who voluntarily deceive (371e7ndash8) are betterthan those who do so involuntarily Hippias denies this since he finds it incredibleto think that people voluntarily doing wrong (371e7ndash8) could be better than thoseinvoluntarily doing so

The translation of the Iliadic passages is based on Lattimore with adjustments

In the third section (up to the end) Socrates and Hippias consider whether peo-ple voluntarily or involuntarily doing wrong or failing (ἁμαρτάνειν) are better in eachin a long series of human activities and finally in the area of justicemdashjustice beingboth power and science and therefore the soul which has the greater power is alsothe more just and the wiser soul will be the juster soul (375d7ff) Their conclusionalways seems to be that the one voluntarily lsquodoing badrsquo in an area is better and infact that the person who voluntarily fails and voluntarily does shameful and unjustthings would have to be the good person if such a good person even exists(376b5ndash6) Both Socrates and Hippias deny the conclusion but neither is able toexplain how they have gone wrong and so the dialogue ends without their beingable to come to a satisfactory conclusion

b Homer Iliad 9

According to Socrates Achilles lsquodares to contradict himself in front of Odysseuswho does not notice it he does not appear to have said anything to him whichwould indicate that he noticed his falsehoodrsquo (371a trans Jowett 19534 with ad-justments) It has been said that we are never closer to Plato as a writer thanwhen we are reading Plato readingsup2

Analyzing Achillesrsquo evolution as a hero in the ninth book of the Iliad CHWhitmansup3 finds that the embassy does not fail entirely to move Achilles andthat his rejection of Agamemnonrsquos offer is not based upon mere sulky passionbut upon the half-realized inward conception of honourWhen Odysseus has fin-ished his speech Achilles in his final words to him announces that lsquotomorrow[hellip] you will see if you wish and if it concerns you my ships at early dawn sailingover Hellespont [hellip] on the third day thereafter we might reach generous Phthiarsquo(357ndash63) After the long emotional speech of Phoenix Achilles is less sure and inhis final words to Phoenix he says lsquowe shall decide tomorrow as dawn showswhether to go back home again or stay herersquo (618ndash 19) Finally after the shortand straight targeted speech of Ajax Achilles says nothing about going homebut he announces that lsquoI shall not think again of bloody war until such timeas [hellip] Hector comes to the ships of the Myrmidons [hellip] But around my own shel-ter I think and beside my black ship Hector will be held though being eager forbattlersquo (650ndash55) Achillesrsquo reply to fight only when the fire reached his own shipsconstitutes the active terms in which he has framed the absolute for himself This

OrsquoConnor Whitman ndash Perysinakis


is the heroic paradigm which he embraced from the story of Meleager Thesethree points in Achillesrsquo replies to the envoys and to Phoenix have alreadysince antiquity been recognized as three stages of Achillesrsquo decision makingBut scholars have failed to see a gradual withdrawal in Achillesrsquo refusal to par-ticipate in the war and its function

When the envoys go back at the end of the ninth book Odysseus reportsonly Achillesrsquo reply to him and that he threatened to go home and hence thewhole venture seems to have failed Odysseus the great diplomat reportsAchillesrsquo position quite erroneously for dramatic reasons and for the sake ofthe plot This inconsistency has been observed as early as the scholia The strat-egy of the Embassy is consumed the Achaeans are found in a worse positionthan before and Achilles is going to meet his fate

c Hippias Minor

(i) Literature on the Hippias Minor

Many scholars have written papers on the Hippias Minor (Weiss 1981 Mulhern1968 Hoerber 1962 Phillips 1987 Zembaty 1989 Leacutevystone 2005 Balaban2011 Lampert 2002 Blundell 1992 Rudolph 2010) and others have occasionallyreferred to the dialogue (Taylor 1926 Guthrie 1962ndash 1981 IV 191ndash99Vlastos 1991Friedlaumlnder 1964 Blondell 2002 Hobbs 2000 Cormack 2006 see recently Des-treacutee Herrmann (eds) 2011 and on Platorsquos response to poetry from the viewpointof classical reception theory see Emlyn-Jones 2008)

In more specific terms Vlastos believes that Plato presents in the HippiasMinor the historical Socrates in an authentic situation of confession of uncertain-ty and vacillation unparalleled in the elenctic dialogues accepting in this wayindirectly the view alluded to in the second part of his additional note lsquoThe Hip-pias Minor-Sophistry or Perplexityrsquo⁴

Behind the sudden uncertainty of Socrates lsquoif there be such a manrsquo (376b)and his refusal to be reconciled with the necessary conclusion what followsfrom our argument and the final aporia of the dialogue stands the entire solu-tion the idea of good in which the whole Platonic belief in the necessity of theknowledge of bad and good has been invested⁵

Vlastos ndash esp ndash Skouteropoulos


In Mulhernrsquos terms the argument fails because of a confusion of dynamis-terms ie terms which denote ability and tropos-terms ie terms which denotetypical behaviour Thus the statement that lsquothose who do wrong voluntarily arebetterrsquo may mean either of two things those who have it in their power to dowrong are better or those who normally wish or desire to do wrong are betterOf course in the first case lsquobetterrsquo means lsquogood at somethingrsquo while in the sec-ond lsquobetterrsquo means lsquomorally goodrsquo⁶ Mulhernrsquos starting point was Spraguersquosmonograph⁷ which drew attention to the fact that large parts of the argumentof Platorsquos Hippias Minor turn on the equivocal use of lsquowilinessrsquo (for both lsquoshifti-nessrsquo and lsquointellectual abilityrsquo) lsquopowerrsquo (for both lsquopower for goodrsquo and lsquopower forevilrsquo) lsquogoodrsquo (for both lsquogood at somethingrsquo and lsquomorally goodrsquo) and lsquovoluntaryrsquo(for both lsquowhat is in our powerrsquo and lsquowhat we normally wish or desirersquo)

Roslyn Weissrsquos interpretation⁸ constitutes an attempt to maintain the integ-rity of the dialogue by viewing all its parts as related to a single topic who is thetruly superior man She concludes that the ἀγαθός of the Hippias Minor is thusnot the standard ἀγαθός who is judged on the basis of his actions Since theagent in this dialogue is judged solely on the basis of his skill things may besaid with impunity about this man that could not be said so freely about the or-dinary ἀγαθόςThe arguments of both stage I and III of the dialogue go no furtherthan to assert that the better man in all τέχναι and ἐπιστῆμαι is the one who isδυνατός and σοφόςWe need only bear in mind that the ἀγαθός here is the manskilled at justicemdashnot lsquothe just manrsquo

Hoerber argues that it is clear from several aspects that Plato is challenginghis readers to work out a solution to the perplexing propositions of the HippiasMinor especially since Socrates himself admits perplexity both in the course ofthe discussion and at the conclusion of the dialogue (372dndashe 376bndashc) Anotherwarning Plato presents to the reader concerning the argumentation which is notto be taken as final is the statement of Socrates on the concluding page εἴπερ τίςἐστιν οὗτος (376b) for Plato employs such a phrase in other dialogues (cf Euthy-phro 8e Gorgias 480e) to show his personal disagreement The doublets and pro-fessed confusion within the dialogue seem to be dramatic clues pointing thereader to two famous propositions of Socrates that virtue is knowledge andthat no one does wrong voluntarily The dramatic technique of the dialogue fi-nally is manifest from the play on the word πολύτροπος The term first becomesprominent in the discussion of the Homeric characters Odysseus and Achilles

Mulhern Sprague ndashndash Weiss


then in the sense of clever or skillful the adjective becomes the chief character-istic of the polymath Hippias and at the conclusion of the dialogue it is Socrateswho is πολύτροπος⁹

Similarly Cormack suggests that instead of interpreting the Hippias Minor asPlatorsquos criticism of the craft analogy and the earlier Socratic method of doingphilosophy one should treat the ending of the dialogue as a puzzle that Platohas left to be worked out by the readersup1⁰

The word polytropia is ambiguous according to Antisthenes it means either lsquodi-versity of styles and discoursesrsquo or lsquodiversity of dispositions characters or soulsrsquo(fr 51 Caizzi) Leacutevystone argued that the same distinction is implicitly at work in Pla-torsquos Hippias Minor where Socrates defends Odysseusrsquo polytropia against the pseudo-lsquosimplicityrsquo of Hippiasrsquo favourite hero Achilles However whereas Antisthenes triesto clarify these different meanings Platorsquos Socrates exploits the ambiguity to con-fuse his interlocutor Such a distinction sheds a new light on the Hippias MinorOdysseus is polytropos in the first positive sense while the simplicity of Achillesshould be understood as a bad kind of polytropia It provides an explanation forthe first paradoxical thesis of the dialogue that he who voluntary deceives is betterthan he who errs for falsehood is in one case only in wordswhile in the other it isfalsehood in the soul itself It is thus proposed that Odysseusrsquo skill in adapting hislogos to his hearers was probably a model for Socrates himself The analogy betweenthe hero and Socrates is especially clear in Platorsquos dialogues which show the phi-losopher in an Odyssey for knowledgesup1sup1

Blondell uses the Hippias Minor to show how Plato puts characterization towork in various ways She chose as she says this dialogue as exemplary notonly because of its elenctic character and its vividly characterized participantsbut also because of its concern on the discursive level with the educational valueof traditional literary figuressup1sup2

Hobbs argues that the Apology Hippias Major and Hippias Minor show un-equivocally that the old Homeric heroes like Achilles and Odysseus are still pow-erful influences in classical Athens and that they also show that reflection onthe heroes and their code of conduct raises ethical and psychological issues ofthe greatest importancesup1sup3

Hoerber ndash passim Cormack Leacutevystone Blondell ndash especially the sections lsquoHippias and Homerrsquo (ndash) and lsquoRewrit-ing Homerrsquo (ndash) Hobbs


After reviewing Weissrsquos position Jane Zembatty argues that Socratesrsquo perplexityin the dialogue should not be seen merely as an ironic ploy Rather it should beseen as reflecting Platorsquos awareness of the problems endemic to the Socratic attemptto define virtue simply in terms of some characteristic of the agent psychēsup1⁴

Arguing that liars are better than the unenlightened Socrates concludes thatthere are no liars Instead there are only those who know and those who do notThe unenlightened cannot lie and alien volitions desires or emotions are un-likely to mislead and deceive those who know ie the wisesup1⁵

Why does Socrates argue for the superiority of Odysseus Why does he insist ona repellant conclusion And why does he say he vacillates The answer to thesequestions points to an essential element of Socratesrsquo political philosophysup1⁶

Blundellrsquos reading of the Hippias Minor argues first that Socratic argument isintrinsically ad hominem rather than a preliminary sketch for a universal moraltheory second that the dialogues must be situated in their local context (in thiscase the Hippias Minor needs to be seen as Platorsquos response to the educationalprogrammes of Homerists and Sophists) and third that it is necessary both toconsider the possibility that weak Socratic argument is an intrinsic part of thedesign of the dialogue rather than Platorsquos oversight and to recognize that this un-avoidable question can never be resolved with absolute certaintysup1⁷

For Rudolph finding Hippias incompetent as a Homeric interpreter Socratestakes up the task of interpreting the poetic basis for Hippiasrsquo moral position Byso doing he makes a larger point that the liar and the truth-teller are the sameman or that unintentional wrongdoers are worse than deliberate wrongdoers Byre-appropriating the language of rhapsody Socrates subverts the Homeric contentin a way that it is reminiscent of Platorsquos Ion She concludes that by mastering therhapsodic skill Plato shows that the supposedly authoritative interpretations ofHomer lead to moral dilemmas from which even Socratic dialectic cannot free ussup1⁸

(ii) My suggestion

According to Aristotlersquos Metaphysics (995a7ndash8) there are people who will takeseriously the arguments of a speaker (including those of a philosopher) only ifa poet can be cited as a witness in support of them Hippias uses Homer to sup-

Zembatty Balaban Lampert Blundell Rudolph


port his arguments Socrates does the same for his purposes The Hippias Minoris concerned on the discursive level with the educational value of traditional lit-erary figures Plato has to contend not only against the mythos of poetry but alsoagainst the power of rhetoric

The following interpretation constitutes an attempt to discover unnoticedthreads of thought in the Hippias Minor especially the transformation of Homer-ic moral values and political behaviour that Plato is making in his dialogues theformation of some of Socratesrsquo (or Platorsquos) main principles and propositions andthe relationship of thought with other dialogues

In composing the Hippias Minor Platorsquos aim seems to be twofold first to deter-mine what is agathos and the meaning of aretē and second to blame poetry forusing plots and mimēsis by means of which it cannot educate the children onaretē Plato aimed at subjecting mythos to logos That the conclusion lsquomust followfrom our argumentrsquo (ek tou logou) is part of the same strategy lsquoreason proves or per-suadesrsquo (logos airei) is a standard expression in Plato (R 604c 607b Lg 663d)Achilles lsquothe best of the Achaeansrsquo cannot behave in the way he does in theIliad as it is described apart from the Hippias Minor in the Republic (336e 390e391c 386c 388a 516d but cf Apol 28c) and other dialogues (Lg 628cd 728a) Jus-tice is the final point in the Hippias Minor and constitutes the main subject of theRepublic the main themes of the dialogue are also addressed in the Apology Prota-goras Menon and the first book of the Republic Hippias is treated (and mistreated)in a dramatic way (as often with other Platonic dialogues) he is one of the lsquodramatispersonaersquo Socratesrsquo intrusion into the sophistsrsquo arena could be described as a cri-tique of the Athenian performance culture and was itself a drama in which Socra-tesrsquo lsquoperformance philosophyrsquo gave conviction to Platorsquos critique of the institutions ofhis polis and force to his lsquoalternative dramatic stagersquo The Platonic dialogues consti-tute lsquometatheatrical prose dramasrsquoWhat we hear are philosophical voices in actiona poetic and philosophic call to the philosophic life In Socratesrsquo interlocutions withthe sophists Plato is dramatizing the reception and the contest of cultural values asa physical realitysup1⁹ The absence of Plato himself either as author or as character inhis dialogues strengthens more than anything else the generic link between the dia-logues and Athenian dramamdashand validates ironically Socratesrsquo complaints (or Pla-torsquos himself) about the poets Finally in the Hippias Minor we have a chapter in the

Emlyn-Jones Cf also Goldhillvon Reden Ferrari The term lsquometatheatrical prose dramasrsquo is adopted by Charalabopoulos esp ndashFor other explanations why Plato wrote dialogues cf Griswold Kahn and ch


history of the ancient quarrel between philosophy and poetry (on which I am cur-rently working)mdashwithout offering a definition of the quarrel or further chapterssup2⁰

d Republic mythos (lsquoplotrsquo) and mimēsisThe verb used for Homer in the Hippias Minor and the Republic is poiei pepoiēkenaipepoiēken pepoiētai and it is the verb which denotes poetry from the fifth centuryBC onwards The poetrsquos own voice can be heard in and through all the elements ofhis poem it is no more than a technical distinction whether we take him to be lsquomak-ingrsquo his characters actspeak in certain ways or lsquospeakingrsquo himselfsup2sup1 But the verbpoiein serves to convey implicit responsibility in such passages as the followingfrom the Republic and the Hippias Minor and this is what Plato criticizes

Homer and the poets are banished from the city both on the basis of theirmythos (plots and myths) and the mimēsis which they employ Plato believedthat one becomes the kind of person one is portraying and this led to the con-clusion that drama has a bad moral and psychological effect on performers whoin their turn pass the influence on to their audience (cf Ion 535d) The poet andlater the recipient assimilates himself to the figures of poetry The battle of thegods that Homer made (pepoiēken) must not be admitted into the city lsquoA childcannot distinguish what is and what is not allegory and the ideas he takes inat that age are likely to become indelibly fixed for this reason it is very impor-tant to see that the first stories he hears should be composed to produce the bestpossible effect on his character (ὅτι κάλλιστα μεμυθολογημένα πρὸς ἀρετήν)rsquo (R378dndashe trans Cornford 1941 with adjustments) Socrates and Adeimantus willnot let the guardians believe that Achilles who was the son of a goddess andof the wise Peleus and the pupil of the sage Chiron was so disordered thathis heart was a prey to two contrary maladies mean covetousness and arrogantcontempt of gods and men (R 391c cf also R 388a 516d Hippias Minor 371d)Needless to say that there is neither covetousness nor arrogant contempt on thepart of Achilles it is a matter of honour and the plot of the Iliad which Platocriticizes The truth-content of myths and stories must be judged principally interms of their implicit logos Achillesrsquo character is also rejected because it is as-

Cf Most ndash This is a wide theme and I am mentioning only the monographsunder the same or similar title Barfield Edmundson Gould Kannicht Levin Rosen Naddaff Ramphos To these I must add the seminalstudy by Nightingale which reassesses Platorsquos quarrel with poetry and rhetoric as well asthe debt he owes to these lsquounphilosophicalrsquo adversaries Cf Halliwell


sociated with grief and lamentation both in his first appearance in book two(383b) and in the final book of the Republic (605dndashe) His lamentation posesa great threat to the well-being of the citizens of Platorsquos ideal state Homer trag-edy lamentation and lsquowomanishrsquo behaviour are all to be eliminated from thelives of the guardians as from the city as a whole Some themes of Platorsquos cri-tique of poetry are already prefigured in the first and second book of the Repub-lic as the first definition of justice by Simonides (331dndashe) and Cephalusrsquo wordsabout old age and the Underworld which are echoed in the view that the godscan be propitiated (364cndashd 365e)sup2sup2

Besides falsehood and deceptiveness are two main points of the HippiasMinor they must be connected to Platorsquos arguments on Greek poetry in the Re-public lsquoTo be deceived about the truth of things and so to be blindly ignorantand harbour untruth in the soul is what all men would least of all accept False-hood in that case is abhorred above everythingrsquo Therefore lsquothis ignorance in thesoul of the man deceived is what really deserves to be called the true falsehoodrsquo(382b trans Cornford 1941 with adjustments) But since we do not know thetruth about events in the past by making something as close as possible tothe truth we make it useful (382d) Deceptiveness of poetry is the subject ofthe tenth book of the Republicsup2sup3

Where Homer is delivering a speech in character he tries to make his mannerresemble that of the person he has introduced as speaker In the Embassy sceneHomer speaks in the character of the participating persons and tries to make usfeel that the words come not from him but from the speakers Homer does notspeak in his own person but he makes Odysseus Phoenix Ajax and Achillesspeak each in his own character (R 393) Plato is blaming Homer for the verypoint for which Aristotle praises him (Poet 1460a5ndash11) after a short proem he rep-resents his characters as speaking and acting Homer is praised because his poemshave so little narrative and so much speech or because only in the proems he speaksin his own voicesup2⁴ Plato criticizes Homer for speaking in the character of Chryses andtries to make us feel that the words come not from Homer but from an aged priest

Perysinakis ndash Michelakis n and n Murray ndash Hobbs ndash Janaway ndash and ndash Halliwell ndash Cf Gill and Belfiore Halliwell ndash Belfiore first suggested that in Rd Plato echoes Hes Th and Od Plato concludes that the poet creates onlylsquolies unlike the truthrsquo not lsquolies like the truthrsquo Partee ndash On this point cf the discussion in De Jong ndash For poetic imitation in R cfDyson


The metaphysical argument of the tenth book on poetry and mimēsis (in par-ticular 598dndash599e) is an expansion of the point adumbrated in the third (393a)The tragic poets and their master Homer we are told understand not only alltechnical matters but also all about goodness and badness and about thegods lsquofor a good poet must understand the issues he writes about if his writingis to be successful otherwise he could not write about themrsquo (598e) The tragicpoet as well as the other poets since he is a representer comes third fromthe king and the truth (597e) Aretē retains much of its Homeric sense butwith a Platonic twist Homer sings the claims of the agathos lsquoto be the bravestrsquoand lsquothe lays of menrsquo Plato accepts the traditional view that tragic poetry is con-cerned with aretē in the sense of the important and memorable actions recordedby the singers of the glorious deeds of men However he insists that becausearetē depends on use true aretē requires craft knowledge of what is useful(601d)sup2⁵ The poet or the singer has no knowledge of a craft he is possessedby divine portion (luck) and power (Ion 534c) Aretē in Plato refers to theorder in the soul in which each of the parts of the soul does its own job as aruler or subject (443b 444dndashe) agathos politēs is one who knows both howto govern and to be governed in accordance with dikē (Lg 643e)

The moral point is clear if the chief purpose of representation is to create animpression then the representer does not have to know about the moral value ofhis work (R 599d) He lacks knowledge and knowledge is always in some senseknowledge of goodness lsquoImitative poetry copies appearances of human affairsand of human excellence in particular But these appearances differ drasticallyfrom reality being varied and contradictory instead of stable and uniform the ap-parently excellent character is in fact a model of vicersquosup2⁶ Poetry corrupts because it isa form of imitation copying appearances instead of reality The poet imitates eidolaof excellence instead of genuine excellence this is to say that the poet imitates ap-parently excellent characters and actions that is whichever characters and actionsappear excellent to the ignorant many The poet creates the illusion of forms basedon the deceptions of the material world and the flattery of the lower part of the soulThus mimetic art encourages the soul to rest content with the shadow world of thebecoming Platorsquos argument against poetry involves firstly the opposition of reasonto the irrational parts of the soul secondly it involves the opposition between twoaspects of reasoningwhich is involved in explaining why one can be tempted to act

Cf Belfiore ndash Woodruff ndash Janaway ndash Moss and passim Cf Urmson Janaway ndash esp ndash Marusic esp ndash


even on what one knows not to be correct Besides Platorsquos repudiation of the tragicis a vital dimension of his own philosophysup2⁷

Therefore Plato banishes Achilles and Homer because in his characterAchilles appears to lie Homer makes his characters speak in accordance withthe plot and for the dramatic purposes of the IliadWe must keep in mind thataccording to Aristotle the poet must be a maker of plots (Poet 1451b28ndash9 cfPl Phd 61b where mythos has a different meaning) Achilles lsquowho was theson of a goddess and of the wise Peleus and the pupil of the sage Chironrsquoand in the main lsquothe best (ἄριστος) of the Achaeansrsquo cannot behave in thisway and Homer must not make him false The acceptable poet is described aslsquothe unmixed imitator of the good manrsquo and as lsquoone who will imitate for usthe speech of the good manrsquo (397d 398b) Achilles does not meet the presuppo-sitions Plot mimēsis virtue (aretē) and agathos falsehood and deceptivenessall of them are questioned in the Republic and Platorsquos other dialogues and allof them are found in the Hippias Minor Of course Achillesrsquo replies serve theplot of the epic Homer makes Achilles speak in his own dramatic characterbut Plato criticizes this And since he is aristos it is time (Plato seems to say)to find out what aristos means and to transform the traditional aretē in termsof morals As Diotima says in the Symposium lsquoif someone got to see the beautifulitself only then will it become possible for him to give birth not to images of vir-tue but to true virtuersquo (211endash 12a) lsquoIf we recall that in the Republic Plato appliesthe phrase ldquoimages of virtuerdquo to poets a particular contrast suggests itselfWhilethe poet makes only images and understands only images the philosopher whostrives for and encounters the eternal unchanging beauty can bring genuinegoods into the world because he understands what virtue isrsquosup2⁸

e Agathos-aretēThroughout the dialogue Achilles is called ἀμείνων or ἄριστος at the beginningof their conversation Socrates asks Hippias lsquoin what particularrsquo he thinks Achillesis ἀμείνων (364d) The first thing to be noticed therefore is that Plato continuesthe particularization of aretē begun already in Homer with expressions such aslsquogood in battle-cryrsquo the standard meaning of aretē is excellence of every kind Asecond observation is the agreement between Socrates and Hippias the wisest

Nehamas cf Murdoch ndash Halliwell Lear Annas ( ndash ndash and Annas ) criticizes Plato for his account of poetry and argues for the dif-ferences between the third and the tenth book of the Republic Janaway Janaway ndash


and the ablest of men is also the best (ἄριστος) in these matters (366d) whichmeans that wisdom science is identified with aretē ie aretē is particularizedin wisdom and dynamis (lsquoabilityrsquo) is also identified with aretē Dynamis gener-ally speaking is the presupposition of excellencearetē In the Republic Platospeaks of the power and capacity of the crafts or of the limbs of the body iethe specific virtue (oikeia aretē) (346a 353bndashc 433d)

In the first part of the dialogue it has been accepted that lsquothe false are theywho have the wisdom and the power to speak falselyrsquo (366b) in the secondpart that lsquothe voluntary liars are better than the involuntaryrsquo (371e) in the thirdpart lsquobetter are those who err voluntarilyrsquo (373c) and the conclusion is that theone voluntarily lsquodoing badrsquo in an area is better and in fact that the person whovoluntarily fails and voluntarily does shameful and unjust things would have tobe the good person if such a good person even exists (376b5ndash6) In fact whatis under discussion in these judgments is the old Socratic dictum lsquono one doeswrong voluntarilyrsquo (or lsquono one wishes evilrsquo) and lsquovirtue is knowledgersquo the manwho errs involuntarily lacks knowledge and is at a disadvantage The agathos isthe man who errs voluntarily while the kakos errs involuntarily and does wrongagainst his own will the kakoswho errs involuntarily has no knowledge and there-fore he is not kakos voluntarily It is a typical feature of the traditional agathos todo wrong voluntarily and of the traditional kakos to do wrong involuntarily Thisstatement mirrors the historical situation for the traditional agathos who is in aposition to do wrong against the kakos and to fall into hybris This is lsquothe mightis rightrsquo principle of the agathos The runner who runs slowly voluntarily is better(373d) because he has both the ability and the knowledge to run quickly if he de-cides to do so The agathos has the ability to do wrong because he has the dyna-mis ability which is an element of aretē It has been shown that lsquothe soul whichhas the greater power (dynamis) and wisdom (sophia) is betterrsquo (375e) because theformer is the presupposition of aretē and the latter is (part of the) aretē itselfsup2⁹ Athird doctrine lsquoI neither know nor think that I knowrsquo (Ap 21d 29andashb cfHpMa 298c) related to Socratesrsquo ignorance and method may be found in the dia-logue he who knows the truth can deceive better than he who does not and hewho deceives voluntarily (as Socrates does) is better than he who does so involun-tarily In the Hippias Minor as in other Platonic dialogues we have to know every

Aristotle criticizes Socratesrsquo doctrine that virtue is knowledge in the seventh book of the EN(b ndashb) At the end of the sixth he says epigrammatically lsquoSocrates then thoughtthat the virtues are instances of reason because he thought that they are all instances of knowl-edgeWe on the other hand think that they involve reasonrsquo (bndash trans Irwin

with adjustments) Cf Guthrie ndash III ndash


time whether Plato uses agathos in the traditional political and social meaning orin the moral meaning he wants to attach to the word

f Hippias Minor Protagoras andother Platonic Dialogues

The Socratic principle lsquono one does wrong voluntarilyrsquo is also found in the Pro-tagoras (345dndashe) and as it is well known in other Platonic dialoguessup3⁰ Thereare also a number of minor topics which may be found in the Hippias Minorand in other dialogues of Plato In the Protagoras Socrates argues that lsquoSimo-nides was not so uneducated as to say that he praised a person who willinglydid no evil as if there were some people who did evil willinglyrsquo and that lsquonowise man believes that anyone does wrong willingly or acts shamefully andbadly of his own free willrsquo (345dndashe trans Taylor 1926 with adjustments) Thisis what Socrates is talking about in the Hippias Minor and this is what is includ-ed in the conditional statement of the final conclusion lsquoif there be such a manrsquo

When in the first section of the Hippias Minor the interlocutors agree thatlsquothe false is he who has the wisdom and the power to speak falselyrsquo (366b)and that lsquoevery man has power who does that which he wishes at the timewhen he wishesrsquo Socrates feels the need to add lsquoI am not speaking of any specialcase in which he is prevented by disease or something of that sortrsquo (366c) Sim-ilarly in the Protagoras Socrates argues that an agathos (lsquogood manrsquo) couldsometimes become kakos (lsquobadrsquo) lsquothrough the effect of either age or toil or dis-ease or some other misfortunemdashfor doing badly is nothing other than being de-prived of knowledgersquo (345b trans Taylor 1926 with adjustments)

In the Protagoras since a most important part of a manrsquos education is beingknowledgeable about poetry the title-character and Socrates decide to analyze Si-monidesrsquo poem to Scopas concerning the very thing that they are discussing name-ly excellencewith the only difference that it is transferred to the sphere of poetry Atthe end of the discussion the analysis fails and they leave aside the discussion oflyric and other kinds of poetry they do not need poets because lsquoone cannot ques-tion them on the sense of what they say but in most of the cases when people quotethem one says the poet means one thing and one anotherrsquo (347e trans Taylor 1926with adjustments) At the end of the dialogue Protagoras and Socrates exchangetheir views on the teachability of virtue In the Hippias Minor the title-character

Cr a Ap dndasha a Μeno bndashb Prt dndashe cndashd R c Lg cb d Ti d For the recurrent theme οὐδεὶς ἑκὼν ἁμαρτάνει see Mackenzy ch


has given a lecture on Homer and uses certain Homeric passages to support hisviews In the middle of the dialogue they decide to leave aside Homer lsquoas thereis no possibility of asking Homer what he meant in these verses of hisrsquo (365d)and at the end they result in a paradox The paradox lsquoif there be such a manrsquo iswhat follows from the argument in accordance with the logos (376e)sup3sup1

Finally as in the Protagoras Menon and the Republic Socrates starts the con-versation in the Hippias Minor inductively from various arts and professions fromthe limbs of the body and the soulrsquos capacity to result in general conclusions

g Hippias Minor Aristotlersquos andXenophonrsquos works

There are a number of topics which may be found in the Hippias Minor and in theworks of Aristotle and Xenophon Without the explicit testimony of Aristotleprobably few critics would consider the Hippias Minor a genuine Platonicworksup3sup2 Aristotle says lsquoHence the argument in the Hippias that the same manis false and true is misleading for it takes him to be false who is able to deceivethough he is discerning and intelligent and takes him to be better who is will-ingly badrsquo (Metaph1025a6ndash9 trans Hope 1960 with adjustments)

The distinction between ethics and other areas of human epistēmē and dy-namis seems to be clear from Aristotlersquos reception of the Hippias Minorsup3sup3 Twopassages from the Nicomachean Ethics are extremely pertinent In the first pas-sage justice is prescribed as a state of character (hexis) and since justice is astate its relation to just actions is different from the relation of a capacity toits character lsquoWe see that the state (hexis) everyone means in speaking of justiceis the state that makes us doers of just actions that makes us do justice and wishwhat is just In the same way they mean by injustice the state that makes us doinjustice and wish what is unjust [hellip] For what is of sciences (epistēmē) and ca-pacities (dynamis) is not true of states For while one and the same capacity orscience seems to have contrary activities a state that is a contrary has no con-trary activitiesrsquo (1129a6ndash 17 trans Irwin 19992)

In the second passage in defining intelligence Aristotle recognizes the connec-tion between temperance and intelligence that intelligence cannot be misused and

On the interlocutors not having the possibility of asking the poet and in general on the dif-ference between oral and written discourse cf Ap b Phdr dndashe Ep VII a c Friedlaumlnder Hoerber ndash


cannot be forgotten lsquoHence intelligence must be a state grasping the truth involv-ing reason and concerned with action about human goods Moreover there is thevirtue of craft but not of intelligence Furthermore in a craft someone who errswillingly is more choiceworthy but with intelligence as with virtue the reverse istrue Clearly then intelligence is a virtue not craft-knowledge There are twoparts of the soul that have reason Intelligence is a virtue of one of them of thepart that has belief for belief is concerned as intelligence is with what admits ofbeing otherwise Moreover it is not only a state involving reason A proof of thisis the fact that such a state can be forgotten but intelligence cannotrsquo (1140a20ndash30 trans Irwin 19992 with minor adjustments)

Aristotlersquos reception of the Hippias Minor emerges from each of these passag-es From the first citation it seems that the prior portion of the Hippias Minor ledAristotle to the definition between hexis versus dynamis and epistēmē thus solv-ing the riddle of the first perplexing proposition In the second citation Aristotleappears to have the latter portion of the Hippias Minor in mind in distinguishingbetween voluntary error in ethics as contrasted with error in the crafts

Finally there is a long passage in XenophonrsquosMemorabilia (421ndash40) which inview of its similarity to Platorsquos Hippias Minor has been discussed in connection withthat dialogue Various claims have been made about the relationship of the twoworks including that Plato copied Xenophonsup3⁴ Though there are clearly some sim-ilarities between this section of the Memorabilia and the Hippias Minor the differ-ences are more striking and more important In Hippiasrsquo position the arrogant pro-fessional teacher who charges others for teaching them what he knows isEuthydemus who is not only not teaching others but has not even reached full ma-turity Since the Platonic material is entirely dramatic with no external lsquoexplana-tionsrsquo by a narrator and so no explicit statement of purpose the interpretation isleft to the reader In the Memorabilia (4219ff) Xenophon allows the discussionto end with Socrates apparently agreeing that justice is exactly like the other craftsand that the knowing wrongdoer is better In the dialogue not only Hippias directlydenies this conclusion but Socrates himself expresses his grave doubts It is theidentification of craft and justicemdashbeing explicit in theMemorabilia but problematicin the Hippias Minormdash that some critics take to be Platorsquos point in the Hippias Minorand what they accordingly take him to task forsup3⁵

Phillips ndash cf Phillips Weiss n I am grateful to Prof M Edwards who read this paper and improved on its English for what-ever blemishes remaining the responsibility is mine


Kleanthis Mantzouranis

A Philosophical Reception of HomerHomeric Courage in Aristotlersquos Discussionof ἀνδρεία

Homerrsquos representation of the heroic warriors of the Iliad bequeathed to the Greeksparadigmatic examples of martial valour as models for emulation and comparisonheroic figures such as Achilles Hector and Diomedes became a benchmark for sub-sequent discussions of courage and military prowess by poets prose authors andeven philosophers This paper explores how Homeric courage forms part of τὰ ἔν-δοξα that is the reputable views that inform Aristotlersquos discussion of ἀνδρεία inthe Nicomachean Ethics I aim to show how Aristotle responds to the Homericidea of courage and how he appropriates Homer to elucidate his own conceptionof genuine ἀνδρεία I shall start by briefly summarizing Aristotlersquos position

Aristotlersquos discussion of ἀνδρεία as a particular virtue of character (EN III6ndash9) can be divided into two parts In the main body of his exposition (EN1115a6ndash 1116a15 1117a29ndash 1117b22) Aristotle discusses what we may describeas ἀνδρεία proper or genuine ἀνδρεία which he defines as a mean state with re-gard to fear and confidence (EN 1115a6ndash7) Aristotle places ἀνδρεία exclusivelyin the field of battle and thus narrows its scope in comparison to Platosup1 For Ar-istotle to display ἀνδρεία is to show the appropriate amount of fear and confi-dence and act accordingly when faced with the dangers and the fear-inspiringcircumstances of the battlefield (EN 1115a28ndash35) The performance of one ormore courageous actions however does not necessarily make one courageousAccording to Aristotle an action qualifies as a genuine manifestation of the rel-evant virtue only if the agent acts with the proper motivation Courage thereforelike other virtues of character should be displayed lsquofor the sake of the noblersquoτοῦ καλοῦ ἕνεκα (EN 1115b11ndash 13 23ndash24 1122b7)

In the remaining of his discussion (EN 1116a15ndash 1117a28) Aristotle de-scribes and examines certain states which are commonly thought to conduce

By narrowing ἀνδρεία to its most paradigmatic manifestation namely courage displayed inthe battlefield Aristotle responds to Platorsquos Socrates who in the Laches (dndashe) extends thefield of ἀνδρεία to include onersquos courageous stance in the face of various adversities such aspoverty disease or sea-danger For Aristotle the application of ἀνδρεῖος in such cases is ametaphorical use of the word (καθrsquoὁμοιότητα EN a) which extends ἀνδρεία beyond itsproper field cf Stewart I ndash On the different methodology that Plato and Aristotleemploy in their treatment of the particular virtues see Joachim ndash

to courageous behaviour The discussion of these states aims to show how ordi-nary conceptions of courage fail to qualify as proper ἀνδρεία in the Aristoteliansense At the same time by contrasting his own understanding of courage withpopular views about it Aristotle elucidates the true nature and scope of this vir-tue It is this part of Aristotlersquos exposition that is most relevant for the examina-tion of his reception and use of Homer

Aristotle discusses five defective forms of courage First πολιτικὴ ἀνδρείαlsquocitizen couragersquo is the kind of courage displayed by citizen soldiers who aremotivated by a desire to win honour and avoid disgrace and the penalties im-posed by the laws (EN 1116a17ndash 1116b3) The second form is the kind of courageresulting from experience in certain conditions (ἐμπειρία) such as the couragedisplayed by mercenary soldiers (EN 1116b3ndash23) Third comes the couragethat results from spirit or passion θυμός which resembles the ferocity of wildbeasts (EN 1116b23ndash 1117a9) Courage can also be displayed fourth by hopefulpeople (εὐέλπιδες) who feel confident because of past successes (EN 1117a9ndash22) Finally one can display courage as a result of ignorance of the impendingdanger (EN 1117a22ndash28)

It has long been observed by Aristotle scholars that the classification of the de-fective forms of courage has its roots in Platosup2 The role of technical expertise or skill(τέχνη) in the display of courage and the connection between courage and the spir-ited part of the human soul (τὸ θυμοειδές) are recurrent ideas in the discussions ofἀνδρεία in the Platonic dialoguessup3 Even the term πολιτικὴ ἀνδρεία that Aristotle uses(EN 1116a17) seems to have been borrowed from Plato⁴

These Platonic resonances however are only part of the picture of Aristo-tlersquos sources In his discussion of the defective forms of courage Aristotle explic-itly establishes Homer as a source for two of these forms namely πολιτικὴἀνδρεία and the ἀνδρεία of θυμός In each case Aristotle develops his argument

Grant II Experience in a certain skill and courage La dndashe Prt endashb θυμός and cour-age R dndasha Grant II Joachim At R bndashc πολιτικὴ ἀνδρεία is defined as the lsquopower topreserve through everything the correct and law-inculcated belief about what is to be feared andwhat isnrsquotrsquo(trans Grube rev Reeve ) Plato uses the term πολιτικὴ ἀνδρεία to distinguish thecourage of the civilized man from the impetus of animals or slaves who may appear to act coura-geously when driven by their natural instincts but in truth they are not since their actions are notthe result of education inculcated by law The idea that true courage should be cultural not naturaland a result of rational choice is formulated already in fifth-century political discourse Atheniandemocratic ideology in its attempt for self-definition presented Athenian courage as a result offree choice and rational thought in contrast to Spartan courage which was a result of constant hard-ship enforced discipline and external pressure see Bassi ndash Balot


in two steps He first describes the nature of the defective form of courage inquestion and then furnishes his discussion with citations of andor allusionsto Homer Aristotlersquos use of Homer in this part of the discussion is a purposefulact of reception with a twofold aim firstly to illustrate by means of concrete ex-amples the form of courage described secondly to reinforce his argument by ad-ducing the authority of the poet⁵ This use of Homer to elucidate and strengthena philosophical argument reveals something about the context of reception andAristotlersquos attitude towards the source text itself On the one hand for an exam-ple to achieve its purpose it must be immediately recognizable by those to whomit is addressed The use of Homeric examples therefore suggests that Aristotlersquosaudience was (or should be) able to identify these examples and understandhow they can help illustrate the point just made On the other hand the veryfact that Aristotle adduces Homer to reinforce his argument suggests that inhis view the two defective forms of courage in question are evidenced alreadyin the epics In other words in Aristotlersquos mind Homer has already grasped anessential truth about the nature of courage

Let us then describe the two defective forms of courage as lsquoHomericrsquo and as-sess their status vis-agrave-vis Aristotlersquos genuine ἀνδρεία This discussion will showhow Aristotle responds to the Homeric conception of courage and how he re-works the Homeric material in accordance with his philosophical outlook

a The courage of θυμός

In the epics θυμός is the seat of the affective life it is therefore the physical basisthat produces among other things the passion that prompts one to actcourageously⁶ Aristotle endorses this prevalent conception of θυμός and arguesthat θυμός is lsquomost eagerrsquo (ἰτητικώτατον) to rush on dangers (EN 1116b26ndash27)⁷

For the Greek practice of citing poetry in general and Homer in particular to illustrate or re-inforce a point of view see Halliwell ndash Il ndash ndash ndash Od ndash On Homeric θυμός see Redfield ndash Hobbs Stewart I points to Prt e where Protagoras says of courageous men that theyare confident and ready for action (ἴτας) in circumstances in which most men would be fearfulAs has already been stressed the Homeric idea that θυμός contributes to courage is discussedand elaborated in Platorsquos Republic Although Platorsquos conception of θυμός is not identical tothe Homeric one Plato endorses the Homeric insight about the connection between θυμόςand martial valour and links closely the spirited part of human soul (τὸ θυμοειδές) to the virtueof courage For an extensive discussion of the Platonic conception of ἀνδρεία and its relation to


To elucidate this form of courage Aristotle uses two sets of Homeric examplesOne set comprises quotations of Homeric formulaic phrases which describethe rousing of a herorsquos spirit usually as a result of the intervention of some god

ἰτητικώτατον γὰρ ὁ θυμὸς πρὸς τοὺς κινδύνους ὅθεν καὶ ῞Ομηρος ldquoσθένοςἔμβαλε θυμῷrdquo καὶ ldquoμένος καὶ θυμὸν ἔγειρεrdquo καὶ ldquoδριμὺ δrsquo ἀνὰ ῥῖνας μένοςrdquoκαὶ ldquoἔζεσεν αἷμαmiddotrdquo πάντα γὰρ τὰ τοιαῦτα ἔοικε σημαίνειν τὴν τοῦ θυμοῦἔγερσιν καὶ ὁρμήν⁸(EN 1116b26ndash30)

For spirit is something which especially spurs people on to face dangers hence we have inHomer lsquohe cast strength into his spiritrsquo and lsquohe stirred up rage and spiritrsquo and lsquofierce ragebreathed through his nostrilsrsquo and lsquohis blood boiledrsquo All such expressions seem to stand forimpetus and the rousing of spirit⁹

The second set of examples builds on the familiar comparison of courageousmen with wild beastssup1⁰ Here Aristotle does not cite but rather alludes to Homericlines and in particular to Homeric similes where a warriorrsquos courageous behav-iour is compared to the sturdy boldness of some animal in a situation of dangerAristotle comments on the bold behaviour of animals

οὐ δή ἐστιν ἀνδρεῖα διὰ τὸ ὑπrsquo ἀλγηδόνος καὶ θυμοῦ ἐξελαυνόμενα πρὸς τὸν κίνδυνον ὁρμᾶνοὐθὲν τῶν δεινῶν προορῶντα ἐπεὶ οὕτω γε κἂν οἱ ὄνοι ἀνδρεῖοι εἶεν πεινῶντεςmiddot τυπτόμενοιγὰρ οὐκ ἀφίστανται τῆς νομῆςmiddot(EN 1116b33ndash 1117a1)

Now rushing into danger because one is driven on by pain and spirit without any sense in advanceof the frightening things one has to face is not courage because on that score even donkeys wouldbe courageous when hungry since they donrsquot stop grazing even when they are beaten

Aristotlersquos image is an allusion to the famous Homeric simile where TelamonianAjax in his slow and unwilling retreat in the face of a Trojan assault is com-pared to an ass who does not stop feeding itself although it is being incessantly

θυμός or τὸ θυμοειδές see Hobbs For a discussion of ἠνορέη (lsquomanlinessrsquo the Homericprecursor of ἀνδρεία) see Graziosi Haubold Aristotle quotes from memory and as a result inaccurately from (a) Il ndash (μέγασθένος ἔμβαλrsquo ἑκάστῳ καρδίῃ) and ndash (μένος δέ οἱ ἔμβαλε θυμῷ) (b) Il ndash(ἔγειρε μένος μέγα θέλγε δὲ θυμόν) (c) Od ndash (τοῦ δrsquo ὠρίνετο θυμός ἀνὰ ῥῖνας δέ οἱἤδη δριμὺ μένοςhellip) (d) the expression ἔζεσεν αἷμα does not occur in Homer cf Stewart I Burnet Irwin

All the translations of the Nicomachean Ethics are taken from Taylor with minor adjustments Cf Pl La e R b


beaten by children (Il 11558ndash65)sup1sup1 From the very beginning of the discussion ofthe ἀνδρεία of θυμός Aristotle compares this form of courage to the fury and fe-rocious spirit of animals

καὶ τὸν θυμὸν δrsquo ἐπὶ τὴν ἀνδρείαν φέρουσινmiddot ἀνδρεῖοι γὰρ εἶναι δοκοῦσι καὶ οἱ διὰ θυμὸνὥσπερ τὰ θηρία ἐπὶ τοὺς τρώσαντας φερόμενα ὅτι καὶ οἱ ἀνδρεῖοι θυμοειδεῖςmiddot(EN 1116b24ndash26)

People also bring spirit under the heading of courage Those who from spirit rush like wildbeasts against those who have injured them also seem courageous since for their part coura-geous people are spirited

The image of wounded beasts attacking their pursuers to which Aristotle com-pares those driven by their spirit into acting courageously is less specific thanthe aforementioned example of the ass Nonetheless given the recurrence ofthe references to Homer in this part of the EN I argue that we can read thisimage as another allusion to a Homeric simileWhen the Trojan Agenor decidesto hold his ground and face the raging Achilles his bold determination is com-pared to that of a leopard which though wounded does not give up its fightagainst those who attack it

ἠΰτε πάρδαλις εἶσι βαθείης ἐκ ξυλόχοιοἀνδρὸς θηρητῆρος ἐναντίον οὐδέ τι θυμῷταρβεῖ οὐδὲ φοβεῖται ἐπεί κεν ὑλαγμὸν ἀκούσῃmiddotεἴ περ γὰρ φθάμενός μιν ἢ οὐτάσῃ ἠὲ βάλῃσινἀλλά τε καὶ περὶ δουρὶ πεπαρμένη οὐκ ἀπολήγειἀλκῆς πρίν γrsquo ἠὲ ξυμβλήμεναι ἠὲ δαμῆναιmiddotὣς Aντήνορος υἱὸς ἀγαυοῦ δῖος Aγήνωροὐκ ἔθελεν φεύγειν πρὶν πειρήσαιτrsquo Aχιλῆος(Il 21573ndash80)

But as a leopard emerges out of her timbered coverto face the man who is hunting her and is neither afraidat heart nor runs away when she hears them baying against herand even though one be too quick for her with spear thrust or spear thrown stuck with theshaft though she be she will not ceaseher fighting fury till she has closed with one of them or is overthrownso proud Antenorrsquos son brilliant Agenorrefused to run away until he had tested Achilles(trans Lattimore 1951 with adjustments)sup1sup2

Cf Stewart I Burnet Irwin

Note the reference to the θυμός of the leopard () as well as to its ἀλκή () which doesnot cease although the animal is hurt at EN bndash Aristotle concludes his response to the


This form of courage can be understood as a sudden emotional impulse thatemerges as a reaction to a certain stimulus and urges one onto unreflective en-gagement with some danger According to Aristotle it is the most natural type ofἀνδρεία (φυσικωτάτη EN 1117a4) it is an irrational purely physical type of cour-age which owes more to natural instincts than to cultural norms or experiencePeople who display this type of courage like wild beasts act because of pain(διὰ λύπην EN 1116b32) and from their passion (διὰ πάθος EN 1117a8ndash9) with-out any appreciation of the danger they face By contrasting the Homeric ἀνδρείαof θυμός to genuine ἀνδρεία Aristotle does not aim to question the role of θυμόςin courage altogether In Aristotlersquos view the spirited element of human naturedoes contribute to the display of courage (συνεργεῖ EN 1116b31) but its role inpromoting courageous behaviour must be subsidiary not primary This is pre-cisely why wild beasts and θυμός-driven humans fail to qualify as properly cou-rageous their spirit is the primary motivational force that incites their coura-geous behaviour For Aristotle θυμός provides only the natural basis requiredfor courageous action and is inadequate by itself to produce genuine ἀνδρεία

φυσικωτάτη δrsquo ἔοικεν ἡ διὰ τὸν θυμὸν εἶναι καὶ προσλαβοῦσα προαίρεσιν καὶ τὸ οὗ ἕνεκα ἀν-δρεία εἶναι καὶ οἱ ἄνθρωποι δὴ ὀργιζόμενοι μὲν ἀλγοῦσι τιμωρούμενοι δrsquo ἥδονταιmiddot οἱ δὲ διὰταῦτα μαχόμενοι μάχιμοι μέν οὐκ ἀνδρεῖοι δέmiddot οὐ γὰρ διὰ τὸ καλὸν οὐδrsquo ὡς ὁ λόγος ἀλλὰδιὰ πάθοςmiddot(EN 1117a4ndash9)

Now courage prompted by spirit seems to be something purely natural but it is when in ad-dition it includes choice and the goal that it is courage And people feel distress when they areroused to anger and pleasure when they retaliate people who fight for these reasons arecombative but not courageous for they do not do it for the sake of the noble or as reasonprescribes but from feeling

The courage of spirit requires two additional elements to become genuineἀνδρεία deliberate choice (προαίρεσις) and proper motivation or direction to-wards the proper goal (τὸ οὗ ἕνεκα) Courageous actions do not consist in rush-ing foolhardily into every danger They must be rationally chosen and dictated byreason (λόγος) after calculating the nature of the impending danger the alterna-

Socratic widening of ἀνδρεία by arguing that people show courage (ἀνδρίζονται) in circumstan-ces which admit of ἀλκή or in which it is καλόν to die In the EE discussion of courage Aristotlecompares the courage of θυμός to the fury of wild boars (ἄγριοι σύες) which display such behav-iour when they are beside themselves (EE andash) Again the image of the distraughtwild boar seems to be an allusion to a Homeric simile at Il ndash Idomeneus is comparedto a wild boar (σῦς) whose back bristles and whose eyes are lsquoshining with firersquo as it stands up toa group of men attacking it


tive courses of action open to one and what one puts at stake by risking onersquoslife in battle Furthermore genuine ἀνδρεία requires proper motivation on thepart of the agent In Aristotlersquos theory of virtue performing virtuous actions isnot enough for making one truly virtuous one must also act for a certain reasonCourageous behaviour motivated by pain or passion does not count as genuineἀνδρεία The truly courageous man is expected to act lsquofor the sake of the noblersquo(διὰ τὸ καλόν or τοῦ καλοῦ ἕνεκα)sup1sup3

b πολιτικὴ ἀνδρεία lsquocitizen couragersquo

Aristotle distinguishes between two forms of πολιτικὴ ἀνδρεία one of which rankshigher than the other The lower form of πολιτικὴ ἀνδρεία is a result of compulsionand fear It is displayed by soldiers who maintain their posts and fight becausetheir commanders use coercive means such as punishments and beatings to en-force their obedience Again Aristotle chooses a Homeric example to elucidatethis form of courage he cites Agamemnonrsquos words to his troops by means ofwhich Agamemnon threatens with death anyone who stays by the ships andavoids fighting (EN 1116a29ndash35)sup1⁴ In its higher form πολιτικὴ ἀνδρεία is motivat-ed by a sense of shame towards the opinion of others (διrsquo αἰδῶ ΕΝ 1116a28) Thislatter form of πολιτικὴ ἀνδρεία ranks higher than the former for in Aristotlersquos viewshame is superior to fear as an incentive to action Fear is what the many (οἱ πολ-λοί) respond to such people do the right thing only to avoid the pain of punish-ment On the other hand responsiveness to shame is a mark of better upbringingand of having already acquired a sense of what is noble and truly pleasant (EN1179b10ndash16) Acting out of shame and the desire to avoid doing what is consid-ered disgraceful suggests that one pays due respect to the opinion of others andhas been properly habituated in acting in accordance with the values of the com-munity In other words whereas fear implies blind conformity to the precepts ofothers with a view to avoiding external sanctions shame requires the internaliza-tion by the agent of the values of the community one who acts out of shame hasmade the values of the community onersquos ownsup1⁵

This higher form of lsquocitizen couragersquo Aristotle says is mostly displayed insocieties where the complementary concepts of honour and shame weigh heavily

On the two requirements see Joachim Deslauriers ndash The reference is to Il ndash but Aristotle wrongly attributes these words to Hector in-stead of Agamemnon cf Stewart I CfWilliams ndash and Cairns ndash ndash ndash who respond to Doddsrsquofamous description of Homeric society as a lsquoshame culturersquo (Dodds ndash)


and are regarded as major motivational factors Aristotle finds that the societywhich best fits this description is the society depicted in the epics so he adducesHomer once again to reinforce his argument and elucidate it by means of twoconcrete examples

δοκοῦσι γὰρ ὑπομένειν τοὺς κινδύνους οἱ πολῖται διὰ τὰ ἐκ τῶν νόμων ἐπιτίμια καὶ τὰ ὀνείδηκαὶ διὰ τὰς τιμάςmiddot καὶ διὰ τοῦτο ἀνδρειότατοι δοκοῦσιν εἶναι παρrsquo οἷς οἱ δειλοὶ ἄτιμοι καὶ οἱἀνδρεῖοι ἔντιμοι τοιούτους δὲ καὶ Ὅμηρος ποιεῖ οἷον τὸν Διομήδην καὶ τὸν ἝκτοραmiddotΠουλυδάμας μοι πρῶτος ἐλεγχείην ἀναθήσειmiddotκαὶ Διομήδης῞Εκτωρ γάρ ποτε φήσει ἐνὶ Τρώεσσrsquo ἀγορεύωνldquoΤυδείδης ὑπrsquo ἐμεῖοrdquo(EN 1116a18ndash26)

Citizens seem to face dangers because of the penalties of the law and public disgrace andhonour and therefore the most courageous seem to be those among whom the cowardlyare disgraced and the courageous honoured Homer depicts people of that kind such as Di-omede and Hector who sayPolydamas will be the first to heap reproach on meandHector will say when he speaks to the TrojanslsquoThe son of Tydeus has fled from mersquo

Aristotlersquos knowledge of Homer becomes evident in this context since the exam-ples he chooses to use from the Iliad are particularly successful in showing howonersquos sense of shame can generate courageous behaviour The first is derivedfrom Hectorrsquos famous monologue before his final battle with Achilles Hector an-ticipates the heavy criticism he will incur from Polydamas for not heeding hisprudent advice and decides to remain outside the walls of Troy and confrontthe raging Achilles (Il 2299ndash 110) In the second example Diomedes forcedby Zeusrsquo thunderbolt to abandon his advance complains that should he hearkento Nestorrsquos advice and retreat before Hector Hectorrsquos boast would make him suf-fer an insufferable loss of face (Il 8146ndash50)

Having clearly illustrated the nature of πολιτικὴ ἀνδρεία Aristotle then goeson to describe its workings and explain how it relates to genuine ἀνδρεία

ὡμοίωται δrsquo αὕτη μάλιστα τῇ πρότερον εἰρημένῃsup1⁶ ὅτι διrsquo ἀρετὴν γίνεται διrsquo αἰδῶ γὰρ καὶ διὰκαλοῦ ὄρεξιν (τιμῆς γάρ) καὶ φυγὴν ὀνείδους αἰσχροῦ ὄντος

This sort most closely resembles the one previously discussed [i e genuine courage] becauseit comes about from virtue i e from shame and the desire for a noble thing (namely honour)and the avoidance of disgrace as something shameful

Cf ΕΝ a μάλιστα ἔοικεν


Aristotlersquos construal of πολιτικὴ ἀνδρεία fits perfectly in the Homeric framework andcaptures the epic representation of military prowess its motivation and its scopeThe martial valour of a Homeric hero is the most evident manifestation of hisἀρετήsup1⁷ which is motivated by his sense of αἰδώς towards his milieu in battle cir-cumstances the single cry for αἰδώς is the most common way to prompt slacking ordiscouraged men back into actionsup1⁸ By displaying his prowess in battle the Homer-ic hero seeks to secure for himself τιμή which entails both respect and a good nameamong his peers and the more concrete material possessions and privileges that ac-company his superior status and social positionsup1⁹ Failure or unwillingness to dis-play courage besmirches onersquos τιμή and results in the disgraceful condition ofbeing open to the reproach of otherssup2⁰ Thus the higher form of Aristotlersquos lsquocitizencouragersquo corresponds to the most typical form of Homeric courage namely couragemotivated by a sense of shame in the face of public criticism

This form of courage Aristotle says is most akin but not tantamount togenuine ἀνδρεία This is due to the status of honour (τιμή) the complementaryconcept of shame as a motive for action Aristotle classifies honour as lsquothe great-est of the external goodsrsquo (EN 1123b20ndash21) but rejects the view of those whoconsider it the supreme good of human life (EN 1095b22ndash26) Honour is indeeda noble motive since it is not distributed haphazardly but is bestowed onlyupon those who promote or are in a position to promote the communityrsquoswell-being (Rh 1361a28ndash30) In this light displaying courage with a view tohonour is finer than being courageous for the sake of acquiring less admirablegoods such as power or wealth In Aristotlersquos theory of virtue however honourdoes not constitute the proper motivation for a truly virtuous action If one fightsbravely being primarily motivated by the honour that customarily ensues fromsuch actions then one is motivated by external rewards rather than by the na-ture of the action itself In Aristotelian terms this amounts to performing an ac-tion for an external end which violates one of the requirements of virtuous ac-tions namely that the action must be chosen for its own sake (προαιρούμενος διrsquoαὐτά EN 1105a32) Aristotlersquos principle that the courageous man should act lsquoforthe sake of the noblersquo (τοῦ καλοῦ ἕνεκα EN 1115b12ndash 13 23ndash24) redirects the

Il ndash ndash ndash ndash ndash ndash Il ndash Ilndash ndash ndash Il ndash ndash ndash ndash


order of priority and focuses on the intrinsic value of the action rather than onthe external rewards that accompany itsup2sup1

c lsquoFor the sake of the noblersquo

Performing an action τοῦ καλοῦ ἕνεκα implies that the agent chooses to act in theway he does because he fully appreciates and is motivated by the intrinsic beau-ty or goodness of his actionsup2sup2 The man of citizen courage (in its higher form) andthe man of genuine ἀνδρεία may indeed prove equally courageous in action Inaddition by displaying courage they act in a way that their social milieu andthey themselves regard as καλόν The man of genuine ἀνδρεία however ration-ally grasps that what renders courageous actions καλόν is their intrinsic good-ness not the praise or honour that customarily ensues from them Unlike theman of citizen courage who acts with a view to honour the man of genuineἀνδρεία is motivated by the intrinsic value of his action What prompts him isthe understanding that such an action is worth doing in itself just because itis the kind of action it is regardless of any favourable consequences orrewardssup2sup3 When the cause justifies the risk the man of genuine courage riskshis life in battle even if no honour is to be gained by his action or even if hisdecision to act courageously is shared by no one but himself

Aristotlersquos analysis therefore shows that πολιτικὴ ἀνδρεία the most typicalform of Homeric courage ranks lower than genuine ἀνδρεία Nonetheless Aristotledoes not overlook or underrate the value of the Homeric conception of courage Ar-istotle often reiterates that becoming truly virtuous and so acting lsquofor the sake of thenoblersquo is not an easy task few people are endowed with the moral and mental ca-pacities that would enable them to achieve this ideal But the city still needs protec-tion and ordinary men to defend it and risk their lives for its sake Therein lies the

There is no tension or incompatibility between doing an action lsquofor the sake of the noblersquo anddoing it lsquofor its own sakersquo a courageous action is seen as noble in virtue of its being courageoussee Rogers Lear ndash Taylor ndash This is only one of the attributes that Aristotlersquos conception of τὸ καλόν entails I focus onthis aspect of τὸ καλόν because it is the one most relevant to the distinction that Aristotledraws between lsquocitizen couragersquo and genuine courage Actions described as καλόν are also ra-tionally chosen demanding praiseworthy fitting or appropriate to the circumstances inwhich they are performed and (more often than not) other-regarding Actions of genuineἀνδρεία display of course all these characteristics For Aristotlersquos conception of τὸ καλόν seeOwens Broadie ndash Rogers Nisters ndash Irwin For a de-tailed discussion of the motivation of Aristotelian ἀνδρεία see Rogers Cf Cairns n Taylor


value of honour and shame as motivational factors being more applicable to ordi-nary people than the rational appreciation of τὸ καλόν the desire for honour and asense of shame in the face of public criticism ensure that the city will not be leftwithout protection As Aristotle observes while professional soldiers are the firstto flee citizen soldiers hold their ground and sacrifice themselves because they pre-fer death to the disgrace of a shameful flight (EN 1116b17ndash20) lsquoCitizen couragersquo pre-serves the city even when the citizens are not so philosophically oriented as to fulfilthe requirements of τὸ καλόν This pragmatic form of courage though defective inphilosophical terms is according to Aristotle the form that most closely resemblesgenuine ἀνδρεία

Conclusion

Homer occupies a prominent place in the part of Aristotlersquos discussion where gen-uine ἀνδρεία is contrasted to five commonly held but defective conceptions of cour-age Aristotle finds that two of these endoxic conceptions πολιτικὴ ἀνδρεία and thecourage of θυμός are formulated already in the epics He therefore appropriatesHomer to elucidate and reinforce his argument by citing and alluding to Homericexamples which provide concrete evidence of the forms of courage in question Ar-istotle singles out these two lsquoHomericrsquo forms as being closer to genuine ἀνδρεία thanthe rest and explains why they are defective and how they can be transformed intogenuine ἀνδρεία Like Homer and Plato Aristotle sees a connection between θυμόςand courage and argues that in order to become true courage the ἀνδρεία of θυμόςrequires deliberation (προαίρεσις) and proper motivation Courageous actions mustbe the product of rational choice and must be performed with a view to a certaingoal Motivation is what distinguishes πολιτικὴ ἀνδρεία from genuine ἀνδρεία aswell lsquoCitizen couragersquo aims at honour which is a noble thing but it does not aimat lsquothe noblersquo τὸ καλόν itself

Aristotlersquos conception of genuine ἀνδρεία underlines the importance of prop-er motivation for virtuous action and therefore refines develops and deepensthe Homeric representation of courage Nevertheless throughout his discussionAristotle acknowledges the validity and value of the Homeric outlook By rank-ing the courage of a Hector or a Diomedes as second-best next to his conceptionof genuine ἀνδρεία Aristotle does justice to the authority of the poet and at thesame time propounds his own view on what it means to be truly courageous byacting lsquofor the sake of the noblersquo


Christina-Panagiota Manolea

Homeric Echoes Pythagorean FlavourThe Reception of Homer in Iamblichus

Introduction

The Neoplatonic philosopher Porphyry (3rd century AD) has included valuableexegetic material in his work Homeric Questions that is based on Aristarchrsquos prin-ciple lsquoὍμηρον ἐξ Ὁμήρου σαφηνίζεινrsquo in terms of methodologysup1 The work in ques-tion is part of a long tradition of commentary that goes back at least to Aristotleand was enormously appropriated in the Byzantine Homeric scholia but none-theless is up to now relatively unexploredsup2 Moreover Porphyryrsquos short mono-graph De antro Nympharum is also a text of the utmost importance as it inter-prets a certain passage of the Odyssey (13102ndash 12) allegorically and is regardedas a major text of ancient literary criticismsup3 Both works show the Neoplatonicphilosopherrsquos knowledge and esteem for Homer and also render Porphyry amajor figure in the history of Homeric reception

Such was the situation with Homerrsquos reception by Porphyry when his stu-dent Iamblichus of Chalcis (3rdndash4th century AD) appeared Iamblichus was a pro-lific Neoplatonic philosopher who elaborated the Platonic system propoundedby Plotinus and Porphyry widely receiving the Pythagorean pseudepigraphaand the Chaldean Oracles and also gave a prominent role to theurgical theoryand practice⁴ But he was also the man who influenced Athenian Neoplatonismmore than any other and also a figure that was hagiographized by posteriors

For Porphyryrsquos work see Lamberton ndash cf Smith For Aristarchus abrief yet inclusive account is found in Janko ndash cf Manolea ndash See Lamberton cf Manolea See Lamberton ndash This analysis of the work in question pioneering in its time isstill valuable especially as a starting point on the workrsquos study Moreover A Smith ( )rightly remarks that the style of approach and presentation found in this work is to be found inmany other works of Porphyry as well He also rightly stresses the philosophical content of theDe Antro Nympharum For an introduction to Iamblichusrsquo philosophy see Dillon ndashWe should note thatDillon is of the opinion that the role of theurgical theory and practice in the thought of Iambli-chus has been given too prominent a role in the past ( ) Nevertheless this element didexist and was also important in Iambichusrsquo and his studentsrsquo thought and everyday practice

who called him lsquodivinersquo⁵ Nevertheless Iamblichusrsquo attitude towards Homer isnot identical with Porphyryrsquos In his existing works he has not provided uswith an appropriation of the Homeric tradition as rich and as elaborate as hismasterrsquos⁶ Therefore it is not surprising to see a lack of attention on the scholarsrsquopart as far as Iamblichusrsquo Homeric passages are concerned

However this does not mean that the Homeric tradition is absent from Iam-blichusrsquo works or that Homer is particularly underestimated by the Neoplatonicphilosopher in question In this paper we shall try to answer a series ofquestions⁷ How was Homerrsquos text received by Iamblichus What are the artisticand intellectual processes involved in his ndashadmittedly limitedndash selection of theHomeric material Did the receiversrsquo knowledge of Homer play a role in Iambli-chusrsquo choice What is the purpose for Homerrsquos presence in Iamblichusrsquo philo-sophical works It will be demonstrated that quotations from both the Iliadand the Odyssey do appear in some surviving philosophical works of Iamblichusthat primarily aimed not at the Homeric textrsquos elaboration but at the expressionof Iamblichusrsquo own Neoplatonic beliefs The existing Homeric passages (tracedin only three extant philosophical works of Iamblichus namely the De vita Py-thagorica the Protrepticus and the De mysteriis) will be examined and briefly an-alyzed in order to demonstrate that the Homeric tradition is employed in somecases for anecdotological purposes moreover it will be shown that Homeric ref-erences are rather well placed in Iamblichusrsquo philosophical discussions on cos-mology and metaphysics and bear a distinctly Pythagorean flavour

a De Vita Pythagorica

(i) At 911ndash13 Iamblichus says that Pythagoras left Samos by night with a certainHermodamas surnamed lsquothe Creophylianrsquo and was said to descend from Creophy-luswho was Homerrsquos host⁸ Iamblichus had already mentioned Creophylus as one

We shall only mention the sophist Eunapius whose Life of Iamblichus is hagiographicalthough ill informed as Dillon rightly remarks ( ) The expression lsquoὁ θεῖος Ἰάμβλιχοςrsquois found in Syrianus and Proclus (Neoplatonic School of Athens th century AD) as well asin writers of the School of Ammonius (Neoplatonic School of Alexandria th century AD) For instance Lamberton has argued that Iamblichus paid little attention to the inter-pretation of Homermdashin his own words lsquomore important [hellip] is the almost complete lack of concernfor the interpretation of early poetry that characterizes Iamblichus and his immediate cyclersquo See Hardwick De vita Pyth ndash νύκτωρ λαθὼν πάντας μετὰ τοῦ Ἑρμοδάμαντος μὲν τὸ ὄνομα Κρεοφυ-λείου δὲ ἐπικαλουμένου ὃς ἐλέγετο Κρεοφύλου ἀπόγονος εἶναι Ὁμήρου δὲ ξένου τοῦ ποιητοῦ


of the eminent teachers of Pythagoras (88ndash11) Creophylus is known from manyancient sources to have been closely related to Homer although in a rather blurredway⁹ But given the fact that Pythagoras himself was by birth and studentship per-sonally involved in the SamosCreophylus tradition of the transmission of the Ho-meric textsup1⁰ Iamblichus could not but have treated Creophylus favourably thusshowing consciously or unconsciously a quite early close relation between Pytha-goras and Homer Now as to the descendant of Creophylus Hermodamas who iscalled lsquothe Creophylianrsquo Iamblichus in the passage that we are discussing men-tions him as the man who taught Pythagoras and travelled with him to see Pher-ecydes Anaximander and Thales We therefore see how Homeric tradition andphilosophy are encountered in this Pythagoras-Hermodamas relation

˂οὗ δεῖ δοκεῖ ˃ γενέσθαι φίλος καὶ διδάσκαλος τῶν ἁπάντων μετὰ τούτου πρὸς τὸν Φερεκύδην διε-πόρθμευε καὶ πρὸς Aναξίμανδρον τὸν φυσικὸν καὶ πρὸς Θαλῆν εἰς Μίλητον For information on Creophylus Burkert ndash is still useful Yet Creophylusrsquo relation toHomer is challenging in itself There is an ancient discussion on the authorship of the poem Oe-chaliae Halosis as to whether it should be attributed to Creophylus rather than Homer For a recentbrief yet illuminating account of this complex issue see Graziosi ndash Graziosi rightlyremarks that there is a group of authors (Stasinus Lesches and Creophylus) who are clearly sub-ordinated to Homer are presented as his relatives or friends and they are said to have been givenby Homer some of his poems as gifts To speak only of Creophylus ancient sources refer to him asHomerrsquos host (Sextus Empiricus Adv Math ndash Κρεοφύλου πόνος εἰμί δόμῳ ποτὲ θεῖον ἀοι-δὸν δεξαμένου) while Aelius Aristides describes him as an ἑταῖρος of Homer (Πρὸς Καπίτωναndash ὁ γὰρ Κρεόφυλος [hellip] ὁ τοῦ Ὁμήρου ἑταῖρος It is Strabo who informs us that OechaliaeHalosis is said to have been given to Creophylus by Homer as a gift but also mentions that Cal-limachus states the opposite and links the whole issue with the story of the hospitality (Strabo Κρεώφυλος ὅν φασι δεξάμενον ξενίᾳ ποτὲ Ὅμηρον λαβεῖν δῶρον τὴν ἐπιγραφὴν τοῦ ποι-ήματος ὃ καλοῦσιν Οἰχαλίας ἅλωσιν Καλλίμαχος δὲ τοὐναντίον ἐμφαίνει διrsquo ἐπιγράμματος τινος ὡςἐκείνου μὲν ποιήσαντος λεγομένου δrsquo Ὁμήρου διὰ τὴν λεγομένην ξενίαν) It is indeed Callimachuswho in Epigram attributes the Oechaliae Halosis to Creophylus For a discussion of Straboand Callimachusrsquo evidence see Graziosi ndash We should not forget either that Platodoes not have a positive opinion about Creophylus (R andashb) Nevertheless Graziosi seemsto consider that negative evidence for Creophylus was not influential in antiquity In our case Iam-blichus does not seem willing to speak of the authorship of the Oechaliae Halosis or to speak neg-atively of Creophylus in general Iamblichus was in all probability familiar with the Platonic opin-ion about Creophylus and maybe with Callimachusrsquo opinion as well He nevertheless does notchoose to touch the issue in question There is a discussion in modern scholarship concerning what seems to be a double traditionin the Homeric text transmission namely the SamosCreophylus tradition and the ChiosHomer-idae tradition For an account of the double traditions the disagreement between scholars andwhat seems to be a rather convincing conclusion see Graziosi ndash


What is important however is the fact that Iamblichusrsquo teacher Porphyry men-tioned Hermodamasrsquo association with Pythagoras in his own De vita Pythagoricasup1sup1

We should not forget that the two works bearing the same title and written by themaster and the student present many similarities and often use the same sourcesbut they also display considerable differences as to their aim and contextsup1sup2

(ii) At 6414ndash 15 we have a Pythagorean reading of epic poetry as selectedpassages from Hesiod and Homer are reported to have been used by Pythagorasin order to cure the soulsup1sup3 Furthermore we cannot but observe the epithetἐξειλεγμένοις (lsquoselectedrsquo) as it places Iamblichus in the tradition not only of Py-thagoras but also of Plato who actually in the Republic expressed severe reser-vations on poetry and art in general but in the end accepted the use of selectedpoems that would undeniably result in the proper education of the youthsup1⁴ Iam-blichus repeats his opinion on the use of selected passages at 9220ndash22 usingalmost identical words with his first referencesup1⁵ What is important is the factthat the Homeric tradition is used in order to cure the soul (πρὸς ἐπανόρθωσινψυχῆς)We are dealing with the healing power of the epics of Homer and Hesiodor as has been notedsup1⁶ with a ritual use of Homeric poems Iamblichus has

Porphyry De vita Pyth ndash(ἐπανελθόντα δrsquo εἰς τὴν Ἰωνίαν ἐντεῦθεν τὸν Πυθαγόρανπρῶτον μὲν Φερεκύδῃ τῷ Συρίῳ ὁμιλῆσαι δεύτερον δrsquo Ἑρμοδάμαντι τῷ Κρεοφυλείῳ ἐν Σάμῳἤδη γηράσκοντι) and ndash (νοσήσαντα δὲ τὸν Φερεκύδην ἐν Δήλῳ θεραπεύσας ὁ Πυθαγόραςκαὶ ἀποθανόντα θάψας εἰς Σάμον ἐπανῆλθεν πόθῳ τοῦ συγγενέσθαι Ἑρμοδάμαντι τῷ Κρεοφυλείῳ)For both passages see Makris ad loc See Makris ndash De vita Pyth ndash χρῆσθαι δὲ καὶ Ὁμήρου καὶ Ἡσιόδου λέξεσιν ἐξειλεγμέναις πρὸς ἐπα-νόρθωσιν ψυχῆς The use of the epic tradition by early Pythagoreans has been adequatelystressed by Delatte ndash Boyanceacute ff Buffiegravere ndash Detienne ndash According to Lambertonrsquos analysis ( ndash) the evidence for early Pytha-gorean concern with Homer is considerable but we should nevertheless bear in mind that whenwe refer to their allegories we should not insist too strongly on distinct categories of physicalmoral and mystical allegory For all those issues cf Makris ndash n cf also Man-olea ndash For a discussion on Platorsquos attitude towards art in general and poetry in particular the bib-liographical references are numerous and date from the

th century In fact the matter is farfrom being closed From the huge bibliography on Platorsquos attitude towards art in general it isworth mentioning T Gouldrsquos influential article (Gould ) For Platorsquos attitude towards poetryan interesting account is to be found in Murray ndash Furthermore a brief but nice dis-cussion on Platorsquos attitude towards Homer in particular can be found in Richardson ndash On this issue cf Murray ndash Manolea ndash De vita Pyth ndash ὑπελάμβανον δὲ καὶ τὴν μουσικὴν μεγάλα συμβάλλεσθαι πρὸς ὑγείανἄν τις αὐτῇ χρῆται κατὰ τοὺς προσήκοντας τρόπους ἐχρῶντο δὲ καὶ Ὁμήρου καὶ Ἡσιόδου λέξεσιδιειλεγμέναις πρὸς ἐπανόρθωσιν ψυχῆς Lamberton


probably taken the whole idea from Porphyry who in his De vita Pythagoricasup1⁷sustains exactly the same thing

(iii) At 2220ndash26 Homer is acknowledged to have done the right thing when heexalted the king of the gods with the title lsquofather of gods and mortalsrsquosup1⁸ The poet isimmediately afterwards described as a myth maker nevertheless Iamblichuspoints out that the characteristics he ascribed to Zeus were right from a Pythagor-ean point of view In these words of Iamblichus we realize a clearly Pythagorizingattempt at giving a solution to the Platonic reservations towards poetrysup1⁹

(iv) Moreover at 2327ndash247sup2⁰ we find an interesting moralizing interpreta-tion of the Iliad the whole poem deals with nothing less than the disastrous con-sequences of ἀκρασία (lsquolack of self-controlrsquo) of a single man Lambertonsup2sup1 hastaken the man to be meant to have been Paris According to this interpretationhad the younger son of Priam had some self-control neither the barbarians (Tro-jans) nor the Greeks would have suffered terribly as they did If we follow thisinterpretation Iamblichus claimed that the Trojans faced the consequence ofwar ie the defeat and the destruction of their city The Greeks in their turnfaced difficulties when they sailed back home and were also granted with aten-year and a thousand-year punishment As far as the Trojans are concernedthe interpretation is fine but in the case of the Greeks we have some problemsWhy is the sailing back home mentioned It has nothing to do with Paris whohad already been killed by Neoptolemus And what about the ten-year and thethousand-year sentence as well as the maidens from Locroi

It seems that each of the two parties suffered because of one man but it wasnot the same man for both parties For the Trojans it was Paris but for the Greeksit was AjaxWe know that the rape of Cassandra by Ajax the Locrian took placeat the altar of Athena where Cassandra had sought refuge and that it was

De vita Pyth καὶ ἐπῇδε τῶν Ὁμήρου καὶ Ἡσιόδου ὅσα καθημεροῦν τὴν ψυχὴν ἐδοκίμαζε CfMakris ad loc De vita Pyth ndash ὅθεν καὶ τὸνὍμηρον τῇ αὐτῇ προσηγορίᾳ τὸν βασιλέα τῶν θεῶν αὔξ-ειν ὀνομάζοντα πατέρα τῶν θεῶν καὶ τῶν θνητῶν πολλοὺς δὲ καὶ τῶν ἄλλων μυθοποιῶν παραδε-δωκέναι τοὺς βασιλεύοντας τῶν θεῶν τὴν μεριζομένην φιλοστοργίαν παρὰ τῶν τέκνων πρὸς τὴνὑπάρχουσαν συζυγίαν τῶν γονέων καθrsquoαὑτοὺς περιποιήσασθαι πεφιλοτετιμημένους See above n De Vita Pyth ndash φανερὸν δὲ εἶναι καὶ διὰ τῆς ἀντικειμένης ἀντιθέσεωςmiddot τῶν γὰρβαρβάρων καὶ τῶν Ἑλλήνων περὶ τὴν Τροίαν ἀντιταξαμένων ἑκατέρους διrsquoἑνὸς ἀκρασίαν ταῖς δει-νοτάταις περιπεσεῖν συμφοραῖς τοὺς μὲν ἐν τῷ πολέμῳ τοὺς δὲ κατὰ τὸν ἀνάπλουν καὶ μόνης˂ταύτης˃τῆς ἀδικίας τὸν θεὸν δεκαετῆ καὶ χιλιετῆ τάξαι τὴν τιμωρίαν χρησμῳδήσαντα τήν τετῆς Τροίας ἅλωσιν καὶ τὴν τῶν παρθένων ἀποστολὴν παρὰ τῶν Λοκρῶν εἰς τὸ τῆς Aθηνᾶς τῆς Ἰλιά-δος ἱερόν Lamberton


avenged afterwards by Poseidonsup2sup2 So if in the case of the Greeks we perceive theman who did not control himself to have been Ajax we interpret the passage cor-rectly Iamblichus is clearly referring to the sentence imposed on the habitants ofLocroi and the maidensrsquo account for the Locrian custom to send every year twovirgins of their noblest families to serve in the temple of Athena Ilias ThereforeLambertonrsquos interpretation of the audacious man is incorrect (actually it wasAjax and not Paris)

Iamblichus thus proves himself to have been undoubtedly familiar with Cas-sandrarsquos story In any case we should bear in mind that we are dealing with amoralizing interpretation of the Trojan War which can well be characterizedas Pythagoreansup2sup3

(v) At 3110ndash16sup2⁴ Iamblichus mentions the effort of Calypso to bribe Odysseusby giving him immortality at the cost of forgetting and abandoning his legal wifePenelope This Odyssey element is nicely exploited in the tradition of Pythagorasrsquoteaching as he is supposed to have been the one who made use of the episodeand stressed that it took place near CrotonWe may welcome this moralizing Pytha-gorean use of a Homeric heroine as a clear shift from Plotinuswho at Enn I 6816ndash21 did not even make the distinction between Circe and Calypsosup2⁵

(vi) At 347ndash358sup2⁶ Pythagoras is reported to have claimed and proven that hehimself in a previous life had been Euphorbus son of Panthoos (the one who

This is a story of the wider tradition of the Trojan War It is found in the Iliou Persis and theIlias Parva cited in Proclusrsquo account For Cassandra as a prophetic figure and for her bad fatesee Davreux passim Mason ndash Aeacutelion ndash Cassandrarsquos rape hasalso been depicted in art (for example in fifth-century pottery Cassandra is often depicted at themoment that she clutches the image of Athena and Ajax seizes her) See Lamberton De Vita Pyth ndash λέγεται δὲ καὶ τοιοῦτόν τι διελθεῖν ὅτι περὶ τὴν χώραν τῶν Κροτω-νιατῶν ἀνδρὸς μὲν ἀρετὴ πρὸς γυναῖκα διαβεβόηται Ὀδυσσέως οὐ δεξαμένου παρὰ τῆς Καλυψοῦςἀθανασίαν ἐπὶ τῷ τὴν Πηνελόπην καταλιπεῖν ὑπολείποιτο δὲ ταῖς γυναιξὶν εἰς τοὺς ἄνδρας ἀποδεί-ξασθαι τὴν καλοκαγαθίαν ὅπως εἰς ἴσον καταστήσωσι τὴν εὐλογίαν See Lamberton ndash De vita Pyth ndash Aλλὰ μὴν τῆς γε τῶν ἀνθρώπων ἐπιμελείας ἀρχὴν ἐποιεῖτο τὴν ἀρί-στην ἥνπερ ἔδει προειληφέναι τοὺς μέλλοντας καὶ περὶ τῶν ἄλλων τὰ ἀληθῆ μαθήσεσθαι ἐναρ-γέστατα γὰρ καὶ σαφῶς ἀνεμίμνησκε τῶν ἐντυγχανόντων πολλοὺς τοῦ προτέρου βίου ὃν αὐτῶνἡ ψυχὴ πρὸ τοῦ τῷδε τῷ σώματι ἐνδεθῆναι πάλαι ποτὲ ἐβίωσε καὶ ἑαυτὸν δὲ ἀναμφιλέκτοιςτεκμηρίοις ἀπέφαινεν Εὔφορβον γεγονέναι Πάνθου υἱόν τὸν Πατρόκλου καταγωνιστήν καὶ τῶνὉμηρικῶν στίχων μάλιστα ἐκείνους ἐξύμνει καὶ μετὰ λύρας ἐμμελέστατα ἀνέμελπε καὶ πυκνῶς ἀνε-φώνει τοὺς ἐπιταφίους ἑαυτοῦ

αἵματί οἱ δεύοντο κόμαι Χαρίτεσσιν ὁμοῖαιπλοχμοί θrsquo οἳ χρυσῷ τε καὶ ἀργύρῳ εὖ ἤσκηντοοἷον δὲ τρέφει ἔρνος ἀνὴρ ἐριθηλὲς ἐλαίης


wounded Patroclussup2⁷ and later got killed by Menelaus)sup2⁸ Pythagoras is also reportedto have cited and sung along with his lyre the corresponding Homeric passage(Il 1751ndash60) We notice that he is reported to have sung it more frequently thanany other Homeric passage The Pythagorean flavour of the context of the episodeis evidentsup2⁹ What is more exactly the same story appears at Porphyryrsquos De vita Py-thagorica 264ndash17sup3⁰ whereas the fact that Euphorbus was the first in the line of Py-thagorasrsquo lives is also briefly mentioned at 454ndash5 of the same worksup3sup1

(vii) At 655ndash 15sup3sup2 the line from Od 4221 is quoted in an anecdotological ref-erence Iamblichus holds that Empedocles sat turned his lyre played a sooth-ing calming melody and sang the aforementioned verse which actually reportsa soothing drug being prepared by Helensup3sup3 The result is that Empedocles savedboth his host Anchitos from being murdered and a young man from committingthe murder Pythagoras is reported to have done more or less the same It shouldbe noted that both Porphyry and Iamblichus mention that Pythagoras actually

χώρῳ ἐν οἰοπόλῳ ὅθrsquo ἅλις ἀναβέβρυχεν ὕδωρκαλὸν τηλεθάον τὸ δέ τε πνοιαὶ δονέουσιπαντοίων ἀνέμων καί τε βρύει ἄνθεϊ λευκῷἐλθὼν δrsquo ἐξαπίνης ἄνεμος σὺν λαίλαπι πολλῇβόθρου τrsquo ἐξέστρεψε καὶ ἐξετάνυσσrsquo ἐπὶ γαίηςmiddotτοῖον Πάνθου υἱὸν ἐυμελίην ΕὔφορβονAτρείδης Μενέλαος ἐπεὶ κτάνε τεύχεrsquo ἐσύλα

Il ndash where Euphorbus cowardly hits the disarmed Patroclus with a spear hurledat the small of his back and then retreats to the ranks For an analysis of the passage see Janko ad loc Il ndash For a brief presentation of all the Homeric passages that include Euphorbussee Edwards ad loc For a discussion of the issue of Pythagorasrsquo own metempsychosis that includes many refer-ences to ancient sources as well as to secondary bibliography see Makris ad loc Porphyry De vita pyth ndash The only difference is that instead of ἀπέφαινε Εὔφορβοντὸν Πάνθου Iamblichus wrote ἀπέφαινε Εὔφορβον γεγονέναι Πάνθου υἱόν τὸν Πατρόκλουκαταγωνιστήν The rest of the quotation is exactly the same It is evident that in an era of inter-textuality Iamblichus used his masterrsquos work without bothering to change the exact words of thepassage in question Ibid ndash ἀνέφερεν δrsquoαὐτὸν εἰς τοὺς πρότερον γεγονότας πρῶτον μὲν Εὔφορβος λέγωνγενέσθαι Ibid ndash Ἐμπεδοκλῆς δὲ σπασαμένου τὸ ξίφος ἤδη νεανίου τινὸς ἐπὶ τὸν αὐτοῦ ξενο-δόχον Ἄγχιτον ἐπεὶ δικάσας δημοσίᾳ τὸν τοῦ νεανίου πατέρα ἐθανάτωσε καὶ ἀίξαντος ὡς εἶχεσυγχύσεως καὶ θυμοῦ ξιφήρους παῖσαι τὸν τοῦ πατρὸς καταδικαστήν ὡσανεὶ φονέα Ἄγχιτονμεθαρμοσάμενος ὡς εἶχε τὴν λύραν καὶ πεπαντικόν τι μέλος καὶ κατασταλτικὸν μεταχειρισάμενοςεὐθὺς ἀνεκρούσατο τὸ νηπενθὲς ἄχολόν τε κακῶν ἐπίληθον ἁπάντων κατὰ τὸν ποιητήν καὶ τόν τεἑαυτοῦ ξενοδόχον Ἄγχιτον θανάτου ἐρρύσατο καὶ τὸν νεανίαν ἀνδροφονίας For the verse in question see Heubeck West Hainsworth ad loc


used the healing power of musicsup3⁴ In the case we are discussing though it isHomer that both Empedocles and Pythagoras were reported to have sungWe re-gard the passage as evidence on the prestige and usefulness which certain Ho-meric material used to have in Pythagorasrsquo circle We should also mention thatPlutarch interpreted the verse in question as allegory of Helenrsquos bewitchingeloquencesup3⁵ It seems that both Empedocles and Pythagoras had realized thisfact and according to Iamblichusrsquo account used the verse appropriately

(viii) An echo of Il1313 (οὐ μέν με κτενέεις ἐπεὶ οὔ τοι μόρσιμός εἰμι) istraced at 11726ndash9sup3⁶ Pythagoras is reported to have had suspicions that Phalariswants to murder him but at the same time knows that he is not fated to die atthe hands of Phalaris The whole concept of fate which dominates peoplersquos livesis a topos in ancient Greek tradition Iamblichusrsquo use presupposes its knowledgeby the readerWe should perhaps add that the verse in question was used by an-cient writers such as Flavius Philostratussup3⁷ Eusebiussup3⁸ and also EustathiusArchbishop of Thessalonicasup3⁹

(ix) At 13118ndash22 there is a reference to Od 11582ndash92 where Odysseus meetsTantalus during his journey to the Underworld⁴⁰ It has been pointed out⁴sup1 that in

For the corresponding passages in both Porphyry and Iamblichusrsquo De vita Pyth as well asfor relevant bibliography see Makris ndash n See Plutarch Mor b cf Heubeck West Hainsworth ad loc De vita Pyth ndash ὁ δὲ Φάλαρις καὶ πρὸς ταῦτα ἠναισχύντει τε καὶ ἀπεθρασύνετοαὖθις οὖν ὁ Πυθαγόρας ὑποπτεύων μὲν ὅτι Φάλαρις αὐτῷ ῥάπτοι θάνατον ὅμως δὲ εἰδὼς ὡςοὐκ εἴη Φαλάριδι μόρσιμος ἐξουσιαστικῶς ἐπεχείρει λέγειν Philostr VA ndash δός εἰ βούλοιο κἀμοὶ τόπον εἰ δὲ μή πέμπε τὸν ληψόμενόν μου τὸσῶμα τὴν γὰρ ψυχὴν ἀδύνατον μᾶλλον δὲ οὐδrsquoἂν τὸ σῶμα τοὐμὸν λάβοις

οὐ γάρ με κτενέεις ἐπεὶ οὔτοι μόρσιμός εἰμιCf also ibid 881ndash5 ὧδε μὲν δὴ τῷ ἀνδρὶ τὰ ἐκ παρασκευῆς εἶχεν ἐπὶ τελευτῇ δrsquoεὗρον τοῦ

λόγου τὰ τελευταῖα τοῦ προτέρου τὸοὐ γάρ με κτενέεις ἐπεὶ οὔτοι μόρσιμός εἰμικαὶ τὰ πρὸ τούτου ἔτι ἀφrsquoὧν τοῦτο

Eus Contra Ieroclem ndash ἐν τῷ δικαστηρίῳ αὐτὰ δὴ ταῦτα ἀναφωνῆσαι δός εἰ βού-λει κἀμοὶ τόπον εἰ δὲ μή πέμπε τὸν ληψόμενόν μου τὸ σῶμα τὴν γὰρ ψυχὴν ἀδύνατον μᾶλλον δὲοὐδrsquoἂν τὸ σῶμα τοὐμὸν λάβοιςmiddot

οὐ γἀρ με κτενέεις ἐπεὶ οὔτοι μόρσιμός εἰμικαὶ δὴ ἐπὶ τούτῳ τῷ περιβοήτῳ ῥήματι ἀφανισθῆναι τοῦ δικαστηρίου φησὶν αὐτόν καὶ ἐν

τούτοις τὸ περὶ αὐτοῦ καταστρέφει δρᾶμα Schol Eust on Il (van der Valk) λέγει δὲ μόρσιμον ἀπολύτως ἐνταῦθα ὁ ποιητὴς τὸνμοίρᾳ ὑποκείμενον De vita Pyth ndash αὐτὸν δὲ συνεπικρύπτεσθαι πολὺ τῶν λεγομένων ὅπως οἱ μὲν καθα-ρῶς παιδευόμενοι σαφῶς αὐτῶν μεταλαμβάνωσιν οἳ δrsquo ὥσπερὍμηρός φησι τὸν Τάνταλον λυπῶν-ται παρόντων αὐτῶν ἐν μέσῳ τῶν ἀκουσμάτων μηδὲν ἀπολαύοντες Heubeck Hoekstra ad loc


the Odyssey no reason for Tantalusrsquo punishment is given ndash the poet takes forgranted his audiencersquos knowledge of the cause of these sufferings The latter isIamblichusrsquo point as Tantalus could neither eat nor drink despite the factthat everything was placed around him this was exactly the case with Pythago-rasrsquo teachings which were all around yet those who were not trained could notprofit from them We see the criticism Iamblichus addresses to those who havenot made the same choice The readersrsquo familiarity with Tantalus story has un-doubtedly played its role to Iamblichusrsquo choice to place it in this context

(x) At 13717ndash23⁴sup2 Iamblichus says that no Pythagorean called Pythagoraswith his name when they wanted to refer to him in his lifetime they calledhim divine (lsquogodlikersquo τὸν θεῖον) whereas after his death lsquoThat Manrsquo (ἄνδρα) Iam-blichus rightly mentions that in the Odyssey the shepherd Eumaios is embar-rassed to utter the name of Odysseus in spite of the fact that the king is absentThen the corresponding verses are quoted (Od 14144ndash5) We are dealing withthe well-known issue of how the Pythagoreans showed their respect towards Py-thagoras through sacred silence (εὐφημία) an element common in many mysticcults⁴sup3 The fact that a Homeric parallel is being used in the context of such animportant issue speaks of Homerrsquos prestige in the Pythagoreans

(xi) At 13921⁴⁴ the common Homeric expression ποιμὴν λαῶν⁴⁵ is reported tohave been used by the Pythagoreans in order to denote that ordinary people arenothing less than cattle which need a shepherd In fact Iamblichus holds thatHomer actually denoted a preference towards oligarchy by using this expressionThis view about ordinary people was of course fitted to the oligarchic characterof the Pythagorean societies Thus this passage is a rather interesting testimony

De vita Pyth ndash ἐπὶ μὲν γὰρ τῷ μηδένα τῶν Πυθαγορείων ὀνομάζειν Πυθαγόρανἀλλὰ ζῶντα μέν ὁπότε βούλοιντο δηλῶσαι καλεῖν αὐτὸν θεῖον ἐπεὶ δὲ ἐτελεύτησεν ἐκεῖνον τὸνἄνδρα καθάπερ Ὅμηρος ἀποφαίνει τὸν Εὔμαιον ὑπὲρ Ὀδυσσέως μεμνημένονmiddot

τὸν μὲν ἐγών ὦ ξεῖνε καὶ οὐ παρεόντrsquoὀνομάζειναἰδέομαιmiddot πέρι γάρ μrsquoἐφίλει καὶ ἐκήδετο λίην

For the sacred silence (εὐφημία) in general see Burkert For thesacred silence in the Pythagoreans as well as for Pythagorasrsquo authority for the antecedentssee Barnes ndash De vita Pyth ndash τὴν αὐτὴν ταύτην γνώμην ὑπὲρ Πυθαγόρου μεμνημένους ἐν μέτρῳτοὺς μαθητὰς λέγεινˑ

τοὺς μὲν ἑταίρους ἦγεν ἴσον μακάρεσσι θεοῖσιτοὺς δrsquoἄλλους ἡγεῖτrsquoοὔτrsquoἐν λόγῳ οὔτrsquoἐν ἀριθμῷτὸνὍμηρον μάλιστrsquoἐπαινεῖν ἐν οἷς εἴρηκε ποιμένα λαῶνˑ ἐμφανίσκειν γὰρ βοσκήματα τοὺς ἄλ-

λους ὄντας ὀλιγαρχικὸν ὄντα See for example Il


of how any work of art and its elements may be used freely by antecedents so asto serve not only artistic but also political purposes

b Protrepticus

In the Protrepticus a work in which Pythagorean and Platonic elements play amajor role⁴⁶ we find two references that actually refer to well-known episodesfrom the Odyssey ndash yet their transmission is an indirect one

(i) At 6922ndash709⁴⁷ we read that the famous weaving trick of Penelope(Od 292ndash95) is a useless activity of the irrational man whose passions imprisonit during the night while philosophy frees it during the dayWhat is important isthat we are dealing with an indirect reception of Homer through Plato as theProtrepticus passage which we are discussing (6922ndash709) actually belongs tothe section 6718ndash709 where Phaedo 82bndash84b is quoted and actually reprodu-ces Phaedo 84andashb In this case then the Homeric reference is actually Platorsquoschoice The latter as we have noted is treated by Iamblichus as being in harmo-ny with Pythagorasrsquo spirit

(ii) Similarly the reference to Achillesrsquo words that he would rather be the lastman on earth but still alive than a king in Hades as he currently is (Od 11489ndash90) actually belongs to a passage where the Republic is used by Iamblichus Pro-trepticus 781ndash824 actually quotes R 514andash517c To be more specific the refer-ence to Achillesrsquo words is found at Protrepticus 8023ndash816⁴⁸ and actually repeats

Iamblichusrsquo Protrepticus has been characterized as an anthology of Platonic philosophyMany of its passages are no other than known Platonic passages carefully chosen and elaborate-ly interwoven between one another as L Benakis notes (Benakis ) but still Platorsquos pas-sages are believed to be in harmony with Pythagorasrsquo spirit (Benakis ) The work alsocontains a major part of Aristotlersquos Protrepticus For the workrsquos relation to Aristotlersquos Protrepticussee P Kotzia-Panteli ndash Protrepticus ndash ἀλλrsquoοὕτω λογίσαιτrsquoἂν ψυχὴ ἀνδρὸς φιλοσόφου καὶ οὐκ ἂν οἰηθείητὴν μὲν φιλοσοφίαν χρῆναι ἑαυτὴν λύειν λυούσης δὲ ἐκείνης αὑτὴν παραδιδόναι ταῖς ἡδοναῖς καὶλύπαις ἑαυτὴν πάλιν αὖ ἐγκαταδεῖν καὶ ἀνήνυτον ἔργον πράττειν Πενελόπης τινὰ ἐναντίως ἰστὸνμεταχειριζομένηςmiddot ἀλλὰ γαλήνην τούτων παρασκευάζουσα ἑπομένη τῷ λογισμῷ καὶ ἀεὶ ἐν τούτῳοὖσα τὸ ἀληθὲς καὶ τὸ θεῖον καὶ τὸ ἀδόξαστον θεωμένη καὶ ὑπrsquo ἐκείνου τρεφομένη ζῆν τε οἴεταιοὕτω δεῖν ἕως ἂν ζῇ καὶ ἐπειδὰν τελευτήσῃ εἰς τὸ ξυγγενὲς καὶ εἰς τὸ τοιοῦτον ἀφικομένη ἀπηλ-λάχθαι τῶν ἀνθρωπίνων κακῶν Protrepticus ndash τιμαὶ δὲ καὶ ἔπαινοι εἴ τινες ἦσαν αὐτοῖς τότε παρrsquoἀλλήλων καὶ γέρατῷ ὀξύτατα καθορῶντι τὰ παριόντα καὶ μνημονεύοντι μάλιστα ὅσα τε πρότερα αὐτῶν καὶ ὕστεραεἴωθε καὶ ἅμα πορεύεσθαι καὶ ἐκ τούτων δὴ δυνατώτατα ἀπομαντευομένῳ τὸ μέλλον ἥξειν δοκεῖςἂν αὐτὸν ἐπιθυμητικῶς αὐτῶν ἔχειν καὶ ζηλοῦν τοὺς παρrsquoἐκείνοις τιμωμένους τε καὶ ἐνδυναστεύ-οντας ἢ τὸ τοῦ Ὁμήρου ἂν πεπονθέναι καὶ σφόδρα βούλεσθαι ἐπάρουρον ἐόντα θητευέμεν ἄλλῳ


R 516dndashe Nonetheless it is worth noticing that although Plato himself hadcondemned and censored the Homeric verses in question at R 386c he usedthem at 516dndashe without reservationndashand so did Iamblichus without saying any-thing on the matter We therefore conclude that we are dealing with another in-direct transmission of Homer through Plato who used the famous words ofAchilles in his discussion of the cave myth We should not forget either that inIamblichusrsquo work in question Plato is employed in a Pythagorean perspective

c De Mysteriis

At De mysteriis 81818⁴⁹ there is a negative reference to Homeric gods accordingto the philosopher it is not appropriate to refer to Homeric gods as they may beturned by prayer The latter characteristic is clearly stated at Il 9497 Iamblichusobviously expresses his disagreement with a common feature of Homeric godsthus placing himself in the chain of the philosophers who criticized Homer onthe image of the gods he provides his audience or his readers

Conclusion

On the basis of the exploration of the Homeric passages in Iamblichus the firstthing to remark is that Iamblichus in some cases of his De vita Pythagorica seemsto have taken the Homeric material directly from Porphyryrsquos De vita Pythagoricawhereas in the Protrepticus he used Platonic material which contained Homericelements But still all Homeric passages in Iamblichus have not been indirectlytransmitted We have a rather satisfying number of passages where Iamblichushimself chose to include Homer Moreover we should mention the fact that inIamblichusrsquo existing works the number of passages from the Odyssey are notconsiderably less in number compared to those from the Iliad This is somethingto note as in most writers of the Hellenistic age and Late Antiquity the quota-tions from the Iliad are considerably more numerous This may be attributedto the possibility of Iamblichusrsquo having an ear towards the Odyssey After allthe adherence to the text of the Odyssey might well be attributed to Porphyryrsquosinfluence In any case Iamblichus was certain that his own audience would

ἀνδρὶ παρrsquoἀκλήρῳ καὶ ὁτιοῦν ἂν πεπονθέναι μᾶλλον ἢ ἐκεῖνά τε δοξάζειν καὶ ἐκείνως ζῆν οὕτωςἔγωγε οἶμαι πᾶν μᾶλλον πεπονθέναι ἂν δέξασθαι ἢ ζῆν ἐκείνως De mysteriis ὥστε οὐδrsquo ὅπερ ἐκ τῶν Ὁμηρικῶν σὺ παρέθηκας τὸ στρεπτοὺς εἶναιτοὺς θεούς ὅσιόν ἐστι φθέγγεσθαι


be familiar with both Homeric poems and so he would be free to choose what-ever material he saw fit for his own purposes

We should also point out that the majority of Homeric references are to befound in the De vita Pythagorica a work that actually aims at providing the read-er with a Pythagorean way of living and thinking while the Protrepticus seems tobear Platonic elements which are considered in a Pythagorean perspective Ofcourse as a proper Neoplatonist Iamblichus widely receives Platonic philosophyand this might account for the only negative reference to Homer in the De mys-teriis In any case the Pythagorean flavour of the Homeric reception actuallyshows that Homerrsquos prestige in Iamblichusrsquo eyes was far from being negligible

Moreover Iamblichusrsquo reception of Homer is developed in the context of hisown Neoplatonic philosophy that bears Pythagorean elements The selection ofHomer as a source text in cases where philosophical matters are discussed is byno means accidental Having undoubtedly a sound knowledge of Homer as hiseducation denotes Iamblichus does not refer to Homer much he neverthelessdoes so in cases where his master used to do so or when he considers it fit tohis argumentation He knows his audience to be familiar with the Homerictextndashnevertheless his aim is not to explain Homer as his teacher Porphyrydid but to enrich his own Neoplatonic philosophical exegesis



Maria Kanellou

Ἑρμιόνην ἣ εἶδος ἔχε χρυσέης Aφροδίτης(Od 414) Praising a Female throughAphrodite ndashFrom Homer into Hellenistic Epigram

It is firstly in the Homeric epics that one finds the idea of a woman being praisedthrough her comparison to one of the goddesses especially Aphrodite the arche-type of beauty and sexuality formulas of the type εἶδος ἔχε χρυσέης Aφροδίτης(Od 414) are usually employed for this purposesup1 My aim in this chapter is to ex-amine the reception of this motif in the surviving poems of the Hellenistic epi-grammatists and to exemplify how its transformations are closely connected toand influenced by several factors changes in the religious practices that tookplace during the Hellenistic era the use of the goddess Aphrodite within theframework of the Ptolemaic political propaganda and the generic characteristicsof specific sub-categories of epigrams An appreciation of the motifrsquos reuse in thepoetry of the archaic and classical era is essential because it enables the identi-fication of the advances which the Hellenistic epigrammatists brought about

With the exception of the Homeric epics no surviving poetic text that datesto the archaic and classical periods openly equates a mortalrsquos charms with a god-dessrsquo beauty as we shall see through characteristic case-studies the praise is al-ways somehow restrained and the gap between mortals and gods is alwaysmaintained On the contrary in the Hellenistic era and especially in the Melea-grean epigrams (1st century BC) the motif is transformed in manners that tran-scend the gap between deities and humans Let us first examine two Sapphicfragments (frr 964ndash5 and 311ndash5 Voigt) which exemplify the restraint in the re-ception of the motif during the archaic times

I would like to thank AGriffiths SChatzikosta LFloridi RHoumlschele and above all CCareyfor the critical reading and comments on earlier drafts of this chapter It goes without saying thatany views expressed are mine alone See the Homeric formulae ἰκέλη χρυσέῃ Aφροδίτῃ (Οd Il ) andοὐδrsquo εἰ χρυσείῃ Aφροδίτῃ κάλλος ἐρίζοι (Ιl ) In a similar vein in Od ndash Athenabestows on queen Penelope irresistible divine attractiveness In Od ndash Odysseus extolsNausicaarsquos godlike virginal beauty by asking her whether she is a goddess or a mortal and thenby comparing her to Artemis in stature and comeliness His praise is restrained because heentertains the possibility of the girl being a goddess and never states that she is a goddess (cfOd ) For the topic of the comparison of men with gods see Bieler passim

σε θέαι σrsquo ἰκέλαν ἀρι-γνώται σᾶι δὲ μάλιστrsquo ἔχαιρε μόλπαι (fr 964ndash5)

(She honoured) you as being an easilyrecognized goddess and took most delight in your songsup2

φαίνεταί μοι κῆνος ἴσος θέοισινἔμμενrsquo ὤνηρ ὄττις ἐνάντιός τοιἰσδάνει καὶ πλάσιον ἆδυ φωνεί-σας ὐπακούεικαὶ γελαίσας ἰμέροενhellip(fr 311ndash5)

He seems as equal to gods to methe one who sits opposite youand listens nearby to your sweet voiceand lovely laughterhellip(trans Campbell 2002 with minor adjustments)

In fr 964ndash5 Atthis is commended for resembling a goddess In fr 311ndash2 the manwho sits opposite to a woman and listens to her voice and laughter is said to belsquoequal to the godsrsquo This phrase either denotes that the man is blessed to see thewoman or extols his ability to resist her attractiveness in either case it simulta-neously praises her beauty indirectly In both fragments the hyperbole is con-trolled as the statements are expressed as forming subjective thoughts andnot an objective incontrovertible truth The reason for this caution in the formu-lation of praise lies in the religious considerations of Sapphorsquos era expressingsuperiority over the gods would be profoundly dangerous because it would pro-voke their wrathsup3 Sappho herself highlights the religious beliefs of her timewhen she says in fr9621ndash23 lsquoit is not suitable for us to rival goddesses in love-liness of figurersquo In Homer the hyperbole is permitted as the epics praise mythicheroes and heroines not living contemporaries

Ibycus fr 288 Davies proves that similar modes of praise were used for themale beloved and moreover preserves a variation of the motif which as weshall see was widely imitated and refreshed by the Hellenistic epigrammatiststhe boyrsquos seductive charms are extolled as deriving from the co-operation of agroup of deities

For the supplement ἔτι]σε and the interpretation of the MS σεθεασϊκελαν see Page See eg Hdt Pi P ndash I ndash See also Call Ap and Williams ndash for further relevant passages

190 Maria Kanellou

Eὐρύαλε γλαυκέων Χαρίτων θάλος lt gtκαλλικόμων μελέδημα σὲ μὲν Κύπριςἅ τrsquo ἀγανοβλέφαρος Πει-θὼ ῥοδέοισιν ἐν ἄνθεσι θρέψαν

Euryalus offshoot of the blue-eyed Gracesdarling of the beautiful-haired (Seasons) the Cyprianand soft-lidded Persuasionnursed you among rose-blossoms(trans Campbell 2001 with minor adjustments)

It should be stressed that Ibycus does not equate Euryalus either to Aphrodite or herattendants his beauty is definitely idealized but he is not portrayed as excelling hispatron deities⁴ The precise means through which each deity makes him irresistibleis left vague but the audience can easily envisage a chain of attributes⁵

From the relevant poetic texts of the classical era I use as my case-study(due to space limitations) Aristophanes Ec 973ndash75⁶ The motif is here used ina burlesque of lyric love songs especially of the paraclausithyron⁷ a girl is ex-tolled through her association with multiple deities

ὦ χρυσοδαίδαλτον ἐμὸνμέλημα Κύπριδος ἔρνοςμέλιττα Μούσης Χαρίτων

Breitenberger ( ) is wrong to suggest that Euryalus lsquoin his beauty [hellip] seems equal tothese divine beings or even superior since due to his origin he combines all of their qualitiesrsquoWhat the poem does is to make him a favourite of the gods his beauty and charm reflect divinefavour Elsewhere the Graces and the Seasons adorn Aphrodite and their role implies the granting ofalluring beauty and seductiveness HHomVenndash and Od ndash (after her affair withAres) and Cypr frndash DaviesBernabeacute (before Parisrsquo Judgment) As far as Persuasion is con-cerned she can confer physical attraction the power of persuasion and alluring talk (cf egRufinus AP = Page Meleager AP = GP Meleager AP = GP and Leontius Scholasticus APl ) Aphrodite can be thought of as bequeathing variouscharms such as beauty and seductiveness (cf eg Hes Th ndash describing Aphroditersquosprovince and referring to these attributes) Similar is the tenor of Ibycus S (a) ndash Davies Another interesting passage is E Hecndash where Polyxena says that among young girls shewas conspicuous like the gods in all but her mortality Here the hyperbole is explicitly tempered bya firm statement of the unbridgeable boundary between mortals and immortal gods Cf Od ndashwhere Nausicaa is said to resemble the immortal goddesses in stature and beauty The princess ismortal while the goddesses are deathless and this maintains strict boundaries between them For the lsquolove-duetrsquo (Ar Ec ndash) as a sophisticated literary parody of the paraclausithyronsee Olson ndash


θρέμμα Τρυφῆς πρόσωπονἄνοιξον ἀσπάζου με∙διά τοι σὲ πόνους ἔχω

Oh my golden work of artmy darling scion of Cyprishoneybee of the Muses nurslingof the Graces the image of Delightopen ndash welcome meitrsquos for you that I am suffering so(ed and trans Sommerstein 2007 with minor adjustments)

As far as Aphrodite is concerned a metaphorical relationship is implied betweenthe girl and the goddess (through the use of the term ἔρνος) with the praisestressing the formerrsquos beauty and sexuality⁸ Her characterization as the honey-bee of the Muse(s) extols her singing skills (a bee produces honey)⁹ but alsopoints to the distress that she has caused the boy because of his longing forher (a bee can also sting cf Ec 968ndash70) Her description as lsquothe very imageof Delightrsquo is also ambiguous both stressing the softness of her skin and imply-ing her luxuriousnesssup1⁰ So as in Ibycusrsquo fr288 Davies the girl is not equatedwith and does not surpass her benefactors the praise is restrained and mortalsremain at armrsquos length from the divine

When we now move on to the epigrams at the first stages of the genrersquos devel-opment as a literary genre and throughout the third century BC no clear and unam-biguous comparison between a common mortal woman and the goddess exists Istart my analysis of the epigrammatic material with Nossis whose collectiondates from 280 or 270 BCsup1sup1 AP 6275 (= 5 GP) and AP 9332 (= 4 GP) exemplifythis tendency for maintaining a clear boundary between mortals and gods inboth of them only very indirect links are created between the devotees and Aphro-dite the poems toy very discreetly with the idea of a mortal woman resembling thedeity in that they all share the same qualities of beauty andor slynesssup1sup2

See LSJ sv ἔρνος Ι ΙΙ One can compare γλαυκέων Χαρίτων θάλος in Ibycus fr Cf Ussher See LSJ sv τρυφή Ι ΙΙ Cf Sommerstein See Gutzwiller ndash Gutzwiller ( ) is fundamental for the interpretation of these epigrams She arguesthat the women and Aphrodite are linked together by shared qualities lsquoin both external appear-ance and its internal reflectionrsquo Her analysis focuses on the thematic links among the devoteesand not between them and Aphrodite I revisit the epigrams with the aim to show the speciallink that is created between the women and the goddess For the interrelation between Aphro-dite and her devotees as expressed in votive epigrams see also Natsina ndash

192 Maria Kanellou

ἐλθοῖσαι ποτὶ ναὸν ἰδώμεθα τᾶς Aφροδίταςτὸ βρέτας ὡς χρυσῷ δαιδαλόεν τελέθειεἵσατό μιν Πολυαρχὶς ἐπαυρομένα μάλα πολλάνκτῆσιν ἀπrsquo οἰκείου σώματος ἀγλαΐας(AP 9332 = 4 GP)

Let us go to the temple and see Aphroditersquos statuehow intricately it is adorned with goldPolyarchis set it up enjoying the benefits of the great wealththat she has from the beauty of her own body(trans Gutzwiller 1998 with minor adjustments)

χαίροισάν τοι ἔοικε κομᾶν ἄπο τὰν Aφροδίτανἄνθεμα κεκρύφαλον τόνδε λαβεῖν Σαμύθαςδαιδάλεός τε γάρ ἐστι καὶ ἁδύ τι νέκταρος ὄσδειτούτῳ καὶ τήνα καλὸν Ἄδωνα χρίει(AP 6275 = 5 GP)

With delight I think Aphrodite has received this gifta headband from Samytharsquos hairFor it is variegated and smells somewhat of sweet nectarwith this she too anoints handsome Adonis

In AP 9332 Nossis plays with the natural assumption that since Aphrodite is thegoddess of seduction and seduction is the trade of the hetaerae she and herdevotee share the same qualities Implicit clues suggest a certain degree of re-semblance between Polyarchis and Aphrodite Specifically it is the adjectivesχρυσῷ and δαιδαλόεν (l2) describing the statue that hint at these shared qual-ities as they create a triangular link between the goddess her devotee and thedevoted object At a first glance the epithet χρυσῷ refers to the gilt surface of thestatue (or to the metal from which it is madesup1sup3) and δαιδαλόεν to an elaboratepattern on its surface (perhaps to the garment that covers the statuersquos body)sup1⁴But χρυσῷ also encapsulates the goddessrsquos beauty which is mirrored in herstatuesup1⁵ and anticipates the explanation provided for the source of Polyarchisrsquo

We can take the statue to be gilted (cf Gow-Page ii Gutzwiller ) or (lesslikely) follow the lemmatist (C) and take it to be made entirely of gold ― this hyperbole wouldhighlight Polyarchisrsquo wealth Derivatives of δαιδάλλω are often used in the praise of objects that are decorated with intri-cate motifs see eg Il ndash of the shield made by Hephaestus AR ndash of themantle that Athena gave to Jason Mosch of Europarsquos golden basket Cf Ar Ec The adjective constitutes Aphroditersquos most common characterization from archaic times on-wards See eg Od Il For thecharacterization of Aphrodite as lsquogoldenrsquo see Friedrich ndash For a funny reading of theHomeric epithet see Luc J Tr Other poets in a scoptic context link the epithet with prostitution


wealth it was the beauty of her body that enabled her to make such an offering(l4)sup1⁶ Similarly the adjective δαιδαλόεν can be interpreted as a double-entendrethat indicates the lsquocunningrsquo nature both of Aphrodite whose figure the statuerepresentssup1⁷ and of Polyarchis who devoted the object to the goddess Onemay juxtapose the adjectiversquos use in the epigram to Hes Th 574ndash75 wherethe word stands for the embroidered design of Pandorarsquos veil but most impor-tantly hints at the cunning of its wearer and of the gods who created Pandora towreak vengeance upon humans ζῶσε δὲ καὶ κόσμησε θεὰ γλαυκῶπις Aθήνηἀργυφέῃ ἐσθῆτι∙ κατὰ κρῆθεν δὲ καλύπτρην δαιδαλέην χείρεσσι κατέσχεθεθαῦμα ἰδέσθαι lsquohellipand with her hands she (ie Athena) hung an intricatelywrought veil from her head a wonder to seersquosup1⁸

Nossis AP 6275 illustrates the dedication of another object ie of a head-band by a woman called Samytha The adjective δαιδάλεος (l3) describing theobjectsup1⁹ most probably creates a verbal link with δαιδαλόεν in AP 93322 andcan be considered as a pointer towards the womanrsquos crafty nature a character-istic that she shares with Aphrodite Moreover the nectar used by Samytha linksher to Aphrodite since it is (supposedly) the same one with the nectar that thegoddess used to anoint Adonisrsquo body (see the emphatic use of τούτῳ in l4) Thishyperbolic statement accentuates the praise of the sensual appeal of the dedicat-ed object and incidentally implies that it is worthy of its recipient It praises Sa-mytha embellishing her with divine beauty and sexuality A comparison withSappho fr9418ndash20 Voigt discloses the development in the mode of praise καὶπhellip[ ] μύρωι βρενθείωι [ ]ρυ[]ν ἐξαλltεgtίψαο κα[ὶ [βασ˩]ιληίωι In the Sapphicfragment the girlrsquos sexuality is praised through the idea that she anoints herselfwith flowery myrrh the customary means for beautifying queens In the epi-gram in a more hyperbolic manner Samytha uses nectar However despite

(an easy association as Aphrodite was the patroness of the hetaerae) see eg AP = GP andAP = GP For the association between the gods and gold see Williams Gutzwiller ndash There is rich intertextual background on Aphroditersquos wily nature Eg in Hes Th deceits(ἐξαπάτας) form part of her realm of power in HHomndash she herself connects her powerover gods with skills that have to do with seduction and trickery in lyric poetry she is charac-terized as lsquowile-weavingrsquo Sapph fr Voigt παῖ˩ Δ[ί]ος δολ[όπλοκε Simon fr ndash PMGἢ δολοπλ[όκου helliprsquoΑφροδίτ[ας and fr PMG hellip δολομήδεος Aφροδίτας Bacch Dith hellip δόλιος άφροδίτα HesTh ndash is also noted by Gutzwiller Translation by Most () slight-ly altered The term δαιδάλεος denotes that the headband was embroidered or that it consisted of var-ious colours (Gow-Page ii )

194 Maria Kanellou

the exaggeration Samytha is only indirectly linked to the goddess and a clearboundary is maintained between them

By examining now the epigrams of Posidippus and Callimachus who flour-ished during the 3rd century BC we detect that these court poets associated onlythe Hellenistic queens to Aphrodite and did not openly compare any otherwoman to the goddess Only AP 5194 (= 34 GP) which might have been writtenby a court poetsup2⁰ associates a girl with Aphrodite However as we shall seethere is no effort to identify the girl with the deity Three Posidippean epigramsopenly equate Arsinoe II (316 BCndash270 BC or 268 BCsup2sup1) with Aphrodite and refer tothe queenrsquos cult at her temple on Cape Zephyriumsup2sup2

ἔνθα με Καλλικράτης ἱδρύσατο καὶ βασιλίσσηςἱερὸν Aρσινόης Κύπριδος ὠνόμασενἀλλrsquo ἐπὶ τὴν Ζεφυρῖτιν ἀκουσομένην AφροδίτηνἙλλήνων ἁγναί βαίνετε θυγατέρεςοἵ θrsquo ἁλὸς ἐργάται ἄνδρεςmiddot ὁ γὰρ ναύαρχος ἔτευξεντοῦθrsquo ἱερὸν παντὸς κύματος εὐλίμενον(1165ndash 10 AB = 12 GP)

Here Callicrates set me up and called methe shrine of Queen Arsinoe-AphroditeSo then to her who will be called Zephyritis-Aphroditecome you pure daughters of the Greeksand you too toilers on the sea For the captain builtthis shrine to be a harbour safe from every wave

τοῦτο καὶ ἐν πόντῳ καὶ ἐπὶ χθονὶ τῆς ΦιλαδέλφουΚύπριδος ἱλάσκεσθrsquo ἱερὸν Aρσινόηςἣν ἀνακοιρανέουσαν ἐπὶ Ζεφυρίτιδος ἀκτῆςπρῶτος ὁ ναύαρχος θήκατο Καλλικράτηςἡ δὲ καὶ εὐπλοίην δώσει καὶ χείματι μέσσῳτὸ πλατὺ λισσομένοις ἐκλιπανεῖ πέλαγος(119 AB = 13 GP)

ie Posidippus who was definitely a court poet or Asclepiades for whom it is uncertainwhether he worked under Ptolemaic patronage or not For the ascription of the epigram see Gui-chard ndash Sens No firm conclusion can be drawn for the authorship Arsinoersquos death is dated to BC (see Cadell ndash) but the alternative date of BC has been proposed as well (Grzybeck ndash) The temple was erected by Callicrates the naval admiral of the Ptolemies For Callicratessee Bing ndash Cf Stephens ndash for the identification of thearmed Arsinoe with Athena in AB Bing identifies the goddess in this epigramwith Aphrodite APl (A) = GP (AsclepiadesPosidippus) also praises a Ptolemaic queenmost probably Berenice I by associating her with Aphrodite I am not analyzing this epigramdue to space limitations


Both on the sea and on land make offerings to this shrineof Cypris Arsinoe PhiladelphusShe it was ruling over the Zephyrian promontorywhom Callicrates the captain was the first to consecrateAnd she will grant safe sailing and in the middle of the stormwill smooth the vast sea for those who entreat her

καὶ μέλλων ἅλα νηῒ περᾶν καὶ πεῖσμα καθάπτεινχερσόθεν Eὐπλοίᾳ lsquoχαῖρεrsquo δὸς Aρσινόῃπό]τνιαν ἐκ νηοῦ καλέων θεόν ἣν ὁ Βοΐσκουναυαρχῶν Σάμιος θήκατο Καλλικράτηςναυτίλε σοὶ τὰ μάλιστα(391ndash5 AB)

Whether you are ready to cross the sea in a ship or to fasten the cableto shore say lsquogreetingsrsquo to Arsinoe of fair sailinginvoking the reverend goddess from her temple which was dedicatedby the Samian captain Callicrates son of Boiscusespecially for you sailor(ed and trans AustinBastianini 2002 with minor adjustments)

The epigrams mirror Ptolemaic self-fashioning After gathering together the culttitles which reflect Arsinoersquos identification with the deity I investigate the reli-gious implications of this representation of the queensup2sup3 In 116 AB Arsinoersquosname is juxtaposed with that of the goddess (l6) and then it is suppressed asshe is called lsquoZephyritis Aphroditersquo (l7) in 1191ndash2 AB it is used along with Aph-roditersquos title lsquoCyprisrsquo and the appellation is preceded by the cult title Philadel-phus which as Fraser states softens the incestuous nature of Arsinoersquos mar-riage to her brother and lays emphasis on their mutual powersup2⁴ in 392 AB thequeen takes on Aphroditersquos cult title Euploiasup2⁵ Although it is uncertain towhat extent these cult titles reveal different degrees of association to Aphroditeit is likely that the main factor is a desire for variation

Fraser ( i ndash) discerns three modes of identification of the Hellenistic kings andqueens with the gods (i) identification by adoption of their attributes (ii) identification by jux-taposition and (iii) complete identification in which the royal name is suppressed Fraser i For Aphrodite Euploia see Pirenne-Delforge passim I believe that this mode of iden-tification with the divine does not compartmentalize the diverse powers of the deified queen itprovides her worshippers with a way of invoking particular powers of the deified queen For Ar-sinoe Euploia see Robert ndash Cf also the anonymous ChicLitPap noII colii (Powell ndash) where Arsinoe is said to lsquogovern the searsquo (κρατοῦσα σὺ πόντον) For thispapyrus see Barbantani ndash

196 Maria Kanellou

All three poems commemorate directly or indirectly the role of Arsinoe II as amarine deity at Cape Zephyrium Callicratesrsquo dedication aimed to promote thequeen as the patroness of the maritime empire and this formed part of hisplan to expand the influence of the Ptolemaic navy throughout theMediterraneansup2⁶ Moreover it is possible that 1168 AB where the chaste daugh-ters of the Greeks are invited to worship Arsinoe evokes her role as a goddess ofmarriage In fact the queen has the same double cultic function in CallimachusAthen7318b (= 51ndash4Pf = 14 GP) where Selenaiarsquos dedication of a nautilus toArsinoe II is both an offering for the protection of sailors by the deified queenand a symbol of the girlrsquos hope for a good marriagesup2⁷ Similarly to the epigramsquoted above in Callimachus fr 5 Pf Arsinoe is concisely addressed as lsquoCyprisrsquo(l2) the appellation emphatically identifying her with Aphrodite hellipἀλλὰ σὺ νῦνμε Κύπρι Σεληναίης ἄνθεμα πρῶτον ἔχεις (lsquobut Cypris I am yours a first offeringfrom Selenaearsquo) In addition in 11610 AB the temple is projected as offeringsanctuary from any sort of adversity (εὐλίμενον) the adjective παντός opensup the semantic field of the term κύματος which thus symbolizes any kind ofadversity and misfortune The ambiguity of the phrase also allows for the possi-bility that the queen was worshipped at Cape Zephyrium under additional roles― the lack of further sources relating to the nature of her worship there may haveled us to mistakenly narrow the spectrum of her actual religious functions Apapyrus of 2521 BC which preserves the names of various streets in Alexandriaderiving from Arsinoersquos diverse religious roles includes the appellation lsquoArsinoeEleēmonrsquo (lsquoArsinoe of pityrsquo) Another papyrus dating to the second century BCcontains the cult title lsquoArsinoe Sōzousarsquo (lsquoArsinoe the Saviourrsquo) Both titles proj-ect the queenrsquos benevolence and it is intriguing that lsquoEleēmonrsquo (lsquoThe Mercifulrsquo)was also a cult title for Aphroditesup2⁸ It is exactly her kindness that the Posidip-pean epigrams also stress at their closure (1169ndash 10 AB 1195ndash6 AB and397ndash8 AB)sup2⁹ Along with the papyri they exemplify that this was a feature ofher deified persona which she shared with Aphroditesup3⁰

Robert ndash Gutzwiller Cf Fraser i ndash ii ndash Note also that Posidippus AB implies Arsinoersquosbenevolence since a dedication is offered to her by a manumitted slave woman (see Stephens ) For the projection of Arsinoersquos benevolence in Posidippusrsquo epigrams cf Stephens ndash Cf APl (A) = GP (Asclepiades or Posidippus) which also praises a Ptolemaic queen(most probably Berenice I) by associating her with Aphrodite


Leaving aside Arsinoe II I turn our attention to AP 5194 = 34 GP since it isessential to examine the motif rsquos transformation in this poem given that it mighthave been written by a court poet (PosidippusAsclepiades)

αὐτοὶ τὴν ἁπαλὴν Εἰρήνιον εἶδον ἜρωτεςΚύπριδος ἐκ χρυσέων ἐρχόμενοι θαλάμωνἐκ τριχὸς ἄχρι ποδῶν ἱερὸν θάλος οἷά τε λύγδουγλυπτήν παρθενίων βριθομένην χαρίτωνκαὶ πολλοὺς τότε χερσὶν ἐπrsquo ἠιθέοισιν ὀιστούςτόξου πορφυρέης ἧκαν ἀφrsquo ἁρπεδόνης

The Εrotes themselves looked on soft Eirenionwhilst leaving Cyprisrsquo golden chambersa sacred shoot from head to feet as ifcarved from white marble laden with a virginrsquos gracesand then they let fly from their hands many arrowsagainst young men sent from the purple bow-strings(trans Paton 1999 with minor adjustments)

Similarly to Ibycus fr288 Davies Eirenion is only indirectly associated to Aphro-dite Her praise starts immediately with the use of the adjective ἁπαλὴν a com-mon laudatory description in erotic poetrysup3sup1 The image of the Erotes coming outof Aphroditersquos chamber is a natural one since they are her childrensup3sup2 They formthe intermediaries between Eirenion and Aphrodite connecting the girl with thegoddess Aphrodite is not the one meeting her but it is her children who see Eir-enion by chance and start shooting men as soon as they gaze upon her Accord-ing to this interpretation the praise of Eirenion is accentuated because it is as ifthe Erotes themselves fall prey to her attractiveness The notion highlights herimpact on male viewerssup3sup3

In addition Eirinion is a ἱερὸν θάλος (l3) the characterization emphasizing hersupernatural beautysup3⁴ It is the adjective ἱερὸν meaning lsquofilled with or manifestingdivine power supernaturalrsquosup3⁵ which adds an element of hyperbole the girl exhibitsdivine beauty from head to toe As in Ibycus fr288 Davies the phrase implies a spe-cial bond between Eirenion and a deity (or deities) responsible for her supreme

For the use of ἀπαλός in poetry see Sens The MSS reading ἐρχόμενοι has been emended into ἐρχομένην see Sens ndash Theparticiple ἐρχομένοι can be defended since the distich makes perfect sense as transmitted Sens ( ) also notes that the Erotes act as surrogates for men and adds that theirgaze stands for that of the youths For her other characterizations within the distich see Guichard ndash Sens ndash LSJ sv ἱερός Ι

198 Maria Kanellou

beautyWhile these benefactors remain unnamed Aphrodite naturally comes to thereaderrsquos mind as she is mentioned in the first distichsup3⁶ So if indeed the poem waswritten by a court poet it is in line with the pronounced reluctance observed in theircorpus to equate commoners with Aphrodite

This narrow and highly specialized range of application of the motif withinthe work of the court poets is very interesting I suggest that it can be directlyrelated to the proximity of these poets to the centre of power and their role asdisseminators of the Ptolemaic propaganda Since we are at the first stages ofthe dissemination of the official propaganda equating the Hellenistic queenswith Aphrodite the indiscriminate random and repeated comparison of ordina-ry mortals to the goddess could have the potential of diluting this propaganda

Outside now of the Ptolemaic court and later in time (2nd century BC) themotif is employed by Antipater of Sidon in AP 9567 (= 61 GP) in which a theat-rical artist called Antiodemis is praised as lsquothe nursling of Aphroditersquo (l 2Παφίης νοσσὶς) and AP 7218 (= 23 GP) where the dead hetaera Lais is eulogisedby her tomb with a series of hyperboles that involve Aphrodite As AP 95672 hassimilar implications to Ibycus fr288 Davies I focus on AP 7218 (= 23 GP) thatarticulates the praise in a much more open emphatic and hyperbolic way

τὴν καὶ ἅμα χρυσῷ καὶ ἁλουργίδι καὶ σὺν Ἔρωτιθρυπτομένην ἁπαλῆς Κύπριδος ἁβροτέρηνΛαΐδrsquo ἔχω πολιῆτιν ἁλιζώνοιο ΚορίνθουΠειρήνης λευκῶν φαιδροτέρην λιβάδωντὴν θνητὴν Κυθέρειαν ἐφrsquo ᾗ μνηστῆρες ἀγαυοίπλείονες ἢ νύμφης εἵνεκα Τυνδαρίδοςδρεπτόμενοι Χάριτάς τε καὶ ὠνητὴν Aφροδίτηνἧς καὶ ὑπrsquo εὐώδει τύμβος ὄδωδε κρόκῳἧς ἔτι κηώεντι μύρῳ τὸ διάβροχον ὀστεῦνκαὶ λιπαραὶ θυόεν ἆσθμα πνέουσι κόμαιᾗ ἔπι καλὸν ἄμυξε κατὰ ῥέθος Aφρογένειακαὶ γοερὸν λύζων ἐστονάχησεν Ἔρωςεἰ δrsquo οὐ πάγκοινον δούλην θέτο κέρδεος εὐνήνἙλλὰς ἂν ὡς Ἑλένης τῆσδrsquo ὕπερ ἔσχε πόνον

I hold Lais who exalted in her wealth and her purple dress and in her amourswith the power of Eros more delicate than tender Cypristhe citizen of sea-girt Corinthmore sparkling than the white water of Peirenethe mortal Cytherea who had more noble suitorsthan Tyndareusrsquo daughter

Cf Sens ndash


plucking her charms and mercenary favourssup3⁷Her very tomb smells of sweet-scented saffronher skull is still soaked with fragrant ointmentand her anointed locks still breathe a perfume as of frankincenseFor her the Foam-born tore her lovely faceand sobbing Eros groaned and wailedIf she had not made her bed the public slave of gainGreece would have pains for her as for Helen(ed and trans Gutzwiller 1998sup3⁸ with minor adjustments)

In this poem the tomb speaks as if it was Laisrsquo last and perpetual lover Alreadyin the second line the hetaera is praised as being lsquomore delicate than tenderCyprisrsquo The hyperbolic phrase obviously presents her as superior to the goddessin softness of the skin This development in the reception of the motif can be at-tributed to the generic characteristics of the sub-genre of fictitious sepulchralepigrams (to which our epigram belongs) since extravagant statements are acommon feature of praises of the deadsup3⁹ Also as we shall see later on in detailthere is a scoptic element in the epigram which inevitably undermines the praiseof Laisrsquo beauty It is quite interesting that there is flexibility in the employment ofthe motif since the epigrammatist (in the voice of the tomb) moves betweenover-exaggerated praises and more restrained ones In l 5 the expression τὴνθνητὴν Κυθέρειαν limits the hyperbole of the praise as it emphasizes Laisrsquo mor-tality stressing human limits and firmly binding her superiority to the humanworld In parallel the hetaera is eulogized as being superior to lsquothe daughterbride of Tyndareusrsquo in beauty (ll 5ndash6) The phrase is ambiguous since νύμφηcan mean both lsquobridersquo and lsquomaidenrsquo and therefore can refer either to Leda orHelen It is the second comparison with Helen in the epigramrsquos closure whichwill lead the reader to interpret this phrase as referring to Helen as well Afterall in general terms the disloyal Helen is a better yardstick for comparison

For the metonymic use of the Graces and Aphrodite see the analysis of the epigram For thedefence of the MSS reading ἀγαυοί altered by Gow-Page ( ii ) into ἄγερθεν see White ndash Ι alter the translation slightly and in the original I printἜρωτι (l) Χάριτάς and Aφροδίτην (l) For Lais cf Athb Supposedly in an engraved epigram on a stone hydria marking hertomb in Thessaly Greece is said to have been enslaved by her divine beauty Eros begot her andCorinth reared her On the narratives on her death see McClure ndash For the heroiza-tion of the deceased and their association with the gods in funerary epigrams of the stndashrd cen-tury AD see Wypustek passim In sarcophagi and tomb statues of the second century ADthe deceased themselves appear in the form of gods eg the depiction of a wife can allude toAphroditeVenus (especially to lsquoCapitoline Venusrsquo) the allusion stressing her beauty and wom-anly virtues including sexual modesty For this topic see ZankerEwald ndash

200 Maria Kanellou

with a hetaera than her mother Leda⁴⁰ Lais is more beautiful than Helen sinceas the tomb says more men were subjugated to her beauty as opposed to theSpartan princess The formula μνηστῆρες ἀγαυοί reserved in Homer forPenelope⁴sup1 is attached here to Helen Lines 11ndash 12 also praise the hetaera Aph-rodite and Eros are depicted as mourning her death The description of their be-reavement reflects great pathos and sorrow (Aphrodite tears her face and Erosgroans and weeps)

However the encomium of Laisrsquo beauty constitutes only one side of the epi-gram the paradoxes included in Laisrsquo hyperbolic praise point towards the humourthe tomb speaks as if Lais retains her beauty in death as if her body is not decayedbut able to preserve in the grave the scent of the saffron perfume and myrrh Thisincompatibility between her praise (ll 9ndash10) and the realistic image of a decayedbody in a grave⁴sup2 makes the praise seem almost grotesque There are two furtherpoints which reduce the hetaera from a high class courtesan to a simple prostitutethus creating a melange of praise and satire In l 7 the metonymic use of the god-dess and her companions praises Laisrsquo charms beauty sexual skills and attractive-ness However the use of ὠνητήν highlights the venality of this divine beauty andthe idea suggests a slight under-hand irony against Lais Moreover the phraselsquoplucking her charms and mercenary favoursrsquo is placed at the end of her comparisonwith Helen which seems to suggest that the commercialization of her splendourprovided Lais with more suitors than the princess The last distich expresses thisidea in a much more open and emphatic way The concept of Lais having lsquomadeher bed the public slave to profitrsquo emphasizes her venality πάγκοινον and δούληνcharacterizing her bed degrade her to a common prostitute available to anyonewho was able to pay⁴sup3 In addition the idea of going to war for a prostitute is in itselfparadoxical and has a double effect On the one hand it undercuts the comparisonwith Helen and suggests that the comparison should be taken humorously On theother hand it potentially cuts Helen down to size since it is stressed that Helen cre-ated ponos for Greece⁴⁴

For the parody of Helen in scoptic poems (based on her common use as a symbol of disloy-alty or an archetype of beauty) see eg AP and AP (Lucilius) with Floridi ndash and ndash and AP (Palladas) where Penelope and Helen are employed tostress that all women are disastrous for men See Od and Cf AP = GP (with Gutzwiller ) if we take the verb ἕζετrsquo as present andnot as imperfect (l ἇς καὶ ἐπὶ ῥυτίδων ὁ γλυκὺς ἕζετrsquo Ἔρως) then the image of Archeanassa aspreserving her beauty in tomb is incongruous with the realistic state of bodies in graves As Penzel ( ) notes there is an indirect allusion to Aphrodite Pandemos For a different reading of the epigram see Gutzwiller ndash


It is therefore Meleager who breaks new ground in the reception of themotif within epigrams In AP 5137 (= 43 GP) within a purely erotic context He-liodora is emphatically associated and metaphorically identified with AphroditeGrace and Peitho

ἔγχει τᾶς Πειθοῦς καὶ Κύπριδος Ἡλιοδώραςκαὶ πάλι τᾶς αὐτᾶς ἁδυλόγου Χάριτοςmiddotαὐτὰ γὰρ μίrsquo ἐμοὶ γράφεται θεός ἇς τὸ ποθεινόνοὔνομrsquo ἐν ἀκρήτῳ συγκεράσας πίομαι

Pour in (wine) for Heliodora Peitho and for Heliodora Cyprisand again for the same Heliodora the sweet-speaking GraceBecause for me she herself is inscribed as the one goddess whose desirablename I drink mixed with pure wine⁴⁵

The loverrsquos toasts acquire a special meaning which derives from the form of thetoasts themselves that imitates official cult titles The phrase τᾶς Πειθοῦς καὶ Κύ-πριδος Ἡλιοδώρας mimics cult titles in which the names of queens and kingswere placed in juxtaposition with that of a god to express identification withthe specific deity (eg Aρσινόης Κύπριδος in 1166AB) In the same vein thecharacterization τᾶς αὐτᾶς ἁδυλόγου Χάριτος imitates cult titles where thename of the queenking is fully repressed This phraseology constitutes a hyper-bolic praise of the beloved that (metaphorically) apotheosizes her Heliodora isglorified as a goddess who combines the (erotic) powers of the three female god-desses If we compare this epigram to eg Ibycus fr 288 Davies and Ar Ec 973ndash75 both passages exalting a person for combining attributes offered by a groupof deities the difference in the degree of hyperbole is obvious Here Heliodora isnot the proteacutegeacutee of the goddesses but she is identified with them This hyperbol-ic praise has a double application on the one hand it stresses the loverrsquos com-plete infatuation for Heliodora on the other hand it highlights the womanrsquos pre-eminence in beauty and all methods of allurement lsquoPeitho Heliodorarsquo denotesher expertise in persuasive speech lsquoCypris Heliodorarsquo having multiple associa-tions alludes inter alia to her supernatural beauty attractiveness expertise inseductiveness and sexual pleasure in the same manner lsquoGracersquo underlinesher beauty sweet voice (this attribute is emphasized by the adjective ἁδυλόγου)charm and attractiveness In this context it is noteworthy that Heliodorarsquos voiceis also praised in AP 5141 (= 44 GP) via hyperbolic phraseology that includescomparison with the divine The lover (Meleager) swears in the name of Erosthat he prefers to hear a whisper from Heliodora than Apollorsquos lyre-playing

My translation

202 Maria Kanellou

ναὶ τὸν Ἔρωτα θέλω τὸ παρrsquo οὔασιν Ἡλιοδώρας φθέγμα κλύειν ἢ τὰς Λατοΐδεωκιθάρας lsquoBy Eros I swear I had rather hear Heliodorarsquos whisper in my ear thanthe harp of the son of Letorsquo⁴⁶

The phrase αὐτὰ γὰρ μίrsquo ἐμοὶ γράφεται θεός (l 3) carries on this idea of He-liodorarsquos metaphorical apotheosis What is more the phrase has a metapoeticfunction The verb γράφεται alludes to the act of writing poetry and suggeststhat Heliodorarsquos apotheosis stands for her prominent position within the Melea-grean corpus (17 epigrams are devoted to her)⁴⁷ Moreover the verb both throughits allusion to the act of writing and of inscribing epigrams implies the perpet-uality that this lsquogoddessrsquo gains through Meleagerrsquos poetry It can further act as anintratextual marker which points towards the other Meleagrean epigrams thatlink the girl with the divine world (AP 5140 5195 5196)

Garrison attributes the belovedrsquos apotheosis to Meleagerrsquos lsquoerotic extremismrsquothat lsquorobs man of his reason his independence and his individualityrsquo In Mele-ager Garrison argues we have the image of the extreme lover whose lsquoerotic statebecomes a part of him and it emerges in religious imagesrsquo⁴⁸ Garrisonrsquos explan-ation is useful for appreciating the effect of this kind of hyperbole which under-lines the loverrsquos passion for and infatuation with the object of his desire How-ever it does not get us any closer to understanding how Meleager was able touse such a degree of hyperbole I believe that the answer is to be found in spe-cific changes that concern the religious beliefs and practices of the Hellenisticera Firstly the cultic practice of the deification and assimilation of kings andqueens to the Greek Olympian gods which was added to the traditional religiouspractices of the Greeks blurred the boundaries between mortals and gods Peo-ple became gradually more accustomed to the idea of mortals (albeit their rulers)being deified This change certainly did not happen overnight as the survivingmaterial suggests earlier Hellenistic poets were reluctant to present the belovedas equal or superior to a god and only the court poets assimilated their queensand kings with the Olympian gods But the use of the motif within the frame ofPtolemaic propaganda probably enabled its transfer to the erotic domain withthe passing of time

What is more from the second century BC at the latest ordinary men andwomen recently dead were offered cultic honours and were spoken of as lsquoher-oes heroinesrsquo For instance the citizens of Amorgos established (at the end ofthe second century BC) in honour of Aleximachus who died at a young age

Cf Gutzwiller Trans Paton Gutzwiller Garrison


monthly public contests that started with a sacrifice in front of his statue andwere followed by a public feast In addition Artemidorus from Perge after dec-ades of service to the Thereans and their deities received himself after his deathcultic honours appropriated to a hero⁴⁹ These cases exemplify the broadening ofthe scope of people to whom cultic honours were offered During the classicalera this meant heroes athletes and famous poets (such as Archilochus) How-ever by the second century BC mere mortals could likewise receive such hon-ours This change in cult practice could have enabled the blurring of boundariesbetween mortal and divine in poetry In other words the praise in poetry of amortal as being equal or superior to a god gradually stopped being connectedwith the idea of expressing disrespect towards gods and impiety Since by Mele-agerrsquos time these cult practices were well-established (and not new cultic phe-nomena) this can explain why the poet lsquoapotheosizedrsquo his beloveds more sys-tematically than his predecessors why Heliodora is praised as lsquoone goddessrsquo

To sum up we cannot draw a homogeneous picture of the reception of the Ho-meric motif in poetry There is a gradual development in the degree of hyperboleemployed that depends upon a nexus of factorsWithin the genre of epigrams Nos-sisrsquo dedicatory poems simply create indirect links between Aphrodite and her dev-otees In the hands of the court poets the motif acquires religious and political im-plications and its application within the frame of Ptolemaic propaganda led to areluctance on the part of the court poets to openly compare any other femalewith the goddess A more adventurous transformation of the motif takes place inAntipaterrsquos AP 7218 (= 23 GP) and it is the fact that this is a sepulchral epigramand the underlying humour that permits the hyperbole Meleagerrsquos AP 5137 (= 43GP) constitutes the apex in the motifrsquos reception in the epigrams of the Hellenisticperiod⁵⁰ The comparison and (metaphorical) assimilation of a beloved to Aphroditea concept that would be inconceivable during the archaic and classical times is at-tributed to the religious changes that took place during the Hellenistic era andwhich had become established cult practices by Meleagerrsquos time allowing a gradualclosing between the Greeks and their gods

Cf Jones ndash Mikalson ndash In the post-Meleagrean epigrammatists it becomes common to openly compare andor as-similate women with the goddess and this fact confirms the changes in the reception of themotif during the Hellenistic era See eg AP = GP (Marcus Argentarius) AP = Page AP = Page and AP = Page (Rufinus) The motif was further adaptedby the poets of the Cycle of Agathias (th century AD) see eg AP = Viansino (PaulusSilentiarius) AP = Viansino (Julianus of Egypt)

204 Maria Kanellou

Karim Arafat

Pausanias and Homer

The second-century AD traveller and writer Pausanias was dianooumenos or anintellectualsup1 Not a self-promoting sophist like many of his time ndash I think first ofAelius Aristides the lsquostar sophistrsquo in Ruth Webbrsquos descriptionsup2 ndash but someonewho showed his knowledge of literature and art when he felt it necessary andon occasion refrained from expressing his views something no self-respectingsophist would do Thus he says lsquothough I have investigated very carefully thedates of Hesiod and Homer I do not like to state my results knowing as I dothe carping disposition [hellip] especially of the professors of poetry at the presentdayrsquo (9303) Similarly he says of the Theogony that lsquosomersquo believe it to be byHesiod (8181) and he casts doubt on attributions to poets such as Eumelus(211)

One manifestation of his learning is the frequency with which he refers to orquotes from earlier authors some 125 in totalsup3 Although his prototype is Hero-dotus it is the poets whom he cites most often Above all he refers and defersto Homer of whom he calls himself lsquoan attentive readerrsquo (242) He quotes Homerover 20 times and cites him another 250 Hesiod is quoted eight times and cited50 while Pindar is quoted 23 times and cited five times and Stesichorus is quot-ed 13 times⁴ It is clear that Homer more than any other writer dominates Pau-saniasrsquo thinking In this article I shall look behind the headline statistics and geta sense of how Pausanias saw and used Homer and why Characteristically hedoes not tell us much but I think we can make some safe inferences

First why Homer not for example Hesiod or Pindar Partly because author-ity comes from chronological primacy and from the sense that Homer is the orig-inal source and not a derivative one Pausanias does not explicitly say that hesees Homer as the first poet but it is often implicit It is repeatedly clear fromhis writings on art that for him antiquity confers sanctity and similarly thevery remoteness in time of Homer conferred on him an unmatchable authority

Then there is Pausaniasrsquo belief that the Iliad and the Odyssey are the su-preme poems in terms of quality Consistent with this is his view of the epic The-baid He quotes the seventh-century Ephesian poet Callinus as saying that the

References to the text of Pausanias are from the Teubner edition of Rocha-Pereira ndashTranslations are from Frazer Vol I with minor adjustments Webb Habicht opcit

author was Homer and adds lsquomany respectable persons have shared his opin-ion Next to the Iliad and Odyssey there is certainly no poem which I esteemso highlyrsquo (995) He speaks similarly of the lsquohymns of Orpheusrsquo lsquofor poeticalbeauty they may rank next to the hymns of Homer and they have received stillhigher marks of divine favourrsquo (93012 cf 1143) In both these cases thepoems are ranked below Homer but enhanced by approaching the quality ofHomer Pausanias refers to many other epicsmdashsuch as the Cypria (3161 42710261 4 10312) Little Iliad (3269) Minyad (4337 10282 7 10313) and Nau-pactia (103811)ndashbut he uses them purely as resources for information on for ex-ample mythology or heroic genealogy commenting on their authorship but noton their quality which is precisely what sets the Homeric poems apart in hisopinion

I think there is also something more personal in Pausaniasrsquo reverence forHomer There may be a natural geographical sympathy as Homerrsquos traditionalhome island of Chios is not far from Pausaniasrsquo apparent own home-city of Mag-nesia ad Sipylum in Lydia in Asia Minor⁵ He says he has heard different storiesabout the origins of Homerndashand of his motherndash but that he will not give his opin-ion on Homerrsquos native land (10243) It is striking that he rejects here an oppor-tunity to claim broadly common origins with Homer of all people Similarly as Imentioned he ‛investigated very carefully the dates of Hesiod and Homerrsquo (9303)This is reminiscent of Herodotusrsquo phrase lsquoI suppose Hesiod and Homer flourish-ed not more than four hundred years earlier than Irsquo (2532) Pausanias may heresimply be imitating Herodotus as he often does although it is extremely unlike-ly that he would not have his own views in any case the claim shows the im-portance of Homeric scholarship to an intellectual of Pausaniasrsquo time I seethis as precisely the sort of occasion when he differs strikingly from other writersof the second sophistic in not showing off his knowledgendashone might say in mak-ing a show of not showing off unless of course he is bluffing and knows lessthan he claims

Another reason I would suggest for Pausaniasrsquo reverence for Homer is thatas he says Homer lsquohad travelled into far countriesrsquo (123) and Pausanias maywell have seen him as a fellow-geographer and even as a prototype periegetetherefore as a model for his own travels and descriptions Pausaniasrsquo work isafter all centred on descriptions of places and what they contain Homer men-tions nearly 350 places in the Iliad alone and the use of the Odyssey as a geo-graphical manual continues to our own day with the recently-revived debate

Arafat and n

206 Karim Arafat

over the identity of the Homeric Ithaca⁶ Pausanias uses Homer as the (not lsquoanrsquo)authority for the foundation or names of cities or their belonging to a particularterritory or people (eg 413ndash4 etc) Thus he gives us the Homeric names of theislands of Aeolus (10113) and of Delphi (1065) Still in Phocis he mentions thatthe cities which in his day no longer existed were once renowned lsquochieflythrough the verses of Homerrsquo (1032) In discussing the most Homeric of main-land Greek cities Mycenae (2154ndash 167) lsquothe city which led the Greeks in theTrojan warrsquo he does not use Homer for his description of the sitendashdespite notingthat the walls were Cyclopean as at Tiryns-beyond mentioning the tombs of theAtreids and of those returning from Troy and even then he does not directlymention Homer But he would hardly need to as he is making the safe assump-tion that his readers would know the connectionWhere he does mention Homeris in explaining that the city was named after a woman called Mycene (2164)

It is his view of rivers as natural boundaries defining and separating placesand yet linking them that reflects the broadest scope of Pausaniasrsquo geographyreal or imagined Thus the Argolid is linked with Asia Minor through the riverAsopos which lsquothey sayrsquo comes from the river Maiander (253) and the westernPeloponnese is linked with Magna Graecia through the waters of the Alpheios(572ndash3 8542ndash3 cf 7232) Rivers and seas are central to Pausaniasrsquo workand here too Homer has a key role as a source for many names of rivers andfor stories associated with them Most references are purely recording withHomer again seen as authoritative eg in book 1 (1175) Pausanias mentionsthe Acherusian Lake and the rivers Acheron and Kokytos calling the latter lsquoa joy-less streamrsquo and adding lsquoit appears to me that Homer had seen these things andboldly modelled his descriptions of hell on them and that in particular he be-stowed on the rivers of hell the names of the rivers in Thesprotisrsquo In book 8he says that Homer introduced the name of Styx into his poetry citing theoath of Hera in Iliad 15 (36ndash37) where Homer says lsquoWitness me now earthand the broad heaven above and the down-trickling water of Styxrsquo Pausaniasconcludes lsquothis passage is composed as if the poet had himself seen thewater of the Styx drippingrsquo (8182) Incidentally he opts for Homerrsquos accountafter rejecting those of Hesiod Linus and Epimenides (8181ndash2) Both these pas-sages emphasize the importance of travelling and of autopsy of seeing for one-self both themes central to Pausaniasrsquo methodology

Thus it is clear that Pausanias sees Homer as a prototype geographer andtraveller and therefore as a model for his own work The same criteria apply

Eg BittlestoneDiggleUnderhill Graziosi b


also to Herodotus and it is interesting that Pausanias makes what is in many re-spects parallel use of a historian and an epic poet

As geography is central to Pausaniasrsquo work so are two further areas forwhich he finds information in Homer namely religion and art Pausaniasgives no critique of Homerrsquos view of the gods and makes surprisingly little explic-it use of him but as so often he still sees him as a supremely influential andauthoritative figure to give a small example he says that the poems of Homerdetermine how Hermes and Heracles are viewed (8324) On occasion he usesHomer to clarify a cult practice as at Olympia where he says lsquoI forgot to askwhat they do with the boar after the athletes have taken the oath With the an-cients it was a rule that a sacrificed animal on which an oath had been takenshould not be eaten by man Homer proves this clearly For the boar on thecut pieces of which Agamemnon swore that Briseis was a stranger to his bedis represented by Homer as being cast by the herald into the searsquo (52410ndash 11see Iliad 19266ndash68)

I turn now to art much of which is mythological and therefore narrative andso inevitably lends itself to comparison with written accounts those of Homerabove all Pausaniasrsquo primary use of Homer is again as an authority usuallyfor identification of figures or narrative details The lost wall-paintings of theClassical period are the obvious examples particularly those of the PaintedStoa at Athens and the Cnidian Lesche at Delphi described in detail by Pausa-nias Here I shall say nothing of the Homeric influence on or lsquoaccuracyrsquo of thepaintings ndash that has been assessed by many scholars already⁷ Instead I mentiona lesser-known painting which Pausanias saw at Plataea by Onasias of the mid-fifth century showing Euryganea who Pausanias alone (as far as I know) tellsus was known to be the mother of Oedipusrsquo children from lsquothe author of thepoem they call the Oedipodiarsquo (9511) Euryganea is shown lsquobowed with griefat the battle between her childrenrsquo The unnamed author Pausanias citesseems not to be sufficient authority since he starts by citing Homer as proofthat Oedipus had no children by Iocaste (Od 11271ndash73) Pausanias has strongviews on Oedipus finding Sophoclesrsquo version of his death lsquoincrediblersquo (1287)and citing Homerrsquos differing account as his sole authority apparently withoutsecond thought indeed he never disagrees with Homer The nearest he comesis when he says (10313) that the Ehoiai and the Minyad give different accounts

The commentary of Sir James Frazer (V ndash) is still invaluable in this respect Mostscholarship on the wall-paintings is concerned with reconstructing them from Pausaniasrsquo ac-count eg Stansbury-OrsquoDonnell and although he does discuss their relationshipto Homer particularly in his article (eg ndash ndash )

208 Karim Arafat

of the death of Meleager from Homer He simply states the disagreement withoutgiving an opinion

So far I have spoken of lost works where we are at an obvious disadvantagein assessing Pausaniasrsquo accuracy in general and specifically in his use of HomerOf surviving works where we would hope to be on more solid ground probablythe best-known example is the central figure of the west pediment of the templeof Zeus at Olympia the huge dominant figure with his right hand stretched outto quieten the fighting Lapiths and Centaurs Pausanias calls him Peirithous atwhose wedding the fight erupted (5108) Scholars almost universally agree thatthis is rather Apollo primarily on the grounds that the centre should be held bya god that the figure is much taller than the other figures that Peirithous shouldbe the same size as Theseus who is also depicted and that Peirithous should bemore agitated considering that it is his bride whose abduction is being attemptedbefore his eyes⁸ All good reasons why then does Pausanias call him Peiri-thous Simply because he says Peirithous was a son of Zeus to whom the tem-ple was dedicated and who was depicted in the centre of the east pediment AtDelphi describing the paintings of the Cnidian Lesche he notes (102910) thatHomer calls Theseus and Peirithous lsquochildren of the godsrsquo (Od 11631) In thesame way the Seasons are depicted on the throne of the statue of Zeus at Olym-pia because lsquoin poetry the Seasons are described as daughters of Zeusrsquo (5117)The logic for identifying Peirithous at Olympia is unimpeachable in literary andgenealogical terms but incompatible with sculptural conventions of which weare I think rather more conscious than Pausanias would have been althoughhe does say he has read what he calls lsquothe historians of sculpturersquo (5233)

Homer is also called upon in the intriguing case of the necklace of Eriphylewhich Pausanias tells us was said to be preserved in his time in the sanctuary ofAdonis and Aphrodite at Amathos in Cyprus Pausanias denies that the necklaceat Amathos is genuine because it lsquois of green stones fastened together with goldrsquo(9413) whereas Homer in the Odyssey says Eriphylersquos necklace was simply lsquopre-cious goldrsquo (Od 11327) At first this looks like precision on the part of someone asinterested in materials and techniques as Pausanias but sheer fussiness in termsof literary criticism However Pausanias strengthens his case by adding lsquonotthat Homer was ignorant of the necklaces composed of various materialsrsquoThus he cites two references in the Odyssey to lsquogolden necklaces [hellip] strung at

Eg AshmoleYalouris ( ndash) say that Apollo is the lsquopatron of all the arts and of allthat makes life humane and decent His presence ensures that civilized man shall prevailrsquo Roll-ey ( ) says that this is Pausaniasrsquo lsquoseule erreur inexcusable hellip Apollon qui nrsquoa aucuneplace dans le sanctuaire reacutepond a la regravegle qursquoun dieu se dresse au centre des frontonsrsquo Board-man ( ) calls Apollo lsquodispenser of law and orderrsquo see also Stewart and others


intervals with amber beadsrsquo one of them a gift to Penelope from one of her sui-tors Pausanias concludes that Homer knew of necklaces made of gold andbeads and would have described the necklace of Eriphyle as such if it hadbeen since he calls it simply lsquoprecious goldrsquo it cannot be the one Pausaniassaw in Amathos Thus Pausanias is led to a reasoned conclusion by the synthe-sis of his technical and literary knowledge rather than the unthinking adherenceto Homer of which he is often accused Incidentally Pausaniasrsquo often-expressedinterest in technique extends to the period of the Trojan war when he denies forexample that a bronze statue of Athena was from the Trojan spoils and that abronze Poseidon was dedicated by Achilles because bronze-casting had notyet been invented (8147 10385ndash7) Conversely he deduces from his readingof Homer that lsquoweapons in the Heroic Age were all of bronzersquo and finds confir-mation of this in the spear of Achilles which he saw at Phaselis and thesword of Memnon which he saw at Nicomedia since lsquothe blade and the spikeat the butt-end of the spear and the whole of the sword are of bronzersquo (338)Clearly there is some wishful thinking in this conclusion but it demonstratesclearly his belief in the literal truth of Homer

Homer personifies chronological remoteness and Pausanias uses him to ap-proach as nearly as possible the art and artists of earliest antiquity Here I thinkof Hephaestus and Daedalus works by both of whom Pausanias claims to haveseen citing Homer in his support in both cases An obvious example is theshield of Achilles made by Hephaestus and described in detail by Homer(Il 18478ndash608) Pausanias has to rely on his literary source for his descriptionof this lost masterpiece exactly as we have to rely on Pausanias for our under-standing of for example the lost wall-paintings from Athens and Delphi Ifwe make more of our source than we should it is because we have no othersource no means of forming a truly independent objective judgement Anotherfactor is relevant and indeed central here namely Pausaniasrsquo insistence on au-topsy which I mentioned earlier apropos of Homerrsquos own travelsWherever pos-sible he went to see the places or works of art that he described on occasiongoing to great lengths to do so and he is reluctant to comment on works hehas not seen It may be for this reason that his one extended passage aboutthe shield of Achillesndashconcerning Linus who was killed by Apollo for vyingwith him in songndash has more literary and historical than artistic content citingPamphus lsquoauthor of the oldest Athenian hymnsrsquo (9298 cf 7219) and Sapphoand ending with the removal of the bones of Linus to Macedonia by Philip II andhis subsequently sending them back to Thebes (9296ndash9)

Pausanias describes only one work he believes to be by Hephaestus in thispassage from book 9 lsquothe god whom the Chaeroneans honour most is the sceptrewhich Homer says Hephaestus made for Zeus and Zeus gave to Hermes and

210 Karim Arafat

Hermes to Pelops and Pelops bequeathed to Atreus and Atreus to Thyestesfrom whom Agamemnon had it This sceptre they worship naming it a spearand that there is something divine about it is proved especially by the distinctionit confers on its owners [hellip] it was brought to Phocis by Electra daughter of Aga-memnon There is no public temple built for it but the man who acts as priestkeeps the sceptre in his house for the year and sacrifices are offered to itdaily and a table is set beside it covered with all sorts of flesh and cakesrsquo(94011ndash 12) He concludes lsquoof all the objects which poets have declared and pub-lic opinion has believed to be works of Hephaestus none is genuine save thesceptre of Agamemnonrsquo (9411)⁹

This strongly expressed sentiment is interesting for showing that Pausaniasis willing to disagree with writers including poets on principle and that he willalso disagree with and distance himself from lsquopublic opinionrsquo unsurprisinglyfor someone who is dianooumenos and has studied sculpture books An exampleof a work which he sees as wrongly attributed to Hephaestus is the third bronzetemple at Delphi (10511ndash2) although he does not say who does believe it was byHephaistos perhaps he is again referring to lsquopublic opinionrsquo Still on the bronzetemple he adds that he does not believe lsquothe story about the golden songstresseswhich the poet Pindar mentions in speaking of this particular templersquo He meansPaean 8 lsquobrazen were the walls and of bronze were the supporting pillars andover its pediment sang six enchantresses made of goldrsquo (68ndash71) and adds lsquohereit seems to me Pindar merely imitated the Sirens in Homerrsquomdasheffectively a doubledenigration of Pindar compared to Homer

On one occasion Pausanias approaches Hephaestus the artist indirectlysaying that Homer lsquocompares the dance wrought by Hephaestus on the shieldof Achilles to a dance wrought by Daedalus never having seen finer works ofartrsquo (8163 ref Il 18590ndash604) I presume that this is the dance of Ariadnewhich Daedalus carved in white marble and which Pausanias saw at Knossos(9403ndash4) He tells us nothing else about it Elsewhere he mentions thatlsquoHomer says Daedalus made images for Minos and his daughtersrsquo (746)

One final observation on Homer and art Pausanias mentions many statuesof poets such those of Corinna at Thebes (9223) and Pindar at Athens (183)but it is striking that he mentions only one lsquolikenessrsquo (eikona) of Homer(10242) One might have expected Homer to have been honoured with more stat-ues although one might equally recall Pausaniasrsquo words that lsquoin [Homerrsquos] daysthey did not yet know how to make bronze imagesrsquo (8147) an observation whichapplies equally to stone images However that may be the likeness of Homer that

Most recently on the sceptre Pirenne-Delforge


Pausanias mentions has rare kudos from its positioning lsquoon a monumentrsquo in thepronaos of the temple of Apollo at Delphi and from its being accompanied by thetext of an oracle given to Homer

Blest and unhappy for thou were born to be bothThou seekest thy father-land but thou hast a mother-land and no fatherlandThe isle of Ios is the father-land of thy mother and it in deathShall receive thee but beware of the riddle of young children

The first line of this oracle pithily stating the lot that Fate had given Homer mayserve to remind us that Pausanias gives no other writer the human dimension hegives Homer Otherwise he only very occasionally gives writers characteristicsnotably describing Tyrtaeus as lsquoa school-master generally thought to be apoor-witted creaturersquo (4156) perhaps unsurprising given that lsquoin all the wideworld there is no people so dead to poetry and poetic fame as the Spartansrsquo(382) Pausanias visited the grotto in the territory of Smyrna lsquowhere they saythat Homer composed his poemsrsquo (7512) and he visited his tomb as he didthose of Pindar and Corinna Where he sets Homer apart is in his references tohis ill-fortune lsquoNever I think did fortune show her spiteful nature so plainlyas in her treatment of Homer For Homer was first struck blind and then as ifthis great calamity were not enough came pinching poverty and drove himforth to wander the wide world a beggarrsquo (2332ndash3) This poverty may be relatedto the humility Pausanias attributes to Homer saying that he lsquoesteemed the lar-gess of princes less than the applause of the peoplersquo (123) In spite of this Pau-sanias says Homer lsquobore up against his misfortune and continued to composepoetry to the lastrsquo (4337) I wonder if Pausanias identified with him whetherhe wandered unappreciated in his own lifetime Did Pausanias have an infirmitytoo perhaps as a result of age given the length of his travels variously estimatedas around twice or even three times the length of Odysseusrsquo wanderings Hisfear expressed towards the end of his travels that he may not get as far as Del-phi (8371) perhaps hints that he did

Whatever Pausaniasrsquo reasons his affinity with Homer is evident and as Imentioned earlier he never disagrees with him This absolute faith in Homercauses problems for example to quote William Hutton on a passage of book1 (1125) lsquoPausaniasrsquo source for the state of the Epeirote naval and culinary ex-pertise in the third century BC is none other than Homerrsquosup1⁰ Jas Elsner draws thiscontrast between Pausaniasrsquo and Philostratusrsquo view of Homer lsquoFor PausaniasHomer is a sanctification of Greece to be followed with respect and an arbiter

Hutton

212 Karim Arafat

in matters of interpretation For Philostratus Homer is an excuse to displaylearning and an appropriate springboard from which to launch into his own cre-ative interpretationrsquosup1sup1 This is fair but inevitable given Pausaniasrsquo and Philostra-tusrsquo very different approaches and agendas To quote Ruth Webb on the Eikonesof Philostratus lsquoits sophistication makes it a special use of ekphrasis that shouldbe ranked alongside the novels for its conscious play with fictionrsquosup1sup2 somethingone could not say of Pausanias I do think though that there is a Procrusteantouch to Elsnerrsquos criticism of Pausanias for example he says of a passage inbook 9 lsquoHomer can prove that a pile of stones at Thebes (9182) is the tombof Tydeusrsquosup1sup3 In fact Pausanias simply reports the use made of Homer(Il 1411) by what he calls lsquothe Theban antiquariesrsquo as often elsewhere he refersto local writers or exegetes (local guides) He does not comment on the passageof Homer nor does he express an opinion on whether the stones he sees atThebes are the tomb of Tydeus

The uses Pausanias makes of Homer are many and varied but he is aware ofHomerrsquos wider value summarising his thoughts by saying lsquoHomerrsquos ideas haveproved useful to mankind in all manner of waysrsquo (4288) Quite so

Elsner n Webb Elsner n


Maria Ypsilanti

The Reception of Homeric Vocabulary inNonnusrsquo Paraphrase of St Johnrsquos GospelΕxamination of Themes and Formulas inSelected Passages

The work of the fifth century AD poet Nonnus of Panopolis in Egypt entitled Par-aphrasis or Metabole of the Gospel of St John is a poem in hexameters whichversifies the prose narration of the Fourth Gospel It is the only extant Greekpoem paraphrasing a text of the New Testament although in Latin there are sev-eral surviving samplessup1 In fact as is attested mainly by church historians thefourth and principally the fifth-century Christian paraphrases flourishedThese are rewritings either of Biblical texts or of Acts of Saints probably writtenin various poetic metressup2 The paraphrase expands upon the original employingthe rhetorical process of amplificatio to do so This is achieved mainly throughembellishment of the original text with verbal abundance (copia verborum)tropes and figures (ornatus) and variation (variatio) of the original vocabularyand phrases as Roberts points out drawing on Quintilianrsquos account of the para-phrase as a genresup3 The dactylic verse employed by Nonnus in his paraphrasenaturally invites the use of epic diction in this process of expanding Biblicalprose The poem is in fact full of Homeric vocabulary and formulas in variationHowever the poet does not merely employ epic poems as his source texts He

Juvencusrsquo Evangeliorum Libri IV Aratorrsquos Historia Apostolica Seduliusrsquo Carmen Paschale (NewTestament) verse-paraphrases of the Old Testament are Claudius Marius Victoriusrsquo AlethiaCyprianusrsquo Heptateuch Avitusrsquo De Spiritalis Historiae Gestis Dracontiusrsquo Laudes Dei is a poempart of which is a paraphrase of the Genesis The other major extant Christian Greek poeticparaphrasis is Pseudo-Apollinarisrsquo hexameter Paraphrasis of Davidrsquos Psalms dealing with anOld Testament text The less important hexameter Greek texts based on the Bible known as theCodex Visionum should be also here mentioned See further Whitby Roberts ndash Cf Quint Inst sua brevitati gratia sua copiae alia tralatisvirtus alia propriis hoc oratio recta illud figura declinata commendat and illud virtutisindicium est fundere quae natura contracta sunt augere parva varietatem similibus voluptatemexpositis dare et bene dicere multa de paucis Cf also neque ego paraphrasin esse inter-pretationem tantum volo sed circa eosdem sensus certamen atque aemulationem

also enriches his work with vocabulary and expressions taken from tragedy andother poetry as well⁴

It is a remarkable feature although perhaps not surprising given the infinitepossibilities offered by the text of Homer that it is used by later authors of worksof widely varying subject-matter and styles Poets who compose hexameters onepic themes such as Quintus Smyrnaeus Triphiodous Colluthus and Nonnus inhis Dionysiaca not surprisingly incorporate in their verses Homeric referencesadapted to their work in accord with the specific requirements of each scenetheir personal taste and their ideas of literary imitatio variatio⁵ As for NonnusrsquoParaphrase scholars have indeed occasionally traced reminiscences of certainscenes and settings of earlier poetry in this work⁶ However the subject-matterof the Paraphrase ie the narration of Biblical episodes does not generallyallow systematic echoes of more extensive passages images and motifs drawnfrom the poetic past since consistent mythological allusion is not appropriatefor the task that Nonnus is undertaking Thus the reception of epic and otherpoetry in the Paraphrase occurs mainly on the lexical level and consists in thecreative adaptation of phrases Still at times the poet makes use of somewider motif that tradition offers him developing it to the extent that his narrativeand the spirit of his work let him An important aspect of the use of Homer byauthors of late Antiquity and especially by Christian authors is the process ofphilosophical or religious interpretation whereby these authors use Homericterms and passages now however endowed with new meaning andor lsquometa-physicalrsquo depth⁷ In adapting Homeric vocabulary in his Paraphrase Nonnuscan either remain on a more lsquosuperficialrsquo level as it were employing the Homer-ic diction for purely decorative purposes or endow these terms with theologicalsignificance according to the needs of religious exegesis that obviously arose inthe procedure of paraphrasing a biblical text Furthermore it has been argued

For example the Wedding at Cana has been regarded as described in terms of a Bacchic feastand echoes from the Bacchae of Euripides have been also traced in it see Bogner ForHomeric echoes and for similarities between the Dionysiaca and the Paraphrasis in this scenesee Shorrock ndash For echoes from Callimachusrsquo Hecale and from Euphorion see Hol-lis ndash For examples of this much-discussed matter see Maciver ndash (with reference toQuintus and Nonnus and with further bibliography) For Homeric adaptation in Quintus seefor instance Maciver passim For instance the Feeding of the Five Thousand has been seen as recalling a Homeric φιλοξε-νία see MacCoull f For Dionysiac elements of the imagery of Par (including alsoresemblances with verses from the Dionysiaca) see also Livrea on Par See Agosti The basic work on this handling of Homer mainly by Neoplatonists is Lam-berton

216 Maria Ypsilanti

that elements of everyday Christianity of fifth-century Egypt were incorporated inthe Nonnian biblical reformulation of the Homeric diction Having the presenceof the Church in mind Nonnus addresses an educated audience that recognizesand appreciates the combination of epic language with religious practice⁸ Non-nus of course employs the Hellenistic technique of variation deftly adjustingthe various poetic echoes in his text rather than merely stitching together versesand half-verses borrowed from the epic so that his poem is by no means a Ho-meric cento⁹ Examples of the Nonnian incorporation of Homeric vocabulary inthe Paraphrase and the consequent attainment of multiple poetic aims will beexamined in the present paper

A very common Homeric formula υἷες Aχαιῶν (for instance Il 1162 22814114 6255) is readily adjusted by Nonnus to a Biblical context Just as inHomer the lsquosons of the Achaeansrsquo are the Aχαιοί themselves so Nonnus usesυἷες Ἰουδαίων (76) to denote the Jews which is exactly what the Gospel alsosays Ἰουδαῖοι in 71 The transfer of epic words bearing heavy pagan overtonesto a Christian context is especially noticeable when terms describing divinitiesand their qualities or activities in the epic are applied to the Trinitarian Godor to a super-human creature in Nonnus Characteristic is the use of ὀμφή thetypical term for the voice of the gods in Homer (for instance Il 241 θείηhellipὀμφή 20129 θεῶνhellipὀμφῆς Od 3215 and 1696 θεοῦ ὀμφῇ) always at verse-end In the Paraphrase the noun appears in the Homeric metrical position usu-ally accompanied by an adjective manifesting its divine provenance exactly ashappens in the epic 193 θεοδινέοςhellipὀμφῆς 349 5106 8139 and 15103 θέσκε-λοςον ὀμφή(ν) 353 θεσπεσίηςhellipὀμφῆςsup1⁰ 5127 θεοδέγμονοςhellipὀμφῆς 5141 ὑπέρ-τερον ὀμφήν 7162 θεηγόροςhellipὀμφή 12166 and 14116 ἔνθεον ὀμφήν Nonnus isnot the only writer who transfers this epic noun to a Christian context The factthat it occurs elsewhere in Christian literature designating the divine voicesup1sup1

clearly illustrates the adaptation of such pagan terminology to texts of thenew religion Now to describe what in John is simply called δαιμόνιον (theJews stating that it is a δαιμόνιον which dictates Christrsquos words) Nonnus uses vo-

It has been suggested more specifically that for the Feeding of the Five Thousand Nonnustransfers liturgical elements into Homeric vocabulary and style MacCoull For an examination of the same Biblical episode in Nonnusrsquo Paraphrase and in Eudociarsquos Ho-meric Centos and for the consequent demonstration of their differences see Whitby For the adjective θεσπέσιος often used by Cyril whose commentary on St Johnrsquos GospelNonnus used systematically see Agosti on Par For ὀμφή as the divine voice in Nonnussee also Stegemann n For instance in the Vision of Dorotheus (P Bodmer ) Christ is referred to as πατέρrsquoὀμφῆς see further Agosti on Par Cf also Christodorus AP θέσπιδος ὀμφῆς


cabulary borrowed from Homer and from tragedy so sketching this daemonimaginatively and with exaggeration as is to be expected In 8158 f δαιμόνιονis conceived as a gad-fly who drives people crazy ὅττι σε λύσσης δαίμονοςἠερόφοιτος ἀλάστορος οἶστρος ἐλαύνει Here the image is created by combiningthe famous Aeschylean ἀλάστωρ δαίμων (for instance Pers 354 Ag 1501sup1sup2) to-gether with a Homeric touch realized through the word ἠερόφοιτος an adjectivethat Nonnus is particularly fond ofsup1sup3 and which is in a slightly varied form aHomeric rarity in both Iliadic passages where it appears it is attributed to thechthonian deity Erinys (Il 9571 and 1987 ἠεροφοῖτις Ἐρινύς) It has been arguedthat in Homer the epithet describes a movement in the darkness rather than amovement in the airsup1⁴ In Nonnus the adjective has simply the sense of lsquomovingin the airrsquosup1⁵ and does not convey any negative connotation In fact in Book Oneof the Paraphrase ἠεροφοίτης describes the throng of angels moving up anddown the sky (1215) It is remarkable that after Homer there is no other passagein extant literature where this adjective occurs except for one instance in Ae-schylus (fr 282 R ἀερόφοιτος) Much later it appears again In addition to Non-nus other poets who employ ἠερόφοιτος are Oppian Manetho and Paul the Si-lentiary the adjective being comparable to οὐρανοφοίτης frequently used byGregory of Nazianzus who attributes it to St John and to St Paul inter aliossup1⁶As regards the fact that in Book One of the Paraphrase the adjective is associatedwith movement of angels and in Book Eight it qualifies a daemonic power it isevident that Nonnus uses the terms offered by the poetic past with a freedomand flexibility that does not prevent him from putting such terms in even com-pletely contrasting contextssup1⁷

Descriptions creating visual and acoustic stimulus inspired by Homer are oc-casionally used by Nonnus to elaborate a brief or plain phrase in the Gospel Thepoet refers repeatedly to death as an ἀχλυόεν βέρεθρον (6157 11184 ἀχλυόεν-

For this Aeschylean motif see further Fraenkel on Ag Ἠερόφοιτος or ἠεροφοίτης see for instance Dion See Hainsworth on Il See Vian on Dion See further De Stefani on Par A variatio of this adjective again applied on the δαιμόνιον attributed to Christ by the Jews(John δαιμόνιον ἔχεις) appears in Par δαίμονος ἠερίοιο Ἠέριος in Homer describesthe cranes (Il ) the tribe of the Cicones (Od ) and twice Thetis (Il ) Thisadjective appears again like ἠερόφοιτοςης very frequently in Nonnusrsquo poetry In the Dionysiacait seldom qualifies a divinity but in the Paraphrase apart from accompanying the daemon in it is also employed for the voice of the Holy Spirit ( φωνῆς ἠερίης θεοδινέα βόμβον)in its only other occurrence in the Paraphrase it is attributed to the winds see

218 Maria Ypsilanti

τοςhellipβερέθρου 1244 ἀχλυόεντιhellipβερέθρῳ) In other instances Hades is aβέρεθρον without return (2104 κόλπον ἀνοστήτοιο βερέθρου occurring in the Di-onysiaca as wellsup1⁸) or simply a βέρεθρον (856 and in 11155) The image of thedark chasm is the result of the combination of two themes Leaving aside thecommonplace that the Underworld is dark again ultimately Homeric(Il 15191 Aΐδης δrsquo ἔλαχε ζόφον ἠερόεντα) when one looks at ἀχλύς with deathin mind reminiscence of Homeric passages emerges once more The first motifused in the Nonnian verses in discussion is that of death (or fainting) as amist ἀχλύς falling on onersquos eyes cf Il 5696 16344 κατὰ δrsquo ὀφθαλμῶνκέχυτrsquo ἀχλύς 20421 Od 2288 On the other hand Hades as a βέρεθρον isalso a variation of the Iliadic description of Tartarus as an abyss in the depthsof the earth even lower than Hades Il 813 f ἤ μιν ἑλὼν ῥίψω ἐς Τάρταρον ἠερ-όεντα τῆλε μάλrsquo ἧχι βάθιστον ὑπὸ χθονός ἐστι βέρεθρον a passage discussed byPlato (Phaedo 112a) Nonnus is moreover probably recalling the idea that Hadesis a βέρεθρονwhich appears in other epic poets namely Apollonius and QuintusSmyrnaeus who also modeled their phrases on the Iliadic linesup1⁹ It is remarkablethat Christian poetry too exploited this theme as is evident in the poetry of Ro-manus the Melodist who says when speaking of the fall of the Devil (33207) καὶἐν βαράθρῳ κατηνέχθη Ἅιδου Now the origin of this presentation of the noise ofthunder described as βροντή in the Gospel (1229 καὶ ἀκούσας ἔλεγεν ὅτι βροντὴγέγονεν) is clearly Homeric The Gospel here narrates how some took Godrsquos voicefor thunder from heaven Nonnus takes the opportunity offered by the text itselfand adorns his diction with vocabulary that bears clear epic overtones when hesays (12116 f) λαὸς ἐπεσμαράγησεν ὅτι ζαθέων ἀπὸ κόλπων βρονταίη βαρύδου-πος ἐπέκτυπεν αἴθριος ἠχώ (lsquoand the people roared because a thunder-likeloud heavenly echo resoundedrsquo) Firstly the poet replaces the simple ἔλεγεν ofthe Gospel with ἐπεσμαράγησεν a variation of the verb σμαραγέω This denotesinarticulate noises caused by the elements such as thunder or the sea breakingon the shore or birds and appears three times in Homer (Il 2210 2463 21199)sup2⁰In the last passage σμαραγέω designates the noise of Zeusrsquo thunder Διὸς μεγά-λοιο κεραυνόν δεινήν τε βροντήν ὅτrsquo ἀπrsquo οὐρανόθεν σμαραγήσῃ Nonnus trans-fers the verb to a similar context but interestingly attributes it to human voices

Dion εἰ πέλε νόστιμος οἶμος ἀνοστήτοιο βερέθρου Ap Rh διὲξ Aίδαο βερέθρων QS and μέχρις ἐπrsquo Aιδονῆος ὑπερθύμοιοβέρεθρον see Campbell ad loc cf ὑπrsquo ἠερόεντι βερέθρῳ Nonnus uses (ἐπι)σμαραγεῖν also in the Dionysiaca to render various noises and clamour andin [Oppian] the verb is used for the echo of the forest (Cyn ) and of the waters (Cyn )For the verb meaning lsquoresoundrsquo rather than lsquogleamrsquo as some thought having confused its rootwith that of σμάραγδος (lsquoemeraldrsquo) see Kirk on Il ndash


this accomplishing an impressive variatio since quite unexpectedly it is not thethunder itself that σμαραγέει but the people who think they hear a thunder Itshould be here added that in the only other instance in which σμαραγέω appearsin the Paraphrase it describes the voice of Christ who addresses Lazarus andcommands him to come out of the tomb (11157 εἶπε καὶ ἐσμαράγησε διαπρυσίῃτινὶ φωνῇ) The use of the verb is again exceptional and striking here enhancingthe notion of the supernatural character that the words of Christ possess Nowthe adjective Nonnus attributes to the thunder βαρύδουπος in Par 12117 is aword first found in Moschussup2sup1 which the Panopolite poet uses very frequentlyin the Dionysiaca of various deities and noisessup2sup2 In the present passage com-bined as it is with the following verb ἐπέκτυπεν it is a variation ofβαρύκτυποςsup2sup3 which qualifies Zeus in the Homeric hymn to Demeter (Cer 3334 441 460) and in Hesiod (Th 388 Op 79)sup2⁴ at the same time the adjectivefurther recalls the Homeric ἐρίγδουπος for lsquothe husband of Herarsquo (ἐρίγδουποςπόσις Ἥρης in Il 7411 10329 13154 1688 Od 15180 Ζηνὸς [hellip] ἐριγδούποιοin Il 12235 15293) Thus Nonnus evokes in a manifold fashion the Homeric no-tion of Zeus who thunders when the poet speaks of the Jews who assume theyhear a βροντή The doctum audience is once more invited to recognize the trans-fer of a memorable epic pattern to an entirely different environment and the so-phistication the author employs as he adapts it to a Christian narrative

Variation can be achieved in a particularly subtle way by exploiting the po-tential of a Homeric image in a highly allusive manner in what is a purely Hel-lenistic fashion In Book 21 of the Paraphrase Nonnus narrates the scene wherethe disciples meet Christ while they are fishing in Lake Tiberias The net is calledeither δίκτυονsup2⁵ as in the Gospel or λίνονsup2⁶ and the net imagery is recurrenteven when it is absent from the original as typically happens in the ParaphraseThe fish-net is called λίνον once in Homer in Il 5487 It is interesting to observethat Peterrsquos garment τὸν ἐπενδύτην in the Gospel (217) is conceived of as alinen veil by Nonnus and is depicted as πολύτρητος (2139 καὶ λινέῳ πεπύκαστοπολυτρήτῳ χρόα πέπλῳ lsquoand covered his body with a linen robe full of holesrsquo)

Moschus uses the adjective for Poseidon (Eur ) For instance Dion There is also a self-variation with Dion f (ἐρωτοτόκῳ δὲ φαρέτρῃ βρονταίης βαρύ-δουπος ἐδουλώθη κτύπος ἠχοῦς) on the arrow of Eros which strikes Semele For the adjective see West on Hes Th and f Σίμων hellipὑπηνέμιον λίνον ἕλκων f λίνα κολπώσαντεςhellip πόντιον αὐτοκύλι-στον ἀνείρυον ἐσμὸν ἀλήτην οὐκέτι δὲ σθένος εἶχον ὑποβρύχιον λίνον ἕλκειν fκαὶ οὐ λίνον ἔνδοθι πόντου σχίζετο τοσσατίων νεπόδων βεβαρημένον ὄγκῳ

220 Maria Ypsilanti

In this description the poet is playing with the Homeric image of the fish-netswhich are lsquofull of holesrsquo (Od 22386 δικτύῳhellipπολυωπῷ) Having presented Pe-terrsquos garment as λίνεον whose cognate λίνονsup2⁷ qualified the nets a little earlierand having further attributed to it an adjective (πολύτρητος) similar to that de-scribing the nets in Homer (πολυωπός) Nonnus uses words playfully reminiscentof the Homeric idea of the πολυωπὸν δίκτυον which is also taken up by Oppian(Hal 3579) as λίνου πολυωπὸν ὄλεθρον (on the dangerousness of the net for thefish) In fact Nonnus transfers the image of the epic nets to the clothes of Peterthrough the semantic transition offered by the meanings of λίνον Πολύτρητος isalso Homeric appearing three times in the Odyssey and typically attributed tothe spongesup2⁸ and both Suda and Eustathius underline its likeness toπολυωπόςsup2⁹ A λίνεος πέπλος described as fine-crafted and suitable for warriorsto be worn under the breast-plate dresses the fighter Morrheus in Dion 35197 fκαὶ λινέῳ κόσμησε δέμας χιονώδεϊ πέπλῳ οἷον ἔσω θώρηκος ἀεὶ φορέουσιμαχηταί Thus Nonnus produces a self-variation which is emphasized in thatit holds the same metrical position where adjective and noun stand in bothpoems In the Dionysiaca the λίνεος πέπλος is decorative as is emphasized bythe verb κόσμησε and the adjective lsquowhite like snowrsquo and by the fact that it isfound in a heroic environment in the Paraphrase it is on the other hand acloth imagined as ragged and of extremely poor quality indeed suitable for fish-ermen Nonnusrsquo phrase is anyway somewhat paradoxical since linen is usuallythe material of the chiton a masculine garment while peplos is the feminine gar-ment more embellished and luxurioussup3⁰ This identification however is not al-ways retained by Nonnus since elsewhere he invariably uses πέπλος and χιτώνsup3sup1In any case πέπλος still bears epic connotations of luxury and finenesssup3sup2 and

See for instance Chantraine sv λίνον the thread of linen was originally used for fishing Od and σπόγγοισι πολυτρήτοισι Eustathius puts in parallel πολύτρητος and πολυωπός in his comment on Od ( f ὅρα δὲ τὸ πολύτρητον οἰκειότατον ὂν σπόγγοις ὥσπερ δικτύοις τὸ πολυωπόν) and on ( πολύτρητοι δὲ σπόγγοι πρός τινα ἴσως ὁμοιότητα τοῦ πολυωπὸν δίκτυον)see also Suda sv πολυωπόν∙ τὸ πολύτρητον δίκτυον Et Gud sv πέπλος διαφέρει πέπλος καὶ χιτώνmiddot χιτὼν λέγεται τὸ ἁπλοῦν καὶ λινοῦνπεριβόλαιονmiddot πέπλος δὲ τὸ ποικίλον καὶ γυναίκιον ἱμάτιον cf EM sv χιτών ἐπὶ μὲν γὰρ ἀνδρῶνλέγεται χιτώνmiddot ἐπὶ δὲ γυναικῶν πέπλος Dion where the cloth woven on the loom is called πέπλος and χιτών in the sameline For instance Il where the πέπλος is χαριέστατος and μέγιστος Od f where theπέπλοι are λεπτοὶ ἐύννητοι where they are παμποίκιλοι where the πέπλος iscalled περικαλλέα In the two other instances where πέπλος is used in the Paraphrase theword has connotations of splendour literal ( θεοκμήτῳ τινὶ πέπλῳ on the shinning gar-


forms a sharp contrast with its adjective lsquofull of holesrsquo and its position in a con-text of poverty and deprivation

The following example demonstrates Homeric variatio in the service of reli-gious exegesis Nonnus renders the Gospelrsquos σκηνοπηγία (72) with a combinationof words which both remains very close to the original and at the same timebears clear Homeric overtones the phrase πηγνυμέναις κλισίῃσιν (78) which oc-curs in variation also in Dion 24125 (κλισίας πήξαντες) retains the etymology ofthe noun employed in the Gospel keeping πήγνυμι and only changing σκηνή toκλισίη its Homeric equivalent and is also by a happy coincidence reminiscentof Homerrsquos εὔπηκτος κλισίη (Il 9663 and 24675 μυχῷ κλισίης εὐπήκτου) Nonnusplayfully uses a phrase recalling the Iliadic setting but applies it to a differentcontext The σκηναί of the Jews rendered by the term κλισίαι are not lsquotentsrsquo likethose of the Iliadic warriors but rather huts made from branches of trees (theHebrew term is lsquosoukkotrsquo) as befits a rural festival that σκηνοπηγία is Moreoverπήγνυμι in the word σκηνοπηγία expresses the fact that the branches are pushedinto the ground while in Homer the tents are εὔπηκτοι because the pieces ofwood which support them are strong well-made εὐπαγῆ as Eustathius noteson Il 9663sup3sup3 It is interesting to observe that κλισίην πήγνυμι occurs again inthe other Greek biblical poem Ps Apollinarisrsquo Paraphrase of the Psalms to ren-der the verb κατασκηνόω used in the Septuagintsup3⁴ It is evident that κλισίη offersthe most convenient solution for the poetic transformation of the common σκηνήand its cognates for authors who chose the epic style for their paraphrase Thelearned audience of both Ps Apollinaris and Nonnus appreciates the transferof a standard Iliadic expression to a totally dissimilar context in which the Ho-meric terminology can be still present albeit endowed with a different meaningand describing acts belonging to a totally diverse cultural environment In Non-nus this transfer is all the more successful since his participle πηγνύμεναι func-tioning as an adjective directly and powerfully recalls the Homeric adjective ofthe κλισίη from the same root εὔπηκτος Yet Nonnusrsquo capacity for variety can

ment of the resurrected Christ) or supposed ( f ἐπὶ χροῒ πέπλα βαλόντες Σιδονίης στίλβοντασοφῷ σπινθῆρι θαλάσσης concerning the ἱμάτιον πορφυροῦν with which the soldiers dressedChrist in mockery as it is described in the Gospel in ) Eust Il ff ὅτι οἴκου μὲν οἰκεῖον ἐπίθετον τὸ εὔδμητον ἤτοι εὐδόμητον κλισίας δὲμάλιστα τὸ εὔπηκτον διὰ τὸ εὐπαγὲς τῶν ἐρειδόντων αὐτὴν ξύλων Aχιλλεὺς οὖν εὗδε μυχῷ κλισίηςεὐπήκτου οὕτω που καὶ πηκτὸν ἄροτρον λέγεται δῆλον δὲ ὅτι καὶ μέγαρόν που εὔπηκτον ὥσπερκαὶ εὔτυκτον (cf also Il Od κλισίην εὔτυκτον) PG vol Migne in Par (σοῖσι παρrsquo αὐλείοις κλισίην πήξοιτο μελάθροις rendering Da-vidrsquos κατασκηνώσει ἐν ταῖς αὐλαῖς σου in Psalm ) and in (κλισίην σθεναρήν ἑο πάντοτεπήξει rendering Davidrsquos καὶ γὰρ ὁ κύριος κατασκηνώσει εἰς τέλος in Psalm )

222 Maria Ypsilanti

go further and deeper still In Par 732 f Jesus refuses to participate in the festivaland Nonnus describes this statement by once more employing κλισίη and attrib-uting to it a cognate of πήγνυμι as an adjective οὔπω ἐγὼ κλισίας νεοπηγέας ἄρτιγεραίρων εἰς τελετὴν ὁσίην ἐπιβήσομαι (to render the Johannine ἐγὼ οὐκ ἀνα-βαίνω εἰς τὴν ἑορτὴν ταύτην in 78) With κλισίας νεοπηγέας Nonnus again ach-ieves a creative adaptation of the Homeric εὔπηκτος κλισίη but this time isalso moving in the realm of biblical interpretatio as he adds to the text termsthat further clarify the content νεοπηγέας in addition to being one more variatioof εὔπηκτος lends an eschatological dimension to Christrsquos words as the lsquonewrsquorite will replace the old Jewish one since the new religion is to surpass andrenew outdated Judaism and its ritualssup3⁵

Another noteworthy Homeric adaptation occurs at Par 11188f Here the act ofthe high-priests in coming and meeting in council is rendered with the sentence καὶἄφρονες ἀρχιερῆες εἰς ἀγορὴν ἀγέροντο πολύθροον ᾗχι γερόντων εἰς ἓν ἀγειρο-μένων πρωτόθρονος ἕζετο βουλή (lsquoand the senseless high-priests gathered in theclamorous assembly where the elders sitting in the first thrones used to come to-gether in councilrsquo) rendering the simple Johannine συνέδριον (1147) Several Ho-meric expressions are blended in this image and the spirit of the Homeric settingsechoed in this passage is reversed First we have a verbatim reproduction of the fig-ura etymologica ἐς δrsquo ἀγορὴν ἀγέροντο of Il 18245sup3⁶ which stands also in the samemetrical sedes occupying the first hemistich Nonnus further enhances this figure bythe ἀγειρομένων of the next line which multiplies the etymological play This tripleoccurrence of cognates is partly parallel to the passage just mentioned whereἀγορήν reappears in the next line (Il 18246 ὀρθῶν δrsquo ἑσταότων ἀγορὴ γένετrsquo)but even more notably it is parallel to the Iliadic οἳ δrsquo ἀγορὰς ἀγόρευον ἐπὶ Πριάμοιοθύρῃσι πάντες ὁμηγερέες ἠμὲν νέοι ἠδὲ γέροντες (2788ndash89 lsquothey were speaking inpublic at the doors of Priamus all gathered together young and old peoplersquo) More-over the image of the eldersrsquo sitting in council is a variation on Il 253 βουλὴν δὲπρῶτον μεγαθύμων ἷζε γερόντων and the ἀγορὴ πολύθροος is a variation on the ἀγο-

See Caprara Cf Eustathius ad loc ( f) ἐτυμολογικὸς δὲ συνήθης τρόπος τὸ ἐς ἀγορὰν ἀγέροντοApollonius Rhodius also uses the phrase in the same sedes in Although this phrasedoes not recur in Homer in order to justify Eustathiusrsquo description of it as lsquousualrsquo we have sim-ilar etymological schemas like οἳ δrsquo ἐπεὶ οὖν ἤγερθεν ὁμηγερέες τε γένοντο in Il and αὐτὰρἐπεί ῥrsquo ἤγερθεν ὁμηγερέες τrsquo ἐγένοντο in Il Od and See also Kirk onIl ndash


ρὴν πολύφημον of Od 2150sup3⁷ The notion of wisdom and prudence inherent in theHomeric image of the leadersrsquo assembly stressed by Nonnusrsquo explicit statement thatthe meeting is principally made by the γέροντες is contrasted with the foolishnessof the ἄφρονες high-priests who plan to kill Jesus This is an illustrative case of Ho-meric imitation through opposition and also yet one more example of Nonnusrsquo hos-tile attitude toward the Jews a stance influenced by Cyril of Alexandriasup3⁸

These are only a few examples of the reception and adaptation of Homericvocabulary and formulas in the Metabole of the Gospel by Nonnus It is evidentthat the poet is repeatedly echoing epic phrases and achieves expected variatioby changing such phrases slightly or even considerably and by modifying thecontext in which these reminiscences appear Thus he creates a poem writtenin a Homeric style rather than merely a Homeric cento He frequently enhancesthe sophistication of his work by combining more than one source in his text sothat a Homeric phrase can find its way in the work of Nonnus through its use insome later epic author In addition epic motifs can be combined with themesfrom other poetry eg tragedy and result into new images creatively adjustedinto Nonnian narration according to the Alexandrian literary practice Thepoet incorporates in his verses terms and imagery drawn from the poetic pastwith an extraordinary flexibility being ready to place them in a pagan or in aChristian context and in opposite settings with equal ease Interestingly biblicalinterpretatio is moreover occasionally realized through the employment of epicphraseology Characteristic passages from both Nonnus and other Christianpoets demonstrate that narratives wholly alien to the mythical heroic worldcan be vested with the elaboration of epic splendour and furthermore that Ho-meric language and Homeric allusion can even be used to articulate ideologicalpositions and to convey fundamental theological notions and doctrinal concepts

The creative use of Il and Od by Nonnus who further combines them with otherHomeric lines can be contrasted with the use made of them by Eudocia who integrates themverbatim in her cento ( and ) See Caprara passim cf also above with n For the Jewsrsquo deranged state of mind inparticular cf Par Ἑβραῖοι μανιωδέες ἄφρονι θυμῷ ὑμεῖς ἄφρονα μῦθον ἐπεφθέγξασθεμανέντες Ἰουδαίης μανιώδεες ἄρτι πολῖται See further Agosti ndash

224 Maria Ypsilanti


Helen Peraki-Kyriakidou

Trees and Plants in Poetic EmulationFrom the Homeric Epic to Virgilrsquos Eclogues

It is obvious that a brief list of two or three lines in length cannot have the samefunction as an epic-sized catalogue ndash such as a battle-catalogue ndash of say 10lines or longer It is true that in a catalogue each name may gain a place inhuman memorysup1 In a long catalogue however the portion of that memoryeach name holds may be indeed meagre Things function differently in a smalllist of names each constituentmdashwhether a proper name or notmdashproportionatelyholds a more prestigious position in the poetic text even more so if that list be-longs to the pastoral genre like the Eclogues Considering the size of a bucolicwork a short catalogue is no longer short In such catalogues each part retainsits value what matters however is not only the entry of an item but also withwhat other similar items the catalogue is formed and above all what the aim ofeach catalogue is In this paper we shall deal with short lists of two to three linesmore or less consisting of names of trees and plants Homer has given us a num-ber of such catalogues

In the Iliad there are five such cataloguessup2 Three of them are found in epicsimilies and display a purely epic character portraying the tension and force ofthe fight One of them appears in two occasions with exactly the same compara-tum and comparandum and with the same aim It is found at 13389ndash93=16482ndash86 In both instances the fall of a hero at the time of the fight is likened to thefelling of trees by the hands of carpenters (τέκτονες ἄνδρες 13390 = 16483)sup3

The third one appears at 16765ndash71 where the fierceness of the battle is com-pared with the strong winds in a wood and the noise the tall trees make asthey clash each other⁴ The tension⁵ thus created is such that the listenerreaderis under the impression that each fallen tree represents nothing more than abrief moment in the phase of destruction Each tree of the simile ndash usually a

Minchin ff Kyriakidis xiv-xvi At least three names distributed in two or more lines should be regarded as a catalogue Kyr-iakidis xiii In the present case however I would like to bring into the discussion alsosome instances of one-line catalogues see next note Cf Il ff which according to Skutsch ( fr ) is the model of EnnAnn ndash Sk (see below) In the latter passage the catalogue covers only one line () It is useful though to includeit into our discussion See below Kyriakidis passim mainly Part I lsquoStructure and Contentsrsquo

tall treendash falls The poetic purpose is similar in the fourth catalogue occurring at21350ndash52 when Hephaestus burns everything together with Achillesrsquo victims

καίοντο πτελέαι τε καὶ ἰτέαι ἠδὲ μυρῖκαικαίετο δὲ λωτός τε ἰδὲ θρύον ἠδὲ κύπειροντὰ περὶ καλὰ ῥέεθρα ἅλις ποταμοῖο πεφύκει

Burned were the elms and the willows and the tamarisksburned were the lotus and the rushes and the galingalewhich grew abundantly round the fair streams of the river⁶

The trees are the victims of divine wrath in a fashion similar to the human vic-tims of Achilles since the true perpetrator was Hera scheming against the Tro-jans The character of these catalogues is purely epic there is tension and mag-nitude the slayers and the slain are also there

In the Iliad however there is one instance of a vignette-catalogue whichcould draw the attention of a bucolic poet⁷ It is from the scene where Zeusmakes love to Hera

Ἦ ῥα καὶ ἀγκὰς ἔμαρπτε Κρόνου παῖς ἣν παράκοιτινmiddotτοῖσι δ᾽ ὑπὸ χθὼν δῖα φύεν νεοθηλέα ποίηνλωτόν θ᾽ ἑρσήεντα ἰδὲ κρόκον ἠδ᾽ ὑάκινθονπυκνὸν καὶ μαλακόν ὃς ἀπὸ χθονὸς ὑψόσ᾽ ἔεργε(Il 14346ndash49)

At that Cronusrsquo son clasped his wife in his armsand beneath them the bright earth made fresh-sprung grass to growand dewy lotus and crocus and hyacinththick and soft that kept them from the ground

No large trees are mentioned and the violence is absent The scene has the char-acteristics of springtime⁸ it is almost a locus amoenus a creation of the poeticimagination which ndash according to scholarsndash has its roots in the same epicwork⁹ This catalogue is different in nature and significance from the previousones If there is anything epic in it it is the divine nature of the participantsHere as in the Virgilian catalogue which will be discussed below ldquothe earth un-

In the Iliadic passages I follow the translation of MurrayWyatt with minor adjustments Janko on ndash lsquoVerses f are richly paralleled in post-Homeric eposrsquo Janko ( on ndash) commenting on the word ποίη recognizes spring flowers in thescene such as the hyacinth Elliger Griffin


asked throws up a carpet of spring flowers beneath the loversrdquosup1⁰ Virgil perhapssaw in this catalogue elements pertaining to his imagery in Eclogue 4 when na-ture itself brings gifts to the puer nullo hellip cultu (418)sup1sup1

In our discussion however the Odyssey proves to be more revealing At4602ndash04 Telemachus compares Laconia fit for horsemanship (ἱππήλατος)with rugged Ithaca

σὺ γὰρ πεδίοιο ἀνάσσειςεὐρέος ᾧ ἔνι μὲν λωτὸς πολύς ἐν δὲ κύπειρονπυροί τε ζειαί τε ἰδ᾽ εὐρυφυὲς κρῖ λευκόν(Od 4602ndash604)

For you are lord of a wide plainwhere there is abundant lotus and galingaleand wheat and spelt and broad-eared white barleysup1sup2

With this catalogue Telemachus claims that Ithaca cannot be ἱππήλατος (4607)The very plants contained in the catalogue define the qualities of the place

In Book 7 the surroundings of Alcinousrsquo palace are described It is full oftrees yielding fruit all year round

ἔκτοσθεν δ᾽ αὐλῆς μέγας ὄρχατος ἄγχι θυράων 112τετράγυοςmiddot περὶ δ᾽ ἕρκος ἐλήλαται ἀμφοτέρωθενἔνθα δὲ δένδρεα μακρὰ πεφύκασι τηλεθάονταὄγχναι καὶ ῥοιαὶ καὶ μηλέαι ἀγλαόκαρποι 115συκέαι τε γλυκεραὶ καὶ ἐλαῖαι τηλεθόωσαιτάων οὔ ποτε καρπὸς ἀπόλλυται οὐδ᾽ ἀπολείπειχείματος οὐδὲ θέρευς ἐπετήσιοςmiddot ἀλλὰ μάλ᾽ αἰεὶζεφυρίη πνείουσα τὰ μὲν φύει ἄλλα δὲ πέσσειὄγχνη ἐπ᾽ ὄγχνῃ γηράσκει μῆλον δ᾽ ἐπὶ μήλῳ 120αὐτὰρ ἐπὶ σταφυλῇ σταφυλή σῦκον δ᾽ ἐπὶ σύκῳsup1sup3

Janko on ndash See below The translation of the passages from the Odyssey is based on MurrayDimock withminor adjustments Equally simple is the imagery in Theocr Id ndash

καὶ τὸ ῥόδον καλόν ἐστι καὶ ὁ χρόνος αὐτὸ μαραίνειmiddotκαὶ τὸ ἴον καλόν ἐστιν ἐν εἴαρι καὶ ταχὺ γηρᾷmiddot[λευκὸν τὸ κρίνον ἐστί μαραίνεται ἁνίκα πίπτειmiddotἁ δὲ χιὼν λευκά καὶ τάκεται ἁνίκα dagger παχθῇmiddot]Fair is the rose too yet time withers itfair in spring is the stock but ages fast[white is the lily but it withers in a short while


ἔνθα δέ οἱ πολύκαρπος ἀλῳὴ ἐρρίζωταιτῆς ἕτερον μέν θ᾽ εἱλόπεδον λευρῷ ἐνὶ χώρῳτέρσεται ἠελίῳ ἑτέρας δ᾽ ἄρα τε τρυγόωσινἄλλας δὲ τραπέουσιmiddot πάροιθε δέ τ᾽ ὄμφακές εἰσιν 125ἄνθος ἀφιεῖσαι ἕτεραι δ᾽ ὑποπερκάζουσινἔνθα δὲ κοσμηταὶ πρασιαὶ παρὰ νείατον ὄρχονπαντοῖαι πεφύασιν ἐπηετανὸν γανόωσαιἐν δὲ δύω κρῆναι ἡ μέν τ᾽ ἀνὰ κῆπον ἅπαντασκίδναται ἡ δ᾽ ἑτέρωθεν ὑπ᾽ αὐλῆς οὐδὸν ἵησι 130πρὸς δόμον ὑψηλόν ὅθεν ὑδρεύοντο πολῖταιτοῖ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἐν Aλκινόοιο θεῶν ἔσαν ἀγλαὰ δῶρα(Od 7112ndash32)

But outside the courtyard close to the doorsthere is a great orchard of four acres and a hedge runs about it on either sideIn it grow trees tall and luxuriantpears and pomegranates and apple-trees with their bright fruitand sweet figs and luxuriant olivesThe fruit of these neither perishes nor failsin winter or in summer but lasts throughout the yearand continually the West Wind as it blows quickens to life some fruits and ripensothers pear upon pear waxes ripe apple upon applecluster upon cluster and fig upon figThere too is his fruitful vineyard plantedone part of which a warm spot on level groundis being dried in the sun while other grapes men are gatheringand others too they are treading but in front are unripe grapesthat are shedding the blossom and others that are turning purpleThere again by the last row of the vinesgrow trim garden beds of every sort blooming the year throughand in the orchard there are two springs one of which sends its water throughout all the gar-den while the other opposite to it flows beneath the threshold of the courttoward the high house from this the townsfolk drew their waterSuch were the glorious gifts of the gods in the palace of Alcinous

The orchard (ὄρχατος 7112) has a specific size (τετράγυος) and well-set bounda-ries (113 περὶ δ᾽ ἕρκος ἐλήλαται ἀμφοτέρωθεν) The trees and fruits of the twocatalogues (to the degree to which the second corresponds to the first) do notseem to have any other distinct presence in the epic outside the catalogue inall its versions as we shall see they have no role therefore in the feasts of

and white is the snow but it wastes away on the ground] (trans Gow 19522 with minor ad-justments)

See also Id 2710 (ΔΑΦΝΙΣ) ἁ σταφυλὶς σταφὶς ἔσταιmiddot ὃ νῦν ῥόδον αὖον ὀλεῖται (lsquoThe grapewill become a raisin and what is now a rose will wither and diersquo trans Gow 19522)


the aristocracy at the palace of Alcinous Although in the Odyssey there is noscene in which men are fed with this kind of fruits nevertheless the scenedescribedsup1⁴ gives a sense of opulence Indeed Alcinousrsquo societysup1⁵ bears the char-acteristics of an affluent aristocratic societysup1⁶ The passage closes with the re-minder that whatever the orchard contains trees plants springs are the giftsof the gods to Alcinous (132 τοῖ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἐν Aλκινόοιο θεῶν ἔσαν ἀγλαὰ δῶρα)sup1⁷

Again the description consists of pieces contained in a sort of locus amoenusa utopia according to Sheinsup1⁸ suitable to a bucolic environment trees watersprings This kind of description according to Hunter is characterized by a lsquotyp-icalityrsquo to the degree that ldquoall landscape description in literature is more or lesslsquotypicalrsquordquosup1⁹ This lsquotypicalityrsquo facilitates the cataloguersquos accommodation in differ-ent contexts Furthermore the double ndashof a sortndash appearance of the cataloguewithin the same narrative unit and its reappearance in very different parts ofthe epic as we shall see below denotes its formulaic character which meansthat it can serve different poetic aims in different poetic environments One ele-ment which enhances the dynamics of repetitiveness is the absence of humanactivity or of human toil as Edwards (1993) notesndash with the exception of courseof the verbs τρυγόωσιν (7124) and τραπέουσιν (7125) in our passage where thesubject remains an abstraction This latter point as Edwards acknowledges isa non-Homeric characteristic and transfers the focus from the action to theresultsup2⁰ All these elements permit us to say that the description of the orchardseems to have characteristics of a rather generic value

The passage can be considered to be part of court poetry For Theocritus or Virgil howeverthe description of the surrounding space contains elements that could be recognized as pastoralAt the same time we should not forget that Theocritus has served court poetry within the frameof his pastoral (eg Id ) According to John Rundin ( n ) as the trees bear fruits all the year round lsquothenet result of this is summed up in the observation that because they have unfailing supplies thePhaeacians like to sit around on expensive coverlets eating and drinking (Od ndash)rsquo Dalby ( ) doubts that the Odyssey refers to an lsquoaristocraticrsquo society and that thepoets used to sing only for its members One of his examples is the garden of Alcinous withits fruits where at no time is there anybody who eats any of its fruits It is rather similar to what Virgil would have described as the gifts of the Earth in Eclogue when the puer is born (see below) Schein Hunter Edwards lsquoThe passage exhibits the same careful and orderly division of spacenoted in the descriptions of Achillesrsquo Shield and of the founding of Scheria with perhaps thesame cosmogonic implications The beauty order and continuous fertility of the gardenwarmed by gentle Zephyr distinguish Alcinousrsquo garden as an example of the enchanted locusamoenus as much as it is a working farm This distinction is emphasized by the strange absence


In the description of Alcinousrsquo palace besides trees and running water(7129ndash30) we have the blowing wind Zephyrus (119) which helps the fruitsripen The presence of Zephyrus in particular is noteworthy for elsewhere thisvery wind is described as δυσαής (stormy) as in Il 23200sup2sup1 whereas here it isa favourable mild wind as again in the Odyssey in the Elysian fields (Οd4563) at line 4567sup2sup2

οὐ νιφετός οὔτ᾽ ἂρ χειμὼν πολὺς οὔτε ποτ᾽ ὄμβροςἀλλ᾽ αἰεὶ ζεφύροιο λιγὺ πνείοντος ἀήταςὨκεανὸς ἀνίησιν ἀναψύχειν ἀνθρώπους(Od 4566ndash68)

There is no snow nor heavy storm nor even rainbut Ocean always sends up blasts of the shrill-blowing West Windthat they may give cooling to men

We cannot but notice that the space of the palace therefore shares some detailswith the description of the Underworld As a matter of fact in the palace of Al-cinous the hero will immerse himself in his past and revive it with his narrativeto the Phaeacians as though he is experiencing a form of katabasis

This overlapping between features of the palace and the Netherworld is con-firmed at Nekyia 11588ndash90sup2sup3 There Tantalusis punished for the hybris he hasshown in life (not registered in the epic) He strives to drink water but alwaysfails At the same time every attempt of this poor man to grasp the fruits of

of any reference to labour and laborers from the garden precinct In the entire passage only thesubjectless τρυγόωσιν () and τραπέουσιν () referring to the harvesting and crushing ofthe grapes adumbrate the necessity of labour in this description which otherwise eclipses anentire class of the population (the vast majority) and a fundamental social relationship Sucha complete ellipsis of a verbrsquos subject is uncharacteristic of Homer and distracts attentionfrom the activity itself to its result The processes of cultivation dressing and irrigation more-over are submerged in the passage as are those of gathering the fruits of the orchard or harvest-ing the vegetablesrsquo Strab See also Il ndash and Stanford on Od West on ff As expected the reappearance of the catalogue from the orchards of Alcinousrsquo palace in theUnderworld has been discussed on the basis of epic orality This repetition is what Combellack( ) calls lsquoformulary illogicalitiesrsquo lsquoAs usual the poet shows no concern to modify thephraseology designed for a normal situation so as to make it appropriate for the abnormal sit-uation he happens to describersquo Orality however should not have been in the priorities of aLatin poet Nonetheless one cannot ignore the fact that every time a passage is in a new envi-ronment it should retain a functional role there contextually This catalogue of trees repeated inthe narrative of the Underworld should be read as an integral part of the description there


the trees with rich foliage over the pond fails as the wind tosses them away tothe clouds (591ndash92)

δένδρεα δ᾽ ὑψιπέτηλα κατὰ κρῆθεν χέε καρπόνὄγχναι καὶ ῥοιαὶ καὶ μηλέαι ἀγλαόκαρποισυκέαι τε γλυκεραὶ καὶ ἐλαῖαι τηλεθόωσαιmiddotτῶν ὁπότ᾽ ἰθύσει᾽ ὁ γέρων ἐπὶ χερσὶ μάσασθαιτὰς δ᾽ ἄνεμος ῥίπτασκε ποτὶ νέφεα σκιόεντα(Od 11588ndash92)

And trees high and leafy let hang their fruits from their topspears and pomegranates and apple trees with their bright fruitand sweet figs and luxuriant olivesBut as often as that old man would reach out towards these to clutch themwith his hands the wind would toss them to the shadowy clouds

The transference of the scene is perfectly served by the formulaic character of thecatalogue retaining once again features of a locus amoenussup2⁴ (treeswater) thatthe dead man cannot enjoy he cannot even approach the trees Furthermoreas in the palace of Alcinous but more emphatically in this case human labourconnected with the cultivation of these trees is absentsup2⁵

The catalogue of Alcinousrsquo orchard after its reappearance in the Netherworldappears again- although in a variant form- in Book 24 of the Odyssey

ὦ γέρον οὐκ ἀδαημονίη σ᾽ ἔχει ἀμφιπολεύεινὄρχατον ἀλλ᾽ εὖ τοι κομιδὴ ἔχει οὐδέ τι πάμπανοὐ φυτόν οὐ συκῆ οὐκ ἄμπελος οὐ μὲν ἐλαίηοὐκ ὄγχνη οὐ πρασιή τοι ἄνευ κομιδῆς κατὰ κῆπονἄλλο δέ τοι ἐρέω σὺ δὲ μὴ χόλον ἔνθεο θυμῷmiddotαὐτόν σ᾽ οὐκ ἀγαθὴ κομιδὴ ἔχει ἀλλ᾽ ἅμα γῆραςλυγρὸν ἔχεις αὐχμεῖς τε κακῶς καὶ ἀεικέα ἕσσαι(Od 24244ndash50)

Old man no lack of skill in tending a garden besets youBut your care is good and there is nothing whatsoevereither plant or fig tree or vine or oliveor pear or garden-plot in all the field that lacks careBut something else I shall tell you and do not take offenceYou yourself do not enjoy good care but you bear woeful old ageand you are sadly squalid and wear wretched clothes

See also Edwards who uses the term with some reservations (passage quotedabove n ) See Combellac on the similarity between this passage and the description of Alci-nousrsquo orchard


It is the moment Odysseus pretends that he does not recognize his father Laertes(a pretence that he will abandon a little later) In sharp contrast however withthe previous occurrences of the catalogue the human effort Odysseusrsquo father hasexerted in cultivating his garden is stressed This detail is important as it differ-entiates this use of the catalogue from its previous uses There is a further pointthough which is particularly stressed here It is the value each kind of tree hasOdysseus names them all one by one in order to stress that not a single one ofthem is deprived of his fatherrsquos special attention (οὐδέ οὐ οὐ οὐκ οὐ οὐκοὐ) The element of bestowing separate value to every single item of the cata-logue is particularly enhanced in the last appearance of the same list furtherdown It is when Odysseus speaking to Laertes uses the contents of the cataloguetogether with a reference to the wound (24331 οὐλή) as a sign to the father torecognize his son after a lapse of long years (340ndash41)

σὺ δέ με προΐεις καὶ πότνια μήτηρἐς πατέρ᾽ Αὐτόλυκον μητρὸς φίλον ὄφρ᾽ ἂν ἑλοίμηνδῶρα τὰ δεῦρο μολών μοι ὑπέσχετο καὶ κατένευσενεἰ δ᾽ ἄγε τοι καὶ δένδρε᾽ ἐϋκτιμένην κατ᾽ ἀλῳὴν 336εἴπω ἅ μοί ποτ᾽ ἔδωκας ἐγὼ δ᾽ ᾔτευν σε ἕκασταπαιδνὸς ἐών κατὰ κῆπον ἐπισπόμενοςmiddot διὰ δ᾽ αὐτῶνἱκνεύμεσθα σὺ δ᾽ ὠνόμασας καὶ ἔειπες ἕκασταὄγχνας μοι δῶκας τρεισκαίδεκα καὶ δέκα μηλέας 340συκέας τεσσαράκοντ᾽middot ὄρχους δέ μοι ὧδ᾽ ὀνόμηναςδώσειν πεντήκοντα διατρύγιος δὲ ἕκαστοςἤην ἔνθα δ᾽ ἀνὰ σταφυλαὶ παντοῖαι ἔασινὁππότε δὴ Διὸς ὧραι ἐπιβρίσειαν ὕπερθεν(Od 24333ndash44)

It was you who sent me you and my honoured motherto Autolycus my motherrsquos father that I could getthe gifts which when he came here he promised and agreed to give meAnd come I shall tell you also the trees in the well-ordered gardenwhich you once gave me and I who was only a childwas following you through the garden and asking you for this and thatIt was through these trees that we passed and you named them and told me ofeach one You gave me thirteen pear-trees and ten apple-treesand forty fig-trees And you also promised to give me rows of vineseven as I say fifty of them which ripened one by one at different timesmdash and upon them are clusters of all sortsmdashwhenever the seasons of Zeus weighed them down from above


In the frame of this catalogue (337ndash39)sup2⁶ the poet gives special attention to thevalue of each tree separately The word ἕκαστος used twice (337 339) and thephrase διὰ δ᾽ αὐτῶν (338) contribute to it Laertes did not give to Odysseus anyold piece of land but a well-ordered space (336 ἐϋκτιμένην κατ᾽ ἀλῳήν)sup2⁷ witha specific number of trees of each kind which he names separately It is thesevery trees which Odysseus had learnt one by one and which became the secondtoken for his recognition hence these trees constitute a proof for his identity asort of referent or even a symbol of his youth

The above catalogue repeated in various versions in different parts of theepic as well as the other short catalogues of plants and trees in the Homerictext show that(i) Most of the above descriptions function outside the sphere of human la-

bour(ii) The items in the above catalogues are added one by one in a paratactic and

linear way (things will change to a great extent in Theocritus and Virgil)(iii) Not only the last catalogue but the others as well except for the (four=)

three lsquoepicrsquo catalogues of the Iliad that we examined at the beginning ofthis paper contain some details from the imagery of a locus amoenusSuch a description according to scholars contains some lsquotypicalrsquo compo-nents which evidently contribute to its potentials of repetitiveness facilitat-ing the cataloguersquos accommodation in different environments within theepic (or in different genres)

(iv) Considering the last catalogues of the Odyssey especially in Book 24 we sawthat the separate value of every single item seems to be stressed eventhough each one is pertinent to collectivity Each one represents eitherhuman labour (at 24244ndash50) or particulars of the herorsquos identity as at24333ndash44 It is precisely this power of representation of each plant ortree which has the dynamism to develop into a symbol and which in turnndashcenturies later and together with the other characteristics of the cata-loguendash found the proper conditions for development in the pastoral

In Virgilrsquos Eclogues there are short catalogues of two to three lines similar to theHomeric ones as regards both form and content It is clear that Homeric epicshave been significantly employed as a source text There are however major dif-ferences First of all the plants included in Virgilrsquos short catalogues differ to a

Kyriakidis shows the importance of the frame for the reception of a catalogue Part IIlsquoCatalogues in Contextrsquo Cf Od ndash (Alcinousrsquo garden for which see above)


great extent from their Homeric counterparts in this instance the Roman poetseems to have received Theocritus rather than Homer Another major differenceis that a considerable number of these plants are related in tradition in one wayor another to a certain god especially to gods of poetry culture and civilizationSuch cases are already attested in Theocritus The reader can therefore easilyconceive the symbolic powersup2⁸ of such plants An obvious example is the vi-gnette-catalogue of Idyll 2

ἦνθον γάρ κεν ἐγώ ναὶ τὸν γλυκὺν ἦνθον Ἔρωταἢ τρίτος ἠὲ τέταρτος ἐὼν φίλος αὐτίκα νυκτόςμᾶλα μὲν ἐν κόλποισι Διωνύσοιο φυλάσσωνκρατὶ δ᾽ ἔχων λεύκαν Ἡρακλέος ἱερὸν ἔρνοςπάντοθι πορφυρέαισι περὶ ζώστραισιν ἑλικτάνsup2⁹(Id 2118ndash22)sup3⁰

For I would have come by sweet LoveI would at early nightfall with two or three friendsbearing in my bosom apples of Dionysusand on my brows the white poplar the holy plant of Heraclestwined all about with crimson bandssup3sup1

Given that the Eclogues as a whole lend themselves to a metapoetic readingmany of the plants mentioned in such catalogues such as for instance the lau-rel the ivy or the vine function very much as cultural or metaliterary symbolssup3sup2

I would like to start with a cataloguesup3sup3 where things are made very clear bythe poet himself As in TheocritusVirgil in a direct way relates a plant or a treeto a specific godsup3⁴ who in tradition has a well-recognized cultural and metalit-

ldquoThe symbol as divine accoutrement occupies a mediating position between the divine andhuman realms It is a thing from this world that is affiliated with a being from beyondrdquo (Struck ) Cf below (Id ) Cf Epigr ndash The translation of Theocritusrsquo Idylls is based on Gow

with minor adjustments Eg Saunders and n Comparing the length of the Homeric text with that of the Eclogues the frequency of this sortof catalogue in the pastoral poetry of Virgil is very high some one-line catalogues are equallyinteresting eg Ecl Later Phaedrus () will form a similar catalogue of plants and trees in relation to certaingods

olim quas uellent esse in tutela suadiui legerunt arbores Quercus Ioviet myrtus Veneri placuit Phoebo laureapinus Cybebae populus celsa Herculi


erary significance at Ecl 7 we have the competition between Corydon and Thyr-sis Through a short catalogue of plants and trees each of them declares theirlove for and faith in their beloved At lines 761ndash64 Corydon the eventual win-ner associates certain plants and trees with specific deities and concludes thathis beloved Phyllis who loves hazels (corylos) will in the end defeat the myrtleof Venussup3⁵ and the laurel of Apollo

Populus Alcidae gratissima uitis Iacchoformosae myrtus Veneri sua laurea PhoeboPhyllis amat corylos illas dum Phyllis amabitnec myrtus uincet corylos nec laurea Phoebi(Ecl 761ndash64)

Dearest is poplar to Alcides vines to BacchusMyrtle to lovely Venus to Phoebus his own bayPhyllis loves hazels and while Phyllis loves thoseHazels will never lose to myrtle or Phoebusrsquo bay(trans Lee 1980 with minor adjustments)

All four plants of the two-line catalogue represent gods who in one way or an-other were associated with poetry and culture in myth and literature Furtherto each godrsquos individual contribution however the relation between Dionysusand Apollosup3⁶ as well as that between Venus and Dionysus is well known alsowell-known is Herculesrsquo contribution to culture and civilization and his relationto the Musessup3⁷ This is not the time to discuss the number of instances wherethese deities were worshipped together or had overlapping interests What isof importance to us is that Phyllis who loves hazelssup3⁸ does not have to competeonly with one god and his or her symbolic plant but with what the four of themtogether represent Corydon through Phyllisrsquo corylos (a word which can be re-garded as an etymology of his own name)sup3⁹ seems to contend that his poetry

Once the gods chose the trees they wantedto have under their protection Jupiter liked the oakVenus liked the myrtle Apollo the laureland Cybele liked the pine Hercules liked the tall poplar

On the relation between Venus and the myrtle see Ov Fast also Plin NH ndashServ on Ecl Geor Aen See Vollgraff ndash (esp ) On this relation in Virgil see the seminal article by Mac Goacuteraacutein ndash See below n In Geor the poet advises the farmer neue inter uitis corylum sere (nor plant the hazelamong the vines) Egan on her name ibid on Corydonrsquos name Lipka ff Peraki-Kyriakidou f Cucchiarelli on


is better than that which is considered the quintessence of poetic productioncharacterized by Apollonian along with Dionysiac elements⁴⁰ cum uenustate⁴sup1in the Musesrsquo realm The relation of populus to Hercules in the first position ofthe catalogue is not without significance The Muses and Hercules had establish-ed their connection long ago Highly important for this connection was the erec-tion of the Aedes Herculis Musarum by M Fulvius Nobilior⁴sup2 However only inCorydonrsquos song is this tree related to Hercules⁴sup3 not in Thyrsisrsquo song

In his response Thyrsis employs another catalogue of trees⁴⁴ which closesby claiming that if his beloved Lycidas visits him more often nature will rewardhim In this short catalogue any connection of the trees with corresponding dei-ties is absent

fraxinus in siluis pulcherrima pinus in hortispopulus in fluviis abies in montibus altissaepius at si me Lycida formose reuisasfraxinus in siluis cedat tibi pinus in hortis(Ecl 765ndash68)

Fairest the ash in forest in pleasure-gardens pinepoplars by streams and on high mountains silver firBut lovely Lycidas visit me more oftenand forest ash and garden pine will honour you(trans Lee 1980 with minor adjustments)

Here I would like to add some further thoughts to what I have already discussedin an earlier paper with regard to this certamen⁴⁵ Lycidas himself unlike Phyllisdoes not have some favourite plant which would stand as representative of himFurthermore Corydon includes in his catalogue plants and trees which were di-rectly related to certain gods and were also acknowledged as symbols of essen-tial constituents of poetry and civilization Only the poplar appears in both qua-

On the co-existence of Apollonian and Dionysiac features in the song see Mac Goacuteraacuteinndash lsquoApollo and Dionysus are both gods of poetic inspiration and as such oftenpaired and it is hardly to be imagined that an ancient poet would subordinate one to theother in a poetic contextrsquo Cf Peraki-Kyriakidou ndash Fowler on Hardie Theocritus was obviously the model (see Id ndash cited above) Cucchiarelli ( on) stresses the fact that in the aforementioned verses of Theocritus λεύκα is clearly associatedalso with Dionysus At Geor ndash the catalogue has much in common with the two aforementioned cata-logues For populus at l (Herculeaeque arbos umbrosa coronae) see Thomas ad loc Peraki-Kyriakidou


trains In Thyrsisrsquo catalogue however it is dissociated from Hercules undersuch circumstances it will not be in a position to give enough drive to hissong to compete with that of Corydonrsquos⁴⁶

In this contest Corydon is the winner one of the reasons being that his po-etics as represented by his beloved Phyllis and her corylos has the ambition togo beyond the standards of the day based on the synthesis of what the abovetrees symbolize In this Eclogue Corydonrsquos catalogue does not function in thesense of accommodating different items one next to the other in order to forma general picture Each plant or tree carries an indisputable and widely-knownsymbolic value related to poetry and culture Even if the above plants or treesare accommodated in a linear fashion it is obvious to the reader that they rep-resent qualities and values of poetry and civilization in a synthetic way Virgilrsquospoetry receives Homeric poetry only to a degree there the corresponding cata-logues were linear catalogues but without any obvious symbolic power ofeach plant separately

According to Macrobius (Sat 6227) Thyrsisrsquo catalogue has its model in theAnnales of Ennius⁴⁷ where the poet describes the felling of the same kind of treein catalogue-form and with the significant exception of the poplar

Percellunt magnas quercus exciditur ilexfraxinus frangitur atque abies consternitur altapinus proceras pervortunt (Ann 177ndash79 Sk)

They throw down great oaks down falls the holmthe ash is subdued the high fir tree is levelledand the tall pines are overthrown

The Ennian catalogue is related to the preparations for the funeral of the victimsof the battle at Heraclea where Pyrrhus suffered heavy losses in 280 BC It isquite obvious that the content of this catalogue is inappropriate for the bucolicenvironment Besides as Lipka points out abies is an ldquounbucolic tree occurringnowhere in any Greek bucolic poetrdquo Thyrsis may well stress the positive relationof each kind of tree to a certain environment but this in no way means that thereader does not recollect the unbucolic features of its ancient model In Enniusthe prevailing imagery is that of felling and death Accordingly in Thyrsisrsquo re-sponse the bucolic pattern seems to collapse If as I think we should we accept

As Egan observes lsquoThe trees which Thyrsis names have no apparent associations withdivinity nor with love or song In general while Thyrsis formally and superficially responds tomost of the elements in Corydonrsquos quatrain his words and phrases are unidimensionalrsquo Lipka f


Ennius as the immediate Roman model then we should perhaps take it as alsquowindow referencersquo to the earlier Iliadic⁴⁸ lsquoepicrsquo catalogues which we mentionedbriefly above since they similarly could not offer any incentive for a pastoralreading I am referring to the two catalogues of purely epic flavour from Book16 at 482ndash86 and 765ndash70 Their aim in the Greek epic was to highlight the ten-sion and the violence of the battle The first one was also a word for word rep-etition of Il 13389ndash93

ἤριπεν δrsquo ὡς ὅτε τις δρῦς ἢ ἀχερωῒςἠὲ πίτυς βλωθρή τήν τ᾽ οὔρεσι τέκτονες ἄνδρεςἐξέταμον πελέκεσσι νεήκεσι νήϊον εἶναιmiddotὣς ὃ πρόσθ᾽ ἵππων καὶ δίφρου κεῖτο τανυσθεὶςβεβρυχὼς κόνιος δεδραγμένος αἱματοέσσης(Il 13389ndash93 = Il 16482ndash486)

And he fell as an oak falls or a poplaror a high pine that among the mountains shipwrights fellwith whetted axes to be a shiprsquos timberso he lay outstretched in front of his horses and chariotmoaning aloud and clutching at the bloody dust

The above description has obviously much in common with the description ofbattle in Book 16765ndash70 although in this case the names of the trees are accom-modated in only one line⁴⁹

ὡς δ᾽ Εὖρός τε Νότος τ᾽ ἐριδαίνετον ἀλλήλοιινοὔρεος ἐν βήσσῃς βαθέην πελεμιζέμεν ὕληνφηγόν τε μελίην τε τανύφλοιόν τε κράνειαναἵ τε πρὸς ἀλλήλας ἔβαλον τανυήκεας ὄζουςἠχῇ θεσπεσίῃ πάταγος δέ τε ἀγνυμενάωνὣς Τρῶες καὶ Aχαιοὶ ἐπ᾽ ἀλλήλοισι θορόντεςδῄουν οὐδ᾽ ἕτεροι μνώοντ᾽ ὀλοοῖο φόβοιο(Il 16765ndash70)

And as the East and the South Wind strive with each otherin shaking a deep wood in the glades of a mountainndash a wood of beech and ash and smooth-barked corneland these dash one against the other their long boughs with a wondrous dinand there is a crack of broken branchesndash so the Trojans and the Achaeans leapt one on anotherand slaughtered nor did either side think of destructive flight

Cf above n See above n and


Since δρῦς and φηγός seem to be the same tree then of the (6 =) 5 trees of theabove-cited Homeric catalogues three also appear in the catalogue of Thyrsis ina bucolic song such catalogues have no place The imagery of the felled treeslike the victims of war in the archaic text and the imagery of manic destructiondo not suit pastoral diction Some of these trees may have their own independentpresence⁵⁰ in the pastoral but their grouping together creates different associa-tions In Corydonrsquos piece each plant because of its symbolic possibility had toadd its own contribution to poetry and song In that of Thyrsis the grouping to-gether of these trees functions only as an lsquounpastoralrsquo reminiscence Thyrsis hasjustly yielded to Corydon since the Iliadic imagery is ill-suited to being generi-cally transplanted

Theocritus could be a better model for Thyrsis In Dioscuri (Id 22) there is asimilar catalogue as some of the trees coincide with those employed by Thyrsis

εὗρον δ᾽ ἀέναον κρήνην ὑπὸ λισσάδι πέτρῃὕδατι πεπληθυῖαν ἀκηράτῳmiddot αἱ δ᾽ ὑπένερθελάλλαι κρυστάλλῳ ἠδ᾽ ἀργύρῳ ἰνδάλλοντοἐκ βυθοῦmiddot ὑψηλαὶ δὲ πεφύκεσαν ἀγχόθι πεῦκαιλεῦκαί τε πλάτανοί τε καὶ ἀκρόκομοι κυπάρισσοιἄνθεά τ᾽ εὐώδη λασίαις φίλα ἔργα μελίσσαιςὅσσ᾽ ἔαρος λήγοντος ἐπιβρύει ἂν λειμῶνας(Id 2237ndash43)

Under a smooth rock they found a perennial springbrimming with pure water the pebbles in its depthsshowing like crystal or silverHigh pines were growing nearbypoplars and planes and tufted cypressesand fragrant flowers farmed gladly by the shaggy beesndashall flowers that teem in the meadows as spring fades away

What the reader notices however is that the overall imagery in Thyrsisrsquo song is amuch lowered pastoral description denuded one might say of its bucolic ele-ments Thyrsis was unsuccessful in constructing a truly bucolic catalogue Hiscatalogue was generically ill-suited a rather lsquounidimensionalrsquo presentation oftrees as Egan rightly says⁵sup1 and deprived of any obvious symbolic value

Pinus also appears in other passages of the Eclogues either as a metonymy for a boat or as ametonymy for the Pan-pipe () However its listing along with fraxinus and abies (trees withno other presence in the Bucolics) is a rather direct allusion to the catalogues of tall trees of theHomeric past thus creating a rift in the bucolic discourse See above n


which could contribute to the formation of an overall idea⁵sup2 Synthesis of sym-bols created by the symbolic dynamics of different trees or plants was not a rec-ognized feature in the short catalogues of plants and trees in the Homeric epics

This feature does not appear only at 761ndash64 It seems to be an establishedcharacteristic in this Virgilian work in Eclogue 2 Corydon tries to attract Alexis

huc ades o formose puer tibi lilia plenis 45ecce ferunt Nymphae calathis tibi candida Naispallentis uiolas et summa papauera carpensnarcissum et florem iungit bene olentis anethitum casia atque aliis intexens suauibus herbismollia luteola pingit uaccinia calta 50ipse ego cana legam tenera lanugine malacastaneasque nuces mea quas Amaryllis amabataddam cerea pruna (honos erit huic quoque pomo)et uos o lauri carpam et te proxima myrtesic positae quoniam suauis miscetis odores 55(Ecl 245ndash55)

Come here O lovely boy for you the Nymphs bring lilieslook in baskets full for you the Naiad fairplucking pale violets and poppy heads combines themwith narcissus and flower of fragrant dillthen weaving marjoram in and other pleasant herbscolours soft bilberries with yellow marigoldMyself I shall pick the grey-white apples with tender downand chestnuts which my Amaryllis lovedI shall pluck you O laurels and you neighbour myrtlefor so arranged you mingle attractive fragrances(trans Lee 1980 with minor adjustments)

His words to Alexis form a double catalogue the list of plants and flowers the Naiadand the Nymphs offer in baskets (45ndash50) and the list of what Corydon himself isoffering (51ndash55) Although this double catalogue is beyond the group of short cata-logues we are discussing in this paper because of its length (even in its separateparts) I believe that it deserves to be taken into consideration in order to see thepoetrsquos inclinations in his Eclogues the flowers and plants of the first part (45ndash50) are put together in baskets (46 calathis) The second (51ndash55) is a selection

Mac Goacuteraacutein (ndash ) who reads these verses from their political aspect comes verynear to what we understand here as lsquounidimensionalrsquo to use Eganrsquos term lsquoThyrsis responds al-most as if to seal his loss referring to plants and trees only with no sensitivity to their religiousdimension seemingly unaware that if we are to sing of woods then these woods should be wor-thy of a consul and thus unaware of his own inferior political sophisticationrsquo


(45 legam) of Corydonrsquos himselfWhat we have here is not the mere presentation ofplants in a linear way but rather an arrangement of them in verse as well as in thebasket or even in Corydonrsquos arms Similarndash but still differentndash was the notion of ar-rangement of plants and trees in well-ordered areas in Homer as in Odyssey 24336(see above) Here in Virgil it is not only the separate beauty (or even the [separate]symbolism) of each one plant that matters but the synthesis of all the flowers to-gether in the first part the Nymphs offer the flowers in baskets calathis (46)This word is Greekndash though rarely used in Greek poetryndash and usually denotes a bas-ket used in rituals This is the first word in the Callimachean Hymn to Demeter⁵sup3 Byusing this wordndash instead of the Latin synonym fiscella (which at the end of the Ec-logues seems to represent the whole of the work⁵⁴)ndash Virgil at this point shows hisHellenistic inclinations⁵⁵ There is agreement that Meleager (AP 5147) is themodel for these lines In that epigram the main verb is πλέκω (lsquoto plaitrsquo) a verb re-lated to the making of a wreath or of a basket In Eclogue 2 the Naiad combines (48jungit) the flowers she gathers weaving (49 intexens) them in an array⁵⁶ Theocritushas shown the way in Id 321ndash23 the poet talks about the wreath he has preparedto Amaryllis

τὸν στέφανον τῖλαί με κατ᾽ αὐτίκα λεπτὰ ποησεῖςτόν τοι ἐγών Aμαρυλλὶ φίλα κισσοῖο φυλάσσωἀμπλέξας καλύκεσσι καὶ εὐόδμοισι σελίνοις

You will make me shred my wreath to piecesthe wreath of ivy which I twined with rosebudsand fragrant celery and wear for you my dear Amaryllis

Plants and flowers are mixed and interwoven arranged in this way in a synthe-sis each plant is one part of the synthesis one factor of an imagery pertaining tothe formation of a whole This same idea is adopted by Virgil in his description ofthe cup in Ecl 3 Πλοκή and synthesis is the centre of the idea The notion ofἀμπλέξας also appears in the description of Alcimedonrsquos cups

Hopkinson ndash and his comment on l The word was used by Virgil also atEcl Geor and at Aen Cucchiarelli on ndash Saunders ndash Clausen on l Berg


Et nobis idem Alcimedon duo pocula fecitet molli circum est ansas amplexus acantho (Ecl 345)The same Alcimedon also created two cups for usand twining soft acanthus leaves around the handles(trans Lee 1980 with minor adjustments)

The Theocritean origins of the description of the κισσύβιον are more than obvious

καὶ βαθὺ κισσύβιον κεκλυσμένον ἁδέι κηρῷἀμφῶες νεοτευχές ἔτι γλυφάνοιο ποτόσδοντῶ ποτὶ μὲν χείλη μαρύεται ὑψόθι κισσόςκισσὸς ἑλιχρύσῳ κεκονιμένοςmiddot ἁ δὲ κατ᾽ αὐτόνκαρπῷ ἕλιξ εἱλεῖται ἀγαλλομένα κροκόεντι(Id 127ndash31)

And I shall give you a deep cup washed over with sweet waxtwo-handled and newly fashioned still fragrant from the knifeAlong the lips above trails ivyivy dotted with golden clustersand along it winds the tendril exalting in its yellow fruit

In the second part of the double catalogue of Eclogue 2 Corydon makes his ownchoices (51 legam) closing his list with the two symbolic plants of poetry andlove par excellence the laurel and the myrtle the sacred plants of Apollo andAphrodite respectively These were precisely the plants with which Corydonagain the winner of the song-contest closed his list at Ecl 7 (62)⁵⁷ Here thesetwo plants are mixed (55 miscetis) to become parts of a synthesis with theirbeautiful odours The metapoetic significance strengthened by the vocabularyndashnot only in this specific passage but in the whole poem⁵⁸ndash is obvious to all Itis further enhanced by the fact that this synthesis has nothing to do with the de-scriptions of nature at the beginning and the end of the Eclogue⁵⁹ What is im-portant for the poet at this stage is to talk metapoetically in order to discloseand promote his stance regarding poetry In this Eclogue through Corydon ldquoVirgildirects attention to a theoretical consideration of pastoral poetryrdquo⁶⁰ Our poetrsquosstance seems to be that his poetry should not be considered to be a product

Leach with reference to Pfeiffer Leach (on fontibus and n ) See also Papanghelis Saunders ndash Leach lsquoAs the singer pursues his evangelical discourse he transforms the pas-toral life into something more fantastic than realrsquo Leach


of a uniform tradition but rather the eclectic product and mixture of various anddifferent literary experiences

From Eclogue 2 we turn our attention to Ecl 4 the poet extols the birth of thepuer who will bring the New Golden Era in the world At his coming Earth cel-ebrates and offers abundantly her gifts nullo cultu (18)

At tibi prima puer nullo munuscula cultuerrantis hederas passim cum baccare tellusmixtaque ridenti colocasia fundet acantho⁶sup1 20[hellip]ipsa tibi blandos fundent cunabula flores⁶sup2

But first child as small gifts for you Earth untilledwill pour the straying ivy rife and baccarisand colocasia mingling them with acanthusrsquo smile[hellip]your very cradle will pour forth caressing flowers(trans Lee 1980 with minor adjustments)

I have dealt with this really interesting catalogue elsewhere⁶sup3 But let us confineourselves to the recognition of the symbolism of the plants included and the waythey are presented the Bacchic element with the ivy and the baccar⁶⁴ has astrong presence while the Apollonian is represented by the acanthus⁶⁵ Thesetwo elements however are not presented next to one another but are inter-wined are mixed Miscere (20) is used again as in Eclogue 255 which we sawabove bringing forth the importance of the synthesis which depicts the first ex-periences of the child The Bacchic element is mixed with the Apollonian Thefirst experiences are not lsquounidimensionalrsquo⁶⁶ they are a synthesis of major ele-

Acanthus is present also at Geor Aen cf Stat Theb medioLinus intertextus acantho See Arnold ndash Saunders ndash with notes Cuc-chiarelli on and on (ridenti acantho) Mynorsrsquo text Harrison ( ) prefers to read line as Peraki-Kyriakidou (forthcoming) Coleman on Hardie a Peraki-Kyriakidou Peraki-Kyriakidou(forthcoming) Elderkin has the evidence Mac Goacuteraacutein ndash Acanthus may also be a Bacchicsymbol I am most grateful to Fiachra Mac Goacuteraacutein for sending me his paper before publicationHis analysis on how Apollonian and Dionysiac elements were blended in the Eclogues is of highinterest and very insightful see also Peraki-Kyriakidou (forthcoming) cf above This is different from what happens in Thyrsisrsquo song (see above n )


ments of culture and poetry Although everything is under Apollorsquos sway (10tuus iam regnat Apollo)⁶⁷ no element can stand alone

With such a cultural background the boy will bring in the New Golden Erawhich will be realized when according to the poet he will have read (legere) thepraise (26 laudes) of the heroic past along with the achievements of his ancestor(s) (26 facta parentis) and have recognised their virtues (27) Then in the worldof nature new phenomena will take place which will indicate the coming of anew period

at simul heroum laudes et facta parentisiam legere et quae sit poteris cognoscere uirtusmolli paulatimflauescet campus aristaincultisque rubens pendebit sentibus uuaet durae quercus sudabunt roscida mella (426ndash30)

But as soon as you can read of the praise of the heroesand of your fatherrsquos deeds and know what virtue meansthen tender spikes of grain will turn the field yellowand reddening grapes will hang from a wild thornbushand hard oak-trees will sweat out dewy honey(trans Lee 1980 with minor adjustments)

What is important in this passage is that the gifts of Nature are produced with thenotion of novelty to predominate uua will come out from uncultivated thornbushbeing something different and new like honey which will be produced from toughoak-trees The new is not any more the same as the old In the first proem to theGeorgics there is a corresponding description where arista⁶⁸ again and uva obvi-ously represent the new phase of the development of civilization

Liber et alma Ceres vestro si munere tellusChaoniam pingui glandem mutavit aristaPoculaque inventis Acheloia miscuit uuis (Geor 17ndash9)

Liber and nourishing Ceres if by your grace the earthchanged the Chaonian acorn for ripe ears of cornand mingled Acheloan water with new-found winehellip⁶⁹

Virgil shows his intention of relating these two passages by putting arista anduva at the same metrical position and in a more or less similar context Both

Peraki-Kyriakidou On arista as a cultural symbol Zissos on l Peraki-Kyriakidou with notes


in the Eclogues and the Georgics civilization does not develop with the mere suc-cession of one period after another nor does one age simply substitute for anoth-er but it is the result of synthesis the new comes from the old It is like the de-velopment of the puer in the Eclogues who will bring in the New Era after delvinginto the deeds and virtues of Man in the past Nature in a similar manner willbring the new era out of the old The manifestation of nature will show that itfinally is the mirror of human spirit and civilizationThe aspirations of theRoman poet are rather different from what is highlighted in the Homeric text

ὄγχνη ἐπ᾽ ὄγχνῃ γηράσκει μῆλον δ᾽ ἐπὶ μήλῳαὐτὰρ ἐπὶ σταφυλῇ σταφυλή σῦκον δ᾽ ἐπὶ σύκῳ(Od 7120ndash21 translated above)

In Homer the new does not seem to promise anything novel⁷⁰ In Virgil from theuncultivated (incultis hellip sentibus)⁷sup1 something new will come about In Homerthe quality of the past experiences seems to be repeated in the future Man inthe age of Virgil through his more complex experiences looks forward to anew ndashpossibly betterndash life but this in itself is an adynaton

See the catalogues above Cf Aen with Serv ad loc As Papanghelis ( ndash) notes the word incultus inthe Eclogues oscillates between the lsquouncultivatedrsquo in agriculture and the intellectually lsquounculti-vatedrsquo


Sophia Papaioannou

Embracing Homeric Orality in the AeneidRevisiting the Composition Politicsof Virgilrsquos First Descriptio

An important dimension of the antagonistic attitude that marks Virgilrsquos receptionof Homer and has escaped in-depth critical study is the lsquooralrsquo character of theAeneid and the poetics of antagonism behind it specifically Virgilrsquos realizationthat Homeric orality was a literary technique as much as a means of literary ex-pression and his systematic effort to appropriate it by embracing tropes andmechanisms of orality fundamental and conspicuous in the composition ofthe Homeric narrative It is the goal of the present study to assess Virgilrsquos sophis-ticated engagement with the Homeric methodology of text composition I shallexplain how the complexity in the texture of the Homeric poems which relieson the recollection and interfusion of different traditional accounts is mirroredin the composition of the Aeneid As case study for Virgilrsquos simulation of Homericorality I have chosen the first ekphrasis of the Aeneid the narrative of the Trojanbattle on the Carthaginian murals in Aen 1430 ff

A seminal passage that governs the reading of the Aeneid in many respectsthe Carthaginian descriptio has received scholarly interest since the dawn ofNew Criticism Scholars however have focused almost exclusively on the interac-tion between the scenes on the mural and the plot of the Aeneid My discussionon the contrary will focus on the method of introducing the descriptio to an audi-ence that does not have visual access to it my reading aspires to serve as meth-odological introduction to the assessment of a literary (epic) ekphrasis and the pol-itics that govern the composition made available to the audience A final goal is toillustrate the deep involvement of the technology of orality in the complexity andsophistication of a narrative that originates in a literacy-governed culture

Seemingly antithetical orality and literacy as ways of human interaction inreality are complementary Orality serves to enhance refine and systematize lit-eracy firstly as an expression of human communication secondly as a way ofmemory enhancement thirdly as a form of literary expression and fourthly as ameans of fashioning the past in the broadest sense (from inventing to discover-ing to editing and revising) and recording the presentsup1 Similar interdependence

Cf the words of Susan Niditch a leading critic of oral traditions and the ways these arereflected in the Hebrew Bible and the ancient Israelite written texts lsquoScholars are now [contrary

marks the concepts of orality and literacy with relation to literary expressionThis calls for redefining onersquos research priorities for the field of orality studiesoralists are strongly encouraged to move beyond the task of determining whichtraditions are genuinely oral which are anterior or posterior more or less widelyknown and influential and onto an investigation of how oral tradition and writ-ing substitute one another across a spectrum of stories originally articulated or-ally and in different versions but were later prescribed and formalized in writingThe phenomenon of the literary ekphrasis as articulated in the Aeneid projectsideally a comparable cognitive process of lsquoopen textrsquo narrative composition-in-performance in a literacy-determined environment

lsquoOral performancersquo in terms of Homeric poetry communication is a system asmuch as a theoretical concept at once a mechanism of poetic production and atechnical term of literary criticism defined within the field of Homeric interpreta-tion studies as the major rival to neoanalysissup2 and situated at the core of the Ho-meric Questionsup3 Though neither Virgil nor any other Roman poet prior to him ac-knowledge the Homeric Question explicitlyVirgilrsquos antagonistic embrace of Homeramong other things fused creatively the poetics surrounding the thematic typologyof oral tradition and the systematic sharing of motif dissemination espoused byneoanalysis For Virgil Homer is a model for the AeneidVirgilrsquos narrative not un-like the Homeric epics is flexible and fluid enough to sustain variant readings ofan interactive subtext of ever evolving character within a long tradition of epiccomposition⁴ This composition to a considerable extent has developed orallyand as such has subconsciously maintained aspects of orality The narrative con-text of a pictorial description which is widely acknowledged as a self-reflection ofthe entire epic in many respects is further determined by the focalization of thenarrator at the time as such it constitutes a narrative-in-performance and so en-capsulates how the technology of orality manifests itself in the context of literacy

to earlier claims among Biblical scholars that in ancient Israelite literary tradition ldquosimple oralworks gave way to sophisticated written works produced by a literate eliterdquo] beginning to seethat orality and literacy exist on a continuum and that there is an interplay between the twomodalities a feedback loop of sortsrsquo (Niditch ) The same interplay manifests itself inGreco-Roman literature and is the ongoing preoccupation of criticism in recent decades For definitions of neoanalysis see Rutherford ndash Willcock ndash The foundational work on the Homeric Question is that of Milman Parry (= Parry ) de-veloped by Albert Lord (Lord ) succinct overviews are offered also in Rutherford and more recently Fowler ndash A recent concise discussion on the parameters that determined the character of Virgilrsquos receptionof Homer as part of the long and complex process of Homeric reception in Greek and Roman antiq-uity (Homer being the source of inspiration for most major ancient literature) is Graziosi


(on Homeric orality and its subsequent transformations see also Efstathiou I Pet-rovic and P Michelakis in this volume)

Etymologically deriving from scribere lsquoto write note record in writing drawmark (within a pictorial representation)rsquo the term descriptio literally means a lsquode-tailed recording transcriptrsquo it implies a process that involves writing⁵ literal ormetaphorical or both but more importantly it firmly communicates an ideologyof literacy The employment of a term that signifies writing to translate a termthat means oral articulation (ie the Greek term lsquoekphrasisrsquo) suggests furtherthat the Latin term was fashioned inside a literacy-determined environment inthe sense that one produced a detailed complete description when one could re-cord it in writing lsquotranscribedrsquo it set certain limitations for the audience whowould receive (audibly or visually) the written description and would try to repro-duce the described object (in the broader sense be it a single item of a synthesis ofitems) in their imagination The Carthaginian descriptio relayed in Aeneid 1 it willbe argued presently is a composition that toys with the technology of orality for itis presented by someone who has been personally and intimately affected by theevents reproduced on the depiction Aeneasrsquo intimacy with the theme on the mu-rals shapes the way of his reproducing the descriptio for the verbal reconstructionof the artifact is directed (i) by Aeneasrsquo personal Trojan-War memories and (ii) byhis subjective interpretation of the various details on pictorial material captured inthe actual descriptio on the murals In short Aeneas narrates as much as describesmdashinterprets the descriptio for the audience rather than reproducing it faithfully forthe audience to interpret

Indeed during the action described in most of these panels Aeneas was notpresent to witness the events This deliberate distancing of the narrator from theaction in the narrative comments is significant in view of accessing Aeneasrsquo ek-phrastic reading as an oral epic-in-performance because it tampers with the no-tion of poetic memory both with its literal meaning formed within the context oforal poetics as the memory of the epic bard who composes from memory and inits metapoetic Contean meaning that is defined within the context of literacyand denotes a demiurgersquos acknowledgment and embrace of the preexisting liter-ary tradition For like an epic performer (even any oral storyteller) Aeneas doesnot compose from memory as much as he composes with memory⁶ He does notrecall events that he actually sees on the murals and tries to report them as ac-curately as possible but he has in mind the various traditional accounts of each

See also Webb lsquoAlthough it is the nearest equivalent to ancient ekphrasis (descriptio inLatin)hellip its connotations are very different as is only to be expected of a term that has been definedand discussed with reference to the written word rather than live oral performancersquo Eg Rubin Minchin


of the epic events narrated on the panels which may include the Homeric epicsthe other epics of the Epic Cycle and not least the treatments of the Trojan leg-end throughout the post-archaic largely literate literary tradition including theearly Roman tradition

The politics of introducing a pictorial description outlined above draws di-rectly on the methodology of artificial memory and the construction of the lsquopal-ace of memoryrsquo for the most detailed and accurate memorization This lsquopalace ofmemoryrsquo system was a Roman memory-training technique particularly favouredamong the orators in the ancient and medieval worlds⁷ In all likeness it waswidely employed by the technology of memorization available to the archaicbards as well I propose that Virgil is aware of the implementation of mnemo-technics by archaic oral poets and aspires to emulate the methodology in his Ae-neid The simulation of Homeric mnemotechnics is particularly evident in thecomposition of the Virgilian descriptiones with that of the Carthaginian muralsin Aeneid 1 standing out given that thematically it reproduces yet another focal-ized account of the Trojan War

The actual text of the Carthaginian descriptio reproduces a series of epi-sodes mostly battle-scenes from the Trojan War with an emphasis on Greek pri-marily Achillesrsquo victories or Trojan defeats⁸ The proper assessment of the narra-tive composition of the panels constitutes a challenge for the interpreter becausethe lsquoreadingrsquo of the murals produced is guided by Aeneasrsquo marveling gaze whichmeans that the selection of panels and their serial arrangement is directed byAeneasrsquo perspective (Aen 1456ndash57)

videt Iliacas ex ordine pugnas bellaque iam fama totum vulgata per orbem

He sees the battles of Troy in order and wars already spread by fama through the entireworld

This epigraph operates as the introduction to the pictorial synthesis and it notesthat all panels represent depictions of Trojan-War episodes the intriguing detailhowever is their specified arrangement lsquoin orderrsquo (ex ordine) As the content ofthe artwork unfolds however it becomes increasingly difficult to understandwhat sort of lsquoorderrsquo is meant In all probability the episodes recorded do not fol-

Carruthers Carruthers and Ziolkowski Yates Smith ndash


low chronological order because Aeneasrsquo reading arranges the panels in a waythat violates the chronology of the Trojan legend⁹

Indeed the descriptio opens with two scenes of war (1466ndash68) one featur-ing the Trojans on the attack and the Greeks fleeing the other reversely Achillesrsquopursuing the fleeing Trojan army The two scenes are generic Trojan battles im-possible to locate specifically in the chronological course of the Trojan War Thenext scene the first referring to a specific episode of the Trojan War records thedeath of Rhesus by Diomedes (469ndash73) This event constitutes the culminatingmoment of the Doloneia episode and is recorded in Iliad 10sup1⁰ Nonethelessthe panel introduced immediately afterwards regresses to the early years ofthe war as it depicts the death and mutilation of Troilus (474ndash78) which accord-ing to the sources had been related in the Cypria Next the pictorial narrative re-turns to Iliadic time the episode from the Cypria is followed by a well-knownscene from Iliad 6 the peplos-offering to Minerva by a procession of Trojanwomen (479ndash82) and immediately afterwards comes the mutilation and ransomof Hectorrsquos corpse (483ndash87) the leading theme of the last three books of theIliad The sixth panel to be introduced merits the most economic as well asthe most vague description it centers on Aeneas whom he portrays lsquoamongthe Achaeansrsquo (488)mdashan epic moment impossible to place with specificity in Tro-jan-War time and as we shall see deliberately so The two panels Aeneas ad-mires last before Didorsquos arrival interrupts his study depict scenes from the Ae-thiopis the epic detailing the events of the Trojan War following the death ofHector and the end of the Iliad The former of the two panels according to Ae-neasrsquo reading order features the Ethiopian king Memnon (489) while the lattercaptures the Amazon queen Penthesilea (490ndash93) both warriors are set amidsttheir troops in a similar fashion as to allude to their similar roles as championsof the Trojan cause in the place of Hector but also to their similar tragic deathsat the hand of Achilles Notably Aeneasrsquo narrative order once again clashesagainst the chronology of the Epic Cycle for Penthesilearsquos arrival and death pre-ceded those of Memnon in the Aethiopis

On the chronologically inconsistent seriality of the murals see Clay ndash otherreadings of the anachronous sequence of the murals include Lowenstam ndash andLa Penna The lsquooralrsquo character of the descriptive synthesis of the Carthaginian murals is evidenced inthe placement of the Rhesus episode from the allegedly spurious Iliad at the head of the spe-cific stories of the Trojan War accounted on the murals and more prominently in the integrationof elements in the Virgilian account of Rhesus that do not come from the Iliad see now Dueacute andEbbott ndash


It becomes clear from the above that Aeneasrsquo violation of the Epic Cyclechronology obvious even to a less experienced reader of archaic epic signifiesa different type of lsquoorderrsquo and so does the employment of the term ordo whichon occasion may refer equally to both time and spacesup1sup1 Putnam and others haveargued that the phrase ex ordine (Aen 1456) more likely represents spatial order(the way the panels are arranged on the walls)sup1sup2 but the text does not justify thisargument either The descriptio conspicuously lacks modifiers of distinct loca-tion and the vagueness of the local adverbs that do exist and allegedly markthis ordo argues against such a spatially determined arrangement Only two ofthe panels are introduced with some information regarding a spatial placementthe Rhesus panel (469 nec procul hinchellip) and the Troilus panel (474 partealiahellip) the information however is hardly specific while the employment ofmodifiers of space does not continue The panel of the Trojan suppliants comingnext is introduced with a modifier of time intereahellip (479) and so is the paneldepicting Priamrsquos supplication of Achilles tumhellip (485)sup1sup3

It is logical then to accept that ordo is used to denote some other perceptionof order determined by Aeneasrsquo point of viewsup1⁴ This more complex type of ordois endorsed by the testimony of Servius (ad Aen 1456)

EX ORDINE hoc loco ostendit omnem pugnam esse depictam sed haec tantum dicit quae autDiomedes gessit aut Achilles per quod excusatur Aeneas si est a fortioribus victus

According to the OLD sv e ex ordine can refer to chronological sequence (lsquoin [chronolog-ical] orderrsquo) but also to spatial arrangement (lsquoin a rowrsquo) On the ambiguity of the phrase see Clay and Barchiesi ndash In his classic treatment of Didorsquos murals Putnam ( ) endorses the spatial meaningAeneas sees lsquothe scenes of battle in a rowhellip the smaller spacings of Carthaginian art (ordo) tak-ing their restricted place in the grander sphere (orbis) [Aeneid ] of what humankind as awhole knowsrsquo Such constrictions lead Putnam to rather enforced compromises as eg in his discussion ofinterea the temporal adverb that introduces the middle panel of the frieze the supplication ofthe Trojan women before Minerva cf Putnam Thomas n influenced bythe spatial modifiers at the beginning of the descriptio nec procul hinc and especially parte aliaembraces the spatial argument and assumes that the pictures are arranged simply in a line Aeneas is the so-defined (by Fowler ) lsquowatching characterrsquo who serves the narrateesVirgilrsquos audience with a first alike presentation and assessment of the descriptio I agree withBoyd that the chronological reversal of the Memnon and Penthesilea episodes inthe end of the ekphrasis narrative can alert the reader to suspect of bias Aeneasrsquo selectivegaze yet I do not understand why the flag of suspicion over a compromised reading is notraised much earlier in the course of the reading


EX ORDINE in this passage [Virgil] shows that every battle has been depicted but he men-tions only the deeds of either Diomedes or Achilles so that Aeneas is excused for being de-feated by stronger men

Servius states that lsquoevery battle has been depictedrsquo but he implicitly takes thephrase omnem pugnam to include only the episodes identified by Aeneas Sinceall these episodes revolve around either Achilles or Diomedes it is implied thatthese battles represent the essence of the entire war for Aeneassup1⁵ Servius inother words here realizes that Aeneas is initiating a selective reading of themural a reading that includes primarily panels which revolve around Achillesand Diomedes that the so-called lsquoorderrsquo is subjective is thematically set and is de-termined by the personal criteria of the viewer at the timemdashin the given instanceAeneas (on Servius as a commentator on Virgil see Maltby in this volume)

The interests of the viewerreader then determine the character and opera-tion of multitextuality it is the organizing principle behind the composition ofthe Carthaginian ekphrasis whose reading is a cognitive process Virgil inviteshis audience to produce a critical assessment of the set-piece depictionrsquos contentintroduced by Aeneas This invitation raises expectations of two different sortsFirst the Virgilian audience is called to embrace Aeneasrsquo point of view and de-code the criteria by which the Trojan hero chooses to identify the specific panelsfrom the Carthaginian murals and not others Subsequently this vicarious criti-cal reading on the audiencersquos part is expected to stimulate their own literarymemories and cause them to produce and visualize new material from the TrojanWar story not visibly present on the descriptio but implicitly present in the alter-native versions of the episodes identified already by Aeneas This new materialcould include aspects of the depicted story that are not explicitly articulated thebroader myth the depicted story belongs to alternative versions of the story sig-nificant omissions or changes to the version of the story depicted it may alsoinclude real images that is various other monumental depictions of the samestory and even parallel stories namely other stories of kindred theme orabout the same protagonists etcsup1⁶ Upon lsquocollectingrsquo this material newly disclosedto them from the depths of their memories Virgilrsquos lsquoreadersrsquo across time could

The suggestion of Petrain ( ndash) that Servius lsquotakes ex ordine as a reference tochronological sequence and he treats this sequence as a comprehensive faithful transcript ofthe epic traditionrsquo where lsquothe pictures on the temple display ldquoevery battlerdquo of the Trojan Warin order (omnem pugnam esse depictam) and thus require no further justificationrsquo seems tome unjustified on the basis of the textual evidence provided in the Aeneid My understanding of an ekphrasis as a subjective and elliptic verbal reproduction of a de-scriptio is inspired by the distinction between description and narrative (or focalization) intro-duced in Fowler


build their own version (or narrative or ekphrastic expression) of the depictionwhich means that they were becoming actively and personally involved in theprocess not only of the interpretation but of the actual composition their person-al visualization is projected on Aeneasrsquo own and competes against it To recallreadily this rich material however Virgilrsquos audience should have developed atechnique to facilitate their memorization and ready recollection of stored mem-ories Pointing them to such a technique of memorization Virgil organizes thetheme-based narrative sequence on the murals by drawing on the compositionmethodology of an oral epic performersup1⁷ This epic performer in the descriptioat hand is the character of Aeneas

With Serviusrsquo suggestion to look for thematic narrative lines in order to ra-tionalize Aeneasrsquo particular ordering of the panels and assess his interpretationof the Trojan War Aeneasrsquo initial reaction to the sight of the murals calls for care-ful consideration anew (Aen 1453ndash57)

Namque sub ingenti lustrat dum singula temploreginam opperiens dum quae fortuna sit urbiartificumque manus inter se operumque laboremmiratur videt Iliacas ex ordine pugnasbellaque iam fama totum vulgata per orbem

For while waiting for the queen and studying everything there was to seeunder the roof of this huge temple as he admired the good fortune of the citythe skill of the workmen and all the work of their handshe suddenly saw laid out in order depictions of the battles fought at TroyThe Trojan War was already famous throughout the world(trans West 1990 with minor adjustments)

The panels Aeneas chooses to identify put together part of the pictorial synthe-sis a fact that it is clearly revealed to the careful reader of Aen 1453ff Upon en-tering the temple Virgil reports Aeneas is immediately confronted with a seriesof independently standing works of art (singula) and he immediately sets out tostudy them carefully (lustrat) Lustrat along with videt and miratur are the finiteverbs in the passage it is hardly a coincidence that all three signify the sameactivity of lsquoseeing viewingrsquo As the description of the ekphrastic unit put together

I agree with Petrain that Serviusrsquo commentary on the content of the temple panelsallegedly balances his omission to take clear stance on the meaning of ordo regarding the se-quence of the scenes narrated in the ekphrasis Petrainrsquos Servius interprets Virgilrsquos particular se-lection process as an effort lsquoto preserve Aeneasrsquo reputationrsquo while the criterion that underwritesthe thematically determined narrative of Aeneas is the presence in the selected panels of eitherDiomedes or Achilles


by Aeneas proceeds in the following lines more verbs of lsquoviewingrsquo and lsquoseeingrsquoappear videbat (466) agnoscit (470) conspexit (487) sehellip agnovit (488) Thestrong emphasis on vision and visual activity splits the readersrsquo focus betweenthe panels on the one hand and the act of viewing them on the other

The repetition of vocabularymdashviewing-related terminology in the case at handmdashat the opening of the Virgilian descriptio introduces an unmistakable mark ofepic orality and as such emulates a typical practice of epic descriptions of arti-facts The latter are presented compartmentalized and the description of each seg-ment begins with some verbal expression that recurs henceforth systematicallyThe classic case study is of course the Homeric Shield of Achilles which consti-tutes the model for all epic pictorial narratives following the Iliad In the Shieldekphrasis the key verb is ποιεῖν lsquoto fashionrsquo The description of the Shield itselfis introduced with ποίει (478)mdashwhich happens to be a leading metapoetic termas wellsup1⁸ The Homeric narrator uses ποιεῖν in a variety of (usually past) tensesand forms and the synonyms to ποιεῖν to introduce each new panelepisode onthe surface of the Shieldsup1⁹ The reader thus receives the impression that the Shieldis just being crafted panel by panel and that heshe is watching the process un-raveling before hisher own eyes This is crucial from the perspective of the oralepic poet who wishes to maintain undiminished the impression of a processthat involves the description of a material object and at the same time to combineeach panel with a non-describable narrative To accomplish such a continuoussensation of visual observation Virgilrsquos collective employment of signposts ofpseudo-viewing in the opening of the description is enforced through the introduc-tion of the individual panels with adverbial expressions of place and time continu-ity (469 nec procul hinchellip 474 parte aliahellip 479 intereahellip 485 tumhellip) in this wayhe creates for his readers the illusion that they watch along with Aeneas the pic-torial series on the murals unraveling before their eyes

The instructive process of constructing selectively a mentally visualized picto-rial narrative and reproducing it verbally in a way that would enable the evalua-tors of the ekphrasis to visualize it themselves too might well be inspired by themethodology of a mnemonic system that is based on the architecture or geographyof space This method of spatially determined memorization was famously credit-ed to Simonides of Ceos by Cicero in De oratore 274 where he tells the story ofhow Simonides uses his ability to memorize by using specific topographicallytied signifiers in a particular scene to locate the bodies of his dinner companions

On the Shield of Achilles as mise en abyme of the Iliad see Hardie Hardie ndash Taplin See Il


when the building they were dining had collapsed during the poetrsquos absenceRoman orators and those among the Roman elite trained in oratory like Virgilhad studied how to enhance the faculties of their memories to remember visualimpressions As a result of methodical training that observed key rules memoriescould be visually imprinted and impressions could be held in the mind with vivid-ness resistant to the passage of time Depending on the oratorrsquos experience to re-sist the distorting influence of emotions second thoughts and current eventsthese memories could be recalled more or less unaltered The Roman process ofartificial memory structured around the premise that remembering retrieved infor-mation stored in the mind involved identifying certain places where the memoriesdesired from preservation could be securely stored The places where these mem-ories would be stored were arranged in the mind in a way as to be readily travers-able once the need for the recollection of a series of memories arose these placeswould famously comprise what Matteo Ricci would later call lsquopalace of memoryrsquoan imaginary architecture of orderly synthesized physical spaces and mentalimagerysup2⁰ According to Ricci memory was to be thought of as a palace which ex-isted in the mind In the different rooms and corridors which comprised the pal-ace one would place a series of imagessignifiers of the different conceptssigni-fieds that needed to be rememberedsup2sup1

The construction and the operational management of these lsquomemory pala-cesrsquo is already conceived and ideally described prior to Cicero in the anonymousrhetorical treatise known as Rhetorica ad Herennium dating from the middle 80sBCsup2sup2 the first systematic effort in Rome to describe and assess artificial memorytraining According to the author of the ad Herennium this lsquopalacersquo was the com-prehensive background against which all memories were to be situated in ar-ranged fashionsup2sup3 The arrangement had to follow specific well-defined serial

On artificial memory in antiquity with special emphasis on the pioneering contribution ofRoman oratory to the cultivation and professionalization of the architectonics of memory seeSmall id ch ldquoThe Roman Contributionrdquo very useful also is Vasaly On Riccirsquos lsquopalace of memoryrsquo theory see Spence mdasha book notably listed among theNew York Times Best Books of the Yearmdashalong with Brook The great popularity of memoryenhancement techniques is best illustrated in the most recent (February ) article by JoshuaFoer in the New York Times Sunday Magazine (=Foer ) essentially a personal diary of thejournalistrsquos own one-year-long memory training that resulted to his winning the USA MemoryChampionship Ad Herennium ndash is the section devoted to the description and training of artificialmemory the text is taken from Caplan the reference commentary to date is Calboli (Calboli attributes the text to Cornificus) For the Roman art of artificial memory on the basis of a comparative discussion of the sys-tematization and methodology of the technology of memorization as detailed in the anonymous


order Seriality would be determined on the basis of criteria subjectively devisedto facilitate individual recollection For the author of the ad Herennium seriality(though not identified as such) is best visualized mentally as a physical familiarspace like a housing complex with multiple compartments in terms of architec-tural features inside such as an intercolumniation a corner an arch etc mem-ories would be located in orderly (serial) fashion on each of these spaces

Constat igitur artificiosa memoria ex locis et imaginibus Locos appellamus eos qui breviterperfecte insignite aut natura aut manu sunt absoluti ut eos facile naturali memoria conpre-hendere et amplecti queamus ut aedes intercolumnium angulum fornicem et alia quae hissimilia sunt (ad Herennium 316)

Artificial memory consists of physical places and mental images We call places those thingswhich by nature or by artifice are for a short distance totally and strikingly complete so thatwe can understand and embrace them easily with natural memorymdashsuch as a house an in-tercolumniation a corner an arch and other things which are similar to these(trans Small 1997 with minor adjustments)

The memories would be captured as images (imagines) and impressed on thesespecific locations (loci) according to some order sensible to and readily recalledby the individual interested in recalling them in the future in the exact same con-dition as when they had been originally stored and in the particular order thatfacilitated their personal recollection process imagines eorum locis certis conlo-care oportebit lsquoit will be necessary to set the mental images of them [the differ-ent information which needs remembering] in specific placesrsquo By traversingmentally through this orderly arrangement the orator would be able to recallthe desired imagesmemories

The philosophy of artificial memory-training is particularly applicable to the de-scription of the operation of the epic poetrsquos memory For an epic poet either a Ho-meric bard who composes exclusively from memory or Virgil the epitome of so-phisticated epic literacy lsquoimaginesrsquo are the various available traditions (literary ororal) these traditions were constantly subjected to manipulated recollection de-pending on the narrative context embracing them at the time Accordingly anepic lsquomemoryrsquo is defined ideally as the recording of all available traditions eventhough authorial predilection may opt for the memorization of a singlemdashthe prefer-redmdashtradition and excluding the rest from preservation inside the palace of mem-ory effectively resulting to their marginalization even gradual disappearance Eachpanel of the Carthaginian mural composition is trailed after by several different ver-

Rhetorica ad Herrenium in Cicerorsquos De Oratore and in Quintilianrsquos Institutiones see Scarth ndash


sions of the visualized Trojan War story Aeneasrsquo perspective of the lsquoepic composerrsquohowever has stored in his memory only one versionwhich may be memorized morereadily than the rest because it touches Aeneasrsquo personal interests and feelingsmore than the others Upon recognizing the unifying subject of the depicted narra-tives on the murals he proceeds to identify and provide details for those amongthem (we are never specifically told that Aeneasrsquo description covers all the panelsdepicted on the mural of Junorsquos temple) that seem the most appropriately address-ing the trail of thoughts (sorrow desperation and pain for Trojan suffering and fateattachment to the Trojan heroic past) and concerns (fear of the unknown and of pos-sible treacherousness) running through Aeneasrsquo mind at the moment he enters thetemple of Juno He also proceeds to determine (i) his selection of the specific panelsand not others and (ii) his descriptionlsquoreadingrsquo of them by stressing the particulardetails instead of others Further in accordance with the directions of the Auctor adHerennium Aeneas has stored in his memory carefully selected details of the actionunraveling in the episodesimagines he readily recallsmdashdetails that makes these nar-rative episodes striking and as such easy to recall even though some of them donot appear anywhere in the surviving literary tradition Politesrsquo mutilated bodyon the ground trailing behind his chariot leaving his trace on the ground (and inAeneasrsquo memory path) which is there in order to duplicate (and anticipate laterin the descriptio) Hectorrsquos similar mutilation behind Achillesrsquo chariot given thatTroilusrsquo mutilation as reported in the murals has no precedent in the pre-Virgiliantradition Greek and Roman alike the impressive mixing of red and white in thefierce (lit lsquofieryrsquo ardentis) horses of Rhesus next to the snow white (nivea) tentsof the Thracian army and to the blood-drenched (cruentus) Diomedes by the riversof Troy the Iliades with their hair down the eyes of Minervarsquos statue fixed on theground immovable the shiny gold in the middle of the encounter between Achillesand Priam the supplication of the Trojan women that leads naturally Aeneasrsquomem-ory to recall (and gaze to look next to) the supplication gesture of Priam to Achillesthe niger Memnon Penthesilea with the golden breast band Unusual postures andgestures impressive and impressionable colours weapons gold in other wordsspecific subject matter or items (res) which contribute to making a panel easierto remember and more permanently retained which leads one back to the Rhetoricaad Herennium warmly encouraging the aspiring orator to lsquoset up images that are notmany or vague but are doing somethingrsquo (non multas nec vagas sed aliquid agentesimagines ponemus) because

si egregiam pulcritudinem aut unicam turpitudinem eis adtribuemus si aliquas exornabimusut si coronis aut veste purpurea quo nobis notatior sit simulitudo aut si qua re deformabi-mus ut si cruentam aut caeno oblitam aut rubrica delibutam inducamus quo magis insignitasit forma hellip nam ea res quoque faciet ut facilius meminisse valeamus (ad Herennium 322)


If we bestow extraordinary beauty or singular ugliness on them if we dress others as if incrowns or purple cloaks so that the similarity may be more distinct to us or if we disfigurethem somehow as if we presented one stained with blood covered with mud or smeared withred ochre so that its appearance is more distinct hellip these things will ensure that we will beable to remember them more easily(trans Small 1997 with minor adjustments)

And these recollections importantly are reproduced by Aeneas ex ordine be-cause this is how he has memorized them the advice offered by the professorialauthor of the ad Herennium is once again crucial The loci (or background framesin terms of the ekphrasis) must be kept in order ex ordine to avoid any confusionwhen following the sequence of the images (the narratives depicted on thesebackgrounds) An order is especially important so that an individual might beable to recall the stored information from start to finish backwards or fromthe middle of any of the loci Item putamus oportere ltex ordine hos locos haberegtne quando perturbatione ordinis inpediamur lsquoI likewise think it obligatory to havethese backgrounds in a series so that we never by confusion in their order beprevented from following the imagesrsquo (Ad Her 317 trans Small 1997) In thislight the order in which Aeneas reproduces his Trojan memories has alreadybeen predetermined in his mind emerging instinctively in accordance with therecollections he will identify in the pictures of the murals and hence reproduceand depending on which of these recollections he will first identifymdashsince eachrecollection is part of a different concatenation of imaginesepisodes

The readers of the descriptio then are made aware that it is their visual per-ception the way themselves in their individual exclusiveness envision mentallythe set-piece descriptive composition on the murals that gives shape and mean-ing to the descriptio that there are as many visual representations as manygazes just as in oral epic composition there are as many verbal renderings ofa typical scene (a description of a recurrent action sequence) as many timesthis is rendered either in a single epic synthesis or in different epic performan-ces and by multiple performers and the mental re-composition of a visually de-scribed picture is no less a hypertext as complex and elusive as the compositionof an epic poem that exists and circulates only orally Thus the study of the Car-thaginian description discloses the two linking threads one thematic one struc-tural both fundamental in the composition mechanism of archaic epic behindAeneasrsquo narrative compositioninterpretation of the descriptio


Charilaos N Michalopoulos

lsquotollite me Teucrirsquo (Verg Aen 3601)Saving Achaemenides Saving Homer

In the third book of the Aeneid wandering Aeneas and his crew land on Sicilythe island of the Cyclops Polyphemus where they come across a totally unex-pected spectacle They are approached by a Robinson Crusoe-like figure rushingtowards them with hands stretched out in supplication This emaciated and dish-eveled figure is identified with Achaemenides a member of Ulyssesrsquo crew whohas been inadvertently abandoned by his fellow shipmates After being assuredhis safety the left-behind Greek gives his account of the disastrous meeting ofUlysses with the ferocious Cyclops The Trojans listen to his story and Aeneas of-fers him the much desired salvation by taking him on board (see also the rele-vant discussion by Kayachev in this volume)

The intertextual nature of this so-called lsquoAchaemenides episodersquo (3588ndash691) has long now been discussed (on its reception in Latin scholarship seeMaltbyrsquos chapter in the next section of this volume)sup1 Much ink has alreadybeen spilt in an attempt to map out Virgilrsquos probable minusand less probableminus liter-ary models for what Stephen Hinds has aptly called lsquoa remake-with-sequelrsquosup2 ofthe Homeric Cyclops episode (Od 9177ndash566)sup3 Virgilrsquos intertextual arsenal com-prises a rich and dense network of multiple allusions intersections and transfor-mations of prior literature ranging from the Homeric epics⁴ and Greek tragedy⁵ toRoman tragedy⁶ via the decisive influence of Hellenistic poetry⁷ (Apollonius Rho-dius in particular)⁸ Τhe metaliterary nature of this episode has also beenacknowledged⁹ So far however emphasis has been put primarily (if not entire-ly) on the temporal and spatial intersection of the Aeneid with the Homeric Odys-

For a concise overview of the critical work on the episode see Horsfall on VergAen ndash Hinds For Aeneasrsquo legend prior to Virgilrsquos Aeneid and its many ramifications see Lloyd See Williams b Knauer ndash Harrison Ramminger ndashBarchiesi See Ramminger See Wigodsky Flores EV IV sv Polifemo ndash So Glenn Flores EV IV sv lsquoPolifemorsquo Geymonat Barchiesi Nelis So Quinn Heinze ndash Ramminger ndash Nelis ndash For various aspects of the episodersquos metaliterariness see Papanghelis

sey In addition there seems to be a long standing debate regarding the structur-al and thematic relevance of the Achaemenides episode with the rest of thepoem more specifically its correspondence with Sinonrsquos episode in book 2sup1⁰It is not my intention to get involved into this discussion even though ‒for rea-sons which I hope to prove below‒ I believe that the episode was meant to sur-vive the poetrsquos ultima manussup1sup1 The aim of this paper instead is to investigatethe episodersquos metaliterary self-consciousness and to contextualize its impacton Virgilrsquos wider poetological program of Homeric reception In particular Iwant to examine how Virgil manipulates Homer not only as a text but also asa cultural and ideological reservoir for his own epic

The importance of Homer (and for that matter of all that was consideredlsquoHomericrsquo)sup1sup2 for the Roman elite from the early Republic to the late Empire hardlyneeds any justification The active engagement of the Roman poets with the Ho-meric epics as early as the first lsquotranslationrsquo of the Odyssey into Latin by LiviusAndronicus is yet another clicheacute in the study of Homeric reception in Romesup1sup3

Moreover the fact that both the Iliad and the Odyssey constituted for centuriesan indispensable part of the curriculum of the children of the Roman elite issymptomatic of the Romansrsquo unfailing concern for the relevance of the Homericvalues to their own culturesup1⁴ Still despite the importance of literary exchangeHomerrsquos impact at Rome needs not be confined solely to literature it should beassessed also on grounds of material culture and social practicesup1⁵ The role of thevisual arts (ie sculpture wall-painting painting artifacts) must be taken intoconsideration at all times Hence my investigation even though primarily con-cerned with intertextual correspondences and linguistic exchanges proves to

For more details on this see Lloyd n Williams on Verg Aen ffwith bibliography Quinn Wigodsky ndash Kinsey n with bib-liography ad loc Cova EV I sv lsquoAchemenidersquo Moskalew ndash Hershkowitz ndash n with bibliography ad loc Ramminger ndash Heinze Papanghe-lis n Papaioannou n with bibliography pace Williams on Verg Aen ff Graziosi a ndash offers an informative discussion of the different meanings acquiredby lsquoHomerrsquo and the lsquoHomeric epic traditionrsquo in antiquity (both Greek and Roman) Homer was of vital importance for the Roman poets of early Rome (Livius Andronicus Nae-vius Ennius) and their claim of lsquoHellenizing innovationrsquo For more on this see Hinds ndash and Graziosi a See also the useful bibliography on the relationship between Homerand the Roman epic poets compiled by Farrell See Farrell n with bibliography ad loc Both Farrell and Graziosi a argue against any linear (mostly literary) models ofHomeric reception and stress the need to discuss Homerrsquos presence throughout Roman culturefrom the viewpoint of a wider engagement with the Homeric epics in their entity


be equally aware of the wider intellectual processes involved in Virgilrsquos variedstrategies of refiguring the Homeric epics For practical reasons my paper is or-ganized in the following sections (i) Achaemenidesrsquo physical appearance andsupplication (ii) Achaemenidesrsquo (self‐)presentation (iii) the Sicilian shore and(iv) the Cyclops and his brothers

a Achaemenidesrsquo physical appearance andsupplication

Achaemenides presents a pitiful sight (Verg Aen 3590ndash99) he is disgustinglyfilthy (593 dira inluuies) he has an overgrown beard (593 inmissa barba) andhe is frail from starvation and suffering (590 macie confecta suprema) His pa-thetic appearance is complemented by a reference to the rags he is wearingwhich are sewn together with thorns (594 consertum tegumen spinis) A closereading of Achaemenidesrsquo description reveals how well chosen Virgilrsquos vocabu-lary is as it abounds with terms of metaliterary output The emphatic accumu-lation in one line of terms like ignoti (591) noua forma (591) cultu (591) aimsat underscoring further its metaliterary implications It is true that Achaeme-nidesrsquo appearance owes much to a long standing tradition of similar descrip-tions whose archetype seems to have been Ulyssesrsquo appearance before Nausicaa(Od 6128ndash29)sup1⁶ also let us not forget that Ulysses upon arrival on Ithaca wasdressed in beggarrsquos rags (miraculously transformed as such by goddess Athenacf Od 13397ndash403 430ndash38) Nevertheless Virgilrsquos detailed reference to Achae-menidesrsquo spin-sewed rags seems to be looking towards a completely different di-rection given that clothes in Roman poetry are often employed as poetologicalmarkerssup1⁷ A reader well equipped to seize on such hints must have appreciatedthe metaliterary implications behind the poetrsquos reference to AchaemenidesrsquoGreek attire (596 Dardanios habitus) as opposed to the Trojansrsquo armour (595ndash96 Troia hellip arma) which in turn works as a subtle allusion to the openingof the Aeneid (11 Arma uirumque canohellip) The overgrown beard underscoresboth Achaemenidesrsquo Greekness (by attributing to him a rather unpopular andold-fashioned ‒at least for Roman standards‒ appearance)sup1⁸ and his wretched-ness The emaciated Greek is very close to death as a result of exhaustion andsuffering (590 macie confecta suprema)

So Ramminger Cf eg Keith Miller Wyke ndash Gibson ndash Papanghelis with n Horsfall on Verg Aen


But what are we supposed to make out of all these It is my contention thatVirgil through his use of this carefully chosen vocabulary manages to refigureAchaemenides from a miserable shipwrecked Greek sailor into a living incarna-tion of the pitiful state of the post-Homeric epic production Achaemenides is notmerely lsquothe relic of an archaic pastrsquosup1⁹ but more importantly he is a metaphor forthe literary remains of the so-called ὁμηρίζοντες whose poor literary output wasa barren and unimaginative imitation of Homerrsquos work The herorsquos almost termi-nal condition in life (590 macie confecta suprema) is suggestive of the almostterminal condition of that literary production In this light the remark by Nich-olas Horsfall that Achaemenidesrsquo beard could perhaps lsquosuggest the age and au-thority of Homerrsquosup2⁰ becomes all the more meaningful Virgilrsquos noua forma (591)sounds doubly programmatic firstly it underscores the fact that Achaemenidesis (in all probability) a Virgilian inventionsup2sup1 and secondly it puts forward theclaim for something new for something fresh which will help him overcomehis own (nearly) terminal conditionsup2sup2

Granting this thread of thought Achaemenidesrsquo desperate cry for rescue atline 601 lsquotollite me Teucri quascumque abducite terrasrsquo receives further metal-iterary significance by essentially becoming a desperate cry for the rescue of theHomeric epic tradition by Virgilrsquos Roman epic Achaemenides the living imper-sonation of a decadent and dying tradition begs for deliverance He urges therecently arrived Trojans to remove him from the Odyssean island of the Cyclopsand take him to another literary land whichever that may be (601 quascumqueabducite terras) Achaemenidesrsquo imminent death is twofold both corporeal andliterary The hero fears both his biological death and the potential absence of histextual body from the long line of epic production (both Greek and Roman) Inthis light his wish to lsquohappily die at the hands of a humanrsquo (606 si pereo hom-inum manibus periisse iuuabit) receives an intriguing metaliterary resonancesince manus apart from lsquohandrsquosup2sup3 can additionally be taken here lsquoas the instru-ment with which writing is donersquosup2⁴ The metaliterary impact of manibus periisseis further enhanced by the fact that manus also appears in phrases referring to

So Papanghelis Horsfall on Verg Aen So Lloyd Williams on Verg Aen ff Cova EV I sv lsquoAchemenidersquo Heinze with n Papanghelis with n Nelis Papaioannou acutely remarks that Achaemenidesrsquo nouahellipforma in Virgilrsquos Aeneidfacilitates the herorsquos assimilation in Ovidrsquos Metamorphoses where shapes change into new bod-ies ( in nouahellipmutatashellipformas corpora) OLD sv lsquomanusrsquo ibid


the use and handling of books (eg in manibus esse in manibus uersari in man-ibus habere)sup2⁵ or the transmission of texts (eg per manus tradere)sup2⁶

b Achaemenidesrsquo (self‐)presentation

Achaemenidesrsquo self-definition as a lsquocomrade of unfortunate Ulyssesrsquo at the veryfirst line of his speech (613 sum patria ex Ithaca comes infelicis Ulixi) should beread as yet another Virgilian attempt to establish continuity within the epictraditionsup2⁷ It is surely not haphazard that the whole episode is rounded offwith the repetition of the same formula the second time however the formulacomes from the mouth of Aeneas (691 comes infelicis Ulixi)sup2⁸ Achaemenidesright from the very beginning also defines himself as one of the Danaan fleet(602 Danais e classibus unum) I am inclined to read here more than a referenceto ethnic descent Classis which means lsquofleetrsquosup2⁹ also carries implications oforder and class which lsquoare essential to the notion of canon and literarysuccessionrsquosup3⁰ In this light Achaemenidesrsquo ethnic self-definition becomes a mat-ter of generic appropriation as the hero effectively subscribes himself to the longliterary tradition of the Homeric epics The metaliterary suggestiveness of classishas already been detected behind Virgilrsquos use of the noun to describe Achaeme-nidesrsquo unspeakable joy at his first sight of the approaching Trojan fleet (651ndash52hanc primum ad litora classem conspexi venientem) In this case lsquothe Aeneid isthe first modern epic to revisit the Cyclops episode after the Odyssey just as Ae-neasrsquo ships are the first to approach the land of the Cyclops after Odysseusrsquosup3sup1

Ibid OLD sv lsquomanusrsquo The exact meaning of infelix (ranging from lsquocursedrsquoor lsquohatefulrsquo to implying [authorial] sym-pathy) has caused considerable confusion to commentators ever since Servius (see Williams and Horfall on Verg Aen ) Infelix should preferably be associated withκάμμορος and δύστηνος two Homeric adjectives exclusively attributed to Ulysses So Papaioan-nou ndash discussing Virgilrsquos emphasis on the herorsquos suffering For the repetition of comes infelicis Ulixi by Aeneas (a rarity in Virgil) as a sign of the Trojanherorsquos recognition of common humanity with his former hated enemy see Kinsey Icannot agree with Williams ndash who finds the repetition lsquoironicalrsquo and lsquototallyalien to his tone [hellip] an authorial sympathy that is inappropriate in the mouth of Aeneasrsquo OLD sv lsquoclassisrsquo Papanghelis loc cit


Achaemenidesrsquo reference to his father which follows immediately his asso-ciation with Ulysses also calls for attentionsup3sup2 The herorsquos reference to his humbledescent from poor Adamastus (614ndash15 Adamasto paupere) is much more than alsquosuperfluousrsquo account lsquore-used hellip in a less suitable contextrsquo compared with thesimilar details used by Sinon in Book 2sup3sup3 As I shall try to showVirgilrsquos referenceto the father and his poverty is intrinsically related with Achaemenidesrsquo metal-iterary status To begin with Adamastus as a proper name appears nowhereelse in classical literature (either Greek or Roman) thus highlighting the factthat Achaemenides is a Virgilian coinagesup3⁴ Horsfall finds the name lsquoextremelyappropriate for a warrior from rugged Ithaca (hellip) but equally true of the Trojanswho prove just as indomiti in defeatrsquosup3⁵ True this may be I contend that given theepisodersquos highly metaliterary texture Adamastus in the sense of lsquounsubduedunconqueredrsquosup3⁶ could well be read as an allusion to the poetic material of theHomeric heritage which the decadent and technically flawed post-Homeric pro-duction of the ὁμηρίζοντες (to which Achaemenides belongs) failed to conquerThe particular reference to Adamastusrsquo poverty (615 pauper) which belongs tothe lsquopoor fatherrsquo topossup3⁷ offers further support to my claim with its implicationsof lsquopoor qualityrsquo and lsquolack of technical resourcesrsquosup3⁸ Through this manipulation oflanguage Virgil manages to portray Achaemenides as the genuine offspring of atechnically poor and artistically deficient poetry

c The Sicilian shore

Despite Virgilrsquos laborious efforts to avoid the encounter of his Aeneid with Hom-errsquos Odyssey it is the temporal and spatial proximity of the two epics which oftenbrings the footsteps of Aeneas really close to the footsteps of Ulyssessup3⁹ As hasalready been argued during this intertextual seafaring lsquothe voyage [becomes]

Verg Aen ndash sum patria ex Ithaca comes infelicis Vlixi nomine AchaemenidesTroiam genitore Adamasto paupere (mansissetque utinam fortuna) profectus So Ramminger Cf also Williams on Verg Aen ndash Nelis ndash argues for the influence of four different rescue stories from ApolloniusRhodiusrsquo Argonautica on the story of Achaemenides One of these stories is Jasonrsquos rescue of thesons of Phrixus (ndash) Nelis suspects behind the use of Adamastus an allu-sion to Athamas whose wealth the sons of Phrixus are urged to take possession of Horsfall on Verg Aen LSJ sv lsquoἀδάμαστοςrsquo Horsfall on Verg Aen ndash Cf OLD sv lsquopauperrsquo For more on the spatio-temporal intersection of the two epics see Barchiesi ndash


a trope for intensive self-reflexivityrsquo with lsquosailing pastclosersquo a shore or arriving toa certain Odyssean shore regulating the degree of Aeneidrsquos avoidance proximityor coincidence with the Odyssean intertext⁴⁰ The very fact that the encounter be-tween the left-behind Homeric hero and the Trojan crew takes place on the shoreof Sicily ultimately transforms this shore from a borderline between land and seainto a metaliterary borderline between the Greek epic tradition (represented bythe pitiful and decadent sight of Achaemenides) and the new still undefinedand unmapped Roman epic tradition (represented by Aeneasrsquo equally unmap-ped sea route) Right from the very beginning Achaemenides desperatelyurges the Trojans to remove him from the Cyclopean shore to any other land(600ndash01)mdasha claim which he repeats near the end of his speech when heurges the Trojans to violently cut off the ropes of their ships⁴sup1 The repeated im-perative (639 fugitehellipfugite) is indicative of the urgency of his appeal It seemsthat the danger involved is not so much the death at the hands of the Cyclopsbut rather the entrapment of Aeneasrsquo boat ie of the new epic in the safetyof the harbour of a badly written epic poetry By cutting off the ropes the Trojansare practically urged to cut off the umbilical cord with the sad remains of a dec-adent literary tradition At the far opposite of the harbourrsquos failed safety standsthe challenge of the open sea where the ship of the new Roman epic sails withits canvas open to favourable winds (683 uentis intendere uela secundis)⁴sup2

d The Cyclops and his brothers

The reworking of the adventure of Odysseus in Aeneid 3 provide Virgil withample opportunity to enrich his narrative with three episodes (namely Charyb-dis mount Aetna and Polyphemus) of hyperbolic narratives which as PhilipHardie has shown are artfully contextualized in Aeneidrsquos wider poetologicalprogram⁴sup3 As I shall try to prove Virgilrsquos depiction of Polyphemus adds furtherto the metaliterary texture of the whole episode Achaemenidesrsquo story is intro-duced by a description of mount Aetna and its volcanic eruptions both fine ex-

Papanghelis Verg Aen ndash sed fugite o miseri fugite atque ab litore funem rumpite Cf also taciti incidere funem The open sea and the ship traveling with sails open to the wind constitute stock poetic met-aphors for literary pursuits in both Greek and Latin poetry Hardie ndash


amples of hyperbolic writing⁴⁴ At first sight both descriptions seem to facilitatethe geographical localization of the episode Mount Aetna as we already hearfrom Lucretius⁴⁵ is traditionally considered to be a place of wonders which an-ticipates the wondrous story to follow The localization of the Cyclopes on theisland of Sicily is conventional ever since Thucydides⁴⁶ I would like to draw at-tention to Virgilrsquos divergence from the ‒more or less‒ conventional Pindaric ver-sion of the myth⁴⁷ according to which it was Typhoeus and not Enceladus whowas crashed under mount Aetna⁴⁸ Virgilrsquos use of Enceladus is much more than achoice of mythological variation in that it reinforces the metaliterary texture ofAchaemenidesrsquo episode as it offers a subtle allusion to a text of huge poetolog-ical impact namely the prologue of Callimachusrsquo Aetia⁴⁹ The geographical lo-calization of Aetna and Virgilrsquos intentional substitution of Enceladus for Ty-phoeus provides an interesting link with Callimachusrsquo renowned wish toshake off old age from his shoulder in the manner of Enceladus under the bur-den of Sicily in the prologue of his Aetia⁵⁰ The Virgilian reception of Callima-chusrsquo reference is further sustained by the description of Polyphemusrsquo eye asan Argive shield⁵sup1 which is echoing a similar reference to the eye of the Cyclopsin Callimachusrsquo Hymn to Artemis 52ndash53⁵sup2

Horsfall on Verg Aen ndash offers a useful tabular summary of Virgilrsquos multipleintertextual influences on his account of Aetnarsquos volcanic eruption Lucr ff Horsfall For the conventional association of the Cyclopes with the island of Si-cily see Eitrem RE XI sv lsquoKyklopenrsquo ndash Barchiesi EV I sv lsquoCiclopirsquo withbibliography with Aetna in particular see Eitrem RE XI sv lsquoKyklopenrsquo ndash For details on the myth and its many variations see Williams on Verg Aen ffand Horsfall on Verg Aen Verg Aen ndash fama est Enceladi semustum fulmine corpus urgeri mole hac ingentem-que insuper Aetnam impositam ruptis flammam exspirare caminis So Hollis ndash Apart from Callimachus Nelis ndash further suggests thepossibility of an influence by Apollonius Rhodiusrsquo Argonautica (description of Typhaon andPhaethon) Paschalis explains the association of Aetna with Enceladus throughtheir etymological combination of fire (Aetna ltαἴθω) with sound (Enceladusltκέλαδος κελάδω) Cf Call Aet fr ndash Pf αὖθι τὸ δrsquo ἐκδύοιμι τό μοι βάρος ὅσσον ἔπεστι τριγλώχιν ὀλοῷνῆσος ἐπrsquo Ἐγκελάδῳ Cf Verg Aen ndash fundimur et telo lumen terebramus acuto ingens quod torua solumsub fronte latebatArgolici clipei aut Phoebae lampadis instar with Williams and Horsfall ad loc The Callimachean influence on Virgilrsquos representation of the Cyclopes (Aen ndash ndash ) is also noted by Barchiesi EV I sv lsquoCiclopirsquo ndash Call Dian ndash πᾶσι δrsquo ὑπrsquo ὀφρύν φάεα μουνόγληνα σάκει ἴσα τετραβοείῳ Callimachusis also present behind ruptishellipcaminis () and mutet latus () in the description of Encela-dus crushed by mount Aetna (see Horsfall ad loc)


Philip Hardie has demonstrated how Virgil manages to portray Polyphemusas a duplicate of Enceladus through an ingenious transference of the qualities ofthe anthropomorphized mountain to the monstrous Cyclops⁵sup3 This rather unex-pected equation of (the Virgilian) Polyphemus with (the Callimachean) Encela-dus brings the Virgilian Cyclops right at the heart of the prologue of CallimachusrsquoAetia In addition the description of the Cyclopes (and their land) resounds witha plethora of metaliterary markers which ultimately transfigure them into meta-poetic analogues of the Callimachean Telchines⁵⁴ Polyphemus is huge (632 im-mensus) and inhabits an enormous cave (617 uasto in antro) he is qualis quan-tusque (641) he is so tall that he knocks his head on the stars (619ndash20 arduusaltaque pulsat sidera) like his brothers (678 Aetneos fratres caelo capita altaferentis) who are likened with oak trees and cypresses towering up into theair (679ndash81) Polyphemus is struggling to hold his pace firm because of hishuge bodily mass (656 uasta se mole mouentem) Virgilrsquos description of the stag-gering blind Polyphemus through the use of the emphatic homoeoptoton mon-strum horrendum informe ingens (658) becomes essentially an acute critique ofa literary tradition that has gone way out of proportion and is now sufferingfrom its massive size and artistic shortcomings Polyphemusrsquo gigantic sizeseems to be echoing the volume of the bountiful Demeter⁵⁵ or the Persiankilometer⁵⁶ or the fat sacrifice victim⁵⁷ of the Callimachean prologue The enor-mity of Polyphemus is also evident in the roar he raises to the sky when realizingthat Aeneasrsquo fleet is leaving his island unharmed⁵⁸ The immensity of his bellowcould perhaps be taken as an analogue for the noise of the asses as opposed to

Hardie ndash Cf also Flores EV IV sv lsquoPolifemorsquo Verg Aen portushellipingens () uasto in antro () domushellip hellip ingens (ndash) arduusaltaque pulsat sidera (ndash) manu magna () immensus () lumenhellip ingens (ndash) qualis quantusque () Aetneos fratres caelo capita alta ferentis () uasta se mole() monstrum hellip ingens () quales cum uertice celso aeriae quercus aut coniferae cyparissiconstiterunt (ndash) Call Aet fr ndash Pf ἀλλὰ καθέλκει πολὺ τὴν μακρὴν ὄμπνια Θεσμοφόρο[ς Call Aet fr ndash Pf αὖθι δὲ τέχνῃ κρίνετε] μὴ σχοίνῳ Περσίδι τὴν σοφίην An implicitreference to the Persian kilometer becomes all the more intriguing in view of the Persian impli-cations behind Achaemenidesrsquo name (for the etymological association of Achaemenides withAchaemenes the founder of the Persian royal house see Kinsey Cova EV Isv lsquoAchemenidersquo OrsquoHara with bibliography Paschalis n with bibliography Hinds n Papaioannou n with bibliography) Call Aet fr Pf hellip τὸ μὲν θύος ὅττι πάχιστον Verg Aen ndash clamorem immensum tollit quo Pontus et omnes contremuere undaepenitusque exterrita tellus For the Homeric background of Polyphemusrsquo great howl see Williams and Horsfall ad loc


the singing voice of the cicadas in the Callimachean prologue (29ndash30)⁵⁹ A finallink between Polyphemus and the Telchines is offered by the fact that the Tel-chines like the Cyclops were closely associated with the sea since god Poseidonwas considered to be their father⁶⁰

Polyphemusrsquo killing of two of Ulyssesrsquo comrades⁶sup1 is also packed with metal-iterary ambiguity His huge hand (624 manu magna) a vivid metaphor for a po-etry of Telchinian pedigree is threatening the very existence of the epic tradi-tion as represented by Odysseus and his crew I am tempted to read thecomradesrsquo corpora (623) both as body⁶sup2 and as text⁶sup3 all the more so since nu-ances of taxonomy⁶⁴ and metrical rhythm⁶⁵ are latent in the use of numerus atline 623⁶⁶ Running the risk of over-interpretation I would further suggest thatVirgilrsquos preference for number two (623 duohellipnumero) instead of number sixwhich appears in the Homeric text constitutes an implicit allusion to the twoHomeric epics The killing of Odysseusrsquo two comrades translates mutatis muta-ndis into the destruction of the Iliad and the Odyssey by the monstrous handsof the disproportionate offspring of a decadent post-Homeric production

The metaliterary impact of Polyphemus becomes even more obvious in Vir-gilrsquos connection of the Cyclopes with three composites of the verb fateor a verbassociated with lsquodeclarationrsquo and lsquoopen acknowledgementrsquo Polyphemus is firstlyportrayed by Achaemenides as dictu affabilis a creature not easy to approach ortalk to⁶⁷ He also calls the Cyclopes unspeakable (644 infandi Cyclopes) and atthe sight of the Trojan fleet he expresses the wish to escape the abominable clan(653 gentemhellipnefandam) The Cyclops is mentioned by name only near the end

Call Aet frndash Pf hellip ἐνὶ τοῖς γὰρ ἀείδομεν οἳ λιγὺν ἦχον τέττιγος θ]όρυβον δrsquo οὐκἐφίλησαν ὄνων For more details on the association of the Telchines with Poseidon and the sea in generalsee Herter RE A sv lsquoTelchinenrsquo ndash and ndash Verg Aen ndash uidi egomet duo de numero cum corpora nostro prensa manu magnamedio resupinus in antro frangeret ad saxum sanieque aspersa natarent OLD sv lsquocorpusrsquo OLD sv lsquocorpusrsquo OLD sv lsquonumerusrsquo OLD sv lsquonumerusrsquo A similar case of ambiguity can be traced behind Achaemenidesrsquo reference to the Cyclopeanfootsteps at line (prospicio sonitumque pedum uocemque tremesco) In this case pes can betaken either as bodily or as metrical foot Verg Aen nec uisu facilis nec dictum adfabilis ulli with Williams ad loc for prob-lems of interpretation The line ultimately looks back to Acciusrsquo Philocteta fr (Macr )quem neque tueri contra neque adfari nequeas (so Wigodsky ndash) Paschalis notes lsquoThe cluster uisuhellipdictu adfabilis combines the component ndashωψ of Κύκλωψ and the com-ponent ndashφημος of Πολύφημοςrsquo


of Achaemenidesrsquo speech (641) which is framed between fatur (612) and fatuserat (655)⁶⁸ The recollection of the etymological association of Polyphemuswith φήμη is unavoidable However Polyphemus hindered by his massive vol-ume fails to communicate with Achaemenides as his head strikes the sky⁶⁹Hence the Cyclops becomes the incarnation of a lsquomuch spoken of rsquo poetrywhich unfortunately fails to communicate its art becomes incomprehensibleand ultimately causes revulsion

Achaemenidesrsquo episode reaches its conclusion on the shore as Polyphemusleaves his cave on the mountain and moves towards the sea (657 et litora notapetentem)⁷⁰ Whereas the Odyssean narrative focuses more on the blinding ofPolyphemus and less on Odysseusrsquo escape in Virgil it is the other wayround⁷sup1 In the pursuit of the Trojan fleet by the Cyclops (3655ndash74) Virgil diverg-es from his Homeric prototype in that his Cyclops does not stay on shore hurlinghuge rocks against the ships (Od 9480ndash83 537ndash40) The Virgilian Cyclops in-stead wades far into the sea until he realizes the futility of his attempt to catchup with the fleeing ships The accumulation of terms referring to the sea (662altos tetigit fluctus 662 ad aequora uenit 664 graditur per aequor 665 fluctus668 aequora 671 Ionios fluctus 672 pontus) underlines the metaliterary sugges-tiveness of the sea as metaphor for literary endeavour Moreover the presence ofpontus (672) combined with the triple repetition of fluctus (662 665 671) a termoften applied to river streams⁷sup2 implicitly alludes to another Callimachean pas-sage of immense poetological importance namely the end of the CallimacheanHymn to Apollo where a combination of the sea with river streams also occurs⁷sup3If so the streams that hit Polyphemusrsquo ribs recall the muddy and filthy streamsof the Assyrian river that threaten to contaminate the clear and untroubled opensea (of the Virgilian text) Polyphemusrsquo steps in the sea then could be read as the

Paschalis See also Papaioannou Moskalew draws an interesting parallel between the description of Polyphemusand the appearance of Fama (Φήμη) in book ndash For the metaliterariness of litora nota see Papanghelis So Williams on Verg Aen ndash OLD sv lsquofluctusrsquo a Call Apol ndash ὁ Φθόνος Aπόλλωνος ἐπrsquo οὔατα λάθριος εἶπενmiddot lsquoοὐκ ἄγαμαι τὸν ἀοιδὸν ὃςοὐδrsquo ὅσα πόντος ἀείδειrsquo τὸν Φθόνον ὡπόλλων ποδί τrsquo ἤλασεν ὧδέ τrsquo ἔειπενmiddot lsquoAσσυρίου ποταμοῖομέγας ῥόος ἀλλὰ τὰ πολλά λύματα γῆς καὶ πολλὸν ἐφrsquo ὕδατι συρφετὸν ἕλκει Δηοῖ δrsquo οὐκ ἀπὸπαντὸς ὕδωρ φορέουσι μέλισσαι ἀλλrsquo ἥτις καθαρή τε καὶ ἀχράαντος ἀνέρπει πίδακος ἐξ ἱερῆςὀλίγη λιβὰς ἄκρον ἄωτονrsquo In Book of the Aeneid Virgil alludes to the Callimachean Hymn toApollo again in Apollorsquos oracle to Aeneas on the island of Delos (see Barchiesi ndash

) For Calli-

machusrsquo presence at the end of Book see Geymonat


agonizing attempts of the Telchinian⁷⁴ post-Homeric epic to persecute to rivaland emulate (a sense latent in fluctus aequare sequendo at line 671⁷⁵) the newRoman epic The emphatic negation of nullahellippotestas (670) and nec potis (671)ultimately reveals the Cyclopsrsquo incompetence and the consequent failure in hispursuit The image of the Cyclops and his horrible brothers on the shore staringat Aeneasrsquo ship sailing away with propitious wind marks the end of the episodePolyphemusrsquo failed hospitium of Achaemenides gives way to a much more fa-vourable hospitium by the Trojans (666ndash67 recepto supplice) which in turn sig-nifies the reception of what seems to be an agonizing post-Homeric tradition bythe Roman epic⁷⁶

All these literary and metaliterary exchanges asideVirgilrsquos description of theCyclops can also be seen as operating within the wider context of the Romansrsquovisual engagement with Greek epic in this case through wall-painting It wasduring the reign of Augustus that the so-called lsquoSecond Pompeian Stylersquo evolvedand offered (among others) exceptional depictions of atmospheric landscapesand scenes from the Odyssey Judging from Vitruviusrsquo comments on mural deco-rations of Roman houses Homeric themes must have been a popular choice⁷⁷Fairly recently Joseph Farrell has acutely drawn our attention to the importanceof these visual lsquoIliadsrsquo and lsquoOdysseysrsquo in Homerrsquos cultural and ideological assim-ilation in Rome⁷⁸What is particularly relevant to my discussion is the impressivepopularity of the Cyclops theme in these decorationswhich makes it a most suit-able complement of the Homeric text in Virgilrsquos refiguration of the story⁷⁹

I would like to conclude this paper with an Ovidian coda In OvidrsquosMetamor-phoses (14158ndash440) when the Trojans finally arrive at Italy they meet a charac-ter named Macareus Macareus a shipmate of Ulysses who has also stayed be-hind recognizes almost immediately among the Trojan crew Achaemenides hisGreek comrade This time however nothing reminds of Achaemenidesrsquo previous

The volume of the Cyclops is once again implied by the fact that even though he has gonehalfway through in the open sea still it is only his ribs that receive the blow of the waves OLD sv lsquoaequorsquo Verg Aen ndash nos procul inde fugam trepidi celerare receptor supplice sic merito tac-iti incidere funem For Achaemenidesrsquo episode as a story of failed hospitality see Kinsey ndash Moskalew ndash (as a model for Didorsquos hospitality to Aeneas) Gibson ndash Vitr ndash Farrell ndash offers an excellent discussion of the evidence provided by the so-called tabulae Iliacae the cycle of Odyssean landscapes from the Esquiline frescoes from Pom-peii the sculpture garden of Spelonga For a detailed examination of the Odyssean landscapes and monsters in Roman wall-paint-ing see Balensiefen


appearance in the Virgilian text Achaemenides has been fully restored to his for-mer archaic glory (Ov Met 14165ndash67) and this means that someone somehowmust have taken good care of him on board Aeneasrsquo ship⁸⁰ More importantlyAchaemenides has made his choice as he proudly declares that he prefers Ae-neasrsquo ship to Ithaca and that he reveres Aeneas equally with his father (OvMet 169ndash71) This undeniably constitutes a bold metaliterary acknowledgmentof the deliverance of Homerrsquos legacy by the Virgilian epic

For a detailed discussion of Ovidrsquos highly sophisticated and inherently metapoetic treatmentof the encounter between Macareus and Achaemenides in his Metamorphoses see Papaioannou ndash


Boris Kayachev

Scylla the Beauty and Scylla the BeastA Homeric Allusion in the Ciris

lsquoOnce we have accepted that the Ciris stems from neither Virgil nor Gallus butwas written by a post-Virgilian poetasterhelliprsquo ndash with these words ROAM Lynewho was later to produce the nowadays standard commentary on the poemsup1 be-gins his first substantial contribution to the Cirisfragesup2 The quoted passage con-tains two fundamental statements one made explicitly and the other only im-plied The former is that the Ciris postdates Virgil Although since then it hasbeen argued again that the Ciris does stem from Gallussup3 it need not concernus at present The latter asserts that the Ciris is mediocre poetry And indeedthroughout the article Lyne is never tired of pointing out the Ciris instances oflsquoheavy-handedrsquo and lsquounskillfulrsquo plagiarism⁴ Lyne was understandably notalone in this condescending attitude to his object of study an attitude madefashionable by Housmanrsquos passing remark that the Ciris lsquowas indited by atwaddlerrsquo⁵ But it was Lynersquos commentary which is indeed as a reviewer putsit lsquoan excellent book on a poem which is less than excellentrsquo⁶ that virtuallycanonized the view of the Ciris as a derivative piece of poetry

Since the publication of Lynersquos commentary a number of minor studies onthe Ciris have appeared which often make considerable progress in solving in-dividual problems or establishing separate allusions but still do not attempt asystematic re-evaluation of the poem Characteristic is the ingenious demonstra-tion by Catherine Connors that the puzzling reference to lsquosimultaneous huntingand herdingrsquo at Ciris 299 f (Cnosia nec Partho contendens spicula cornu Dictaeasageres ad gramina nota capellas)⁷ does not in fact imply actual herding at all butalludes to the belief lsquothat goats that had been wounded by a hunter were able tosave themselves by seeking out and ingesting dictamnusrsquo (ie gramina nota)⁸(Indeed as has been observed by Annette Bartels approaching the poem froma narratological perspective lsquoeine Analyse die den Text mit seinen Eigentuumlm-

Lyne Lyne Gall Lyne Housman Williams a Cf Lyne ndash Connors

lichkeiten ernst nimmt zeigt daszlig die Ciris zumindest besser ist als ihr Ruf rsquo⁹)Still Connors cautiously admits that the lsquodisplay of etymological and scientificdoctrina associated with dictamnusrsquo may be derived from lsquowhat was presumablythe Ciris poetrsquos source for the digressionValerius Catorsquos Dictynnarsquo rather than beoriginal to the poem itselfsup1⁰

Let us briefly adduce some more examples Heather White has recently pro-duced a plausible explanation for the perplexing comparison of the bird ciriswith lsquoLedarsquos Amyclean goosersquo (489 ciris Amyclaeo formosior ansere Ledae) as re-ferring not to Zeusrsquo transformation into a swansup1sup1 but to that of Leda herself into agoose as reported by some sourcessup1sup2 Jackie Pigeaud has clarified a number ofdifficult details in the description of Scyllarsquos metamorphosis (490ndash507) in par-ticular the simile comparing it with the development of the embryo within anegg by pointing out striking parallels in ancient medical writingssup1sup3 RiemerFaber has firmly situated the peplos ekphrasis (21ndash35) within the earlier poetictradition of embroidered garments as cosmic imagessup1⁴ thus vindicating it fromLynersquos charge of being a borrowing ill-suited to the new contextsup1⁵ Luigi Lehnusand Donato De Gianni have demonstrated the Ciris poetrsquos acquaintance with Cal-limachusrsquo Hecale and Euripidesrsquo Hippolytus respectively though both were partlyanticipated by Atillio Dal Zotto of whose research they seem to be unawaresup1⁶Armando Salvatore and Erich Woytek have shed a more favourable light onthe Cirisrsquo engagement though not unknown before with the poetry of Cicero(the former) and Catullus (the latter)sup1⁷ Jeffrey Wills has pointed out a suggestiveallusion to Apolloniusrsquo Argonautica and Adrian Hollis to Nicanderrsquos Theriaca (instudies not primarily concerned with the Ciris)sup1⁸ both of which we shall have theoccasion to consider more closely

Bartels Connors Cf Lyne Lyne also mentions lsquoa version in which Ledarsquos Jupiter ap-peared as a goosersquo but that still leaves Amyclaeo unexplained since it was Leda and notZeus who had connections with Amyclae White Pigeaud To cite just one example Pigeaudrsquos interpretation () of (medium cap-itis discrimen) as the sagittal suture seems more convincing than Lynersquos f as the hairparting Faber Cf Lyne ndash Lehnus though earlier than Lyne but apparently still too late to be taken intoaccount De Gianni Dal Zotto ignored by Lyne Salvatore Woytek Wills Hollis f

278 Boris Kayachev

Some (but far from all) of these advances in understanding the Ciris are nowbrought together in a new commentary by Pierluigi Gatti who also makes furtheruseful observations of his own such as for example noting an allusion to afragment of Euphorionrsquos Thrax at Ciris 129ndash32sup1⁹ But Gattirsquos commentary isstill too limited in scale and ambition to effect a thorough reappraisal of thepoem This is of course not the place to offer such a reappraisal for the obviousreason of space limits there is however enough room to take at least one morestep towards it In what follows I shall discuss a case of Homeric reception in theCiris which will both shed light on some ambiguities of the text and demonstratethe poemrsquos sophistication in engagement with the literary past

As pointed out by Craig Kallendorf in a study of allusion as a form of recep-tion lsquothere are two readers operating in allusion the critic who notices an allu-sion and the author who wrote itrsquosup2⁰ This underlying isomorphism of the twomodes of reception ndash reading by the critic and reading by the author ndash oftenleads to the formerrsquos role being assimilated to that of the latter modern scholar-ship tends to value the criticrsquos creativity in producing a textrsquos meaning I wouldsuggest that the reverse perspective is also valid the author can in a sense bethought of as being as passive in interpreting a predecessorrsquos text as the idealcritic of an earlier generation had to be This ambivalence of the authorrsquos rolein appropriating a model it will be shown is not merely exemplified in theCiris but deliberately thematized by the poet

I propose to begin by reading and discussing a passage of the Ciris that em-beds ndash as we shall come to see ndash a Homeric context albeit in an implicit way Asa punishment for the betrayal of her father and city the Megarian princess Scyl-la daughter of Nisus is being dragged through the sea behind Minosrsquo ship whenat last she is pitied by Amphitrite and turned into the ciris (478ndash89)

fertur et incertis iactatur ad omnia uentiscumba uelut magnas sequitur cum paruula classisAfer et hiberno bacchatur in aequore turbodonec tale decus formae uexarier undisnon tulit ac miseros mutauit uirginis artuscaeruleo pollens coniunx Neptunia regnosed tamen aeternum squamis uestire puellam

Gatti though here too he is anticipated by Latte n and Spanou-dakis This allusion may be of some interest for the argument that the Ciris is a work ofGallus as in antiquity Gallus was closely associated with Euphorion Kallendorf On the latterrsquos role as a reader cf further lsquoThe alluding author beginsthe process by reading an earlier text then working out an interpretation of that text As he orshe begins writing the new text unfolds in dialogue with the old onersquo


infidosque inter teneram committere piscesnon statuit (nimium est auidum pecus Amphitrites)aeriis potius sublimem sustulit alisesset ut in terris facti de nomine cirisciris Amyclaeo formosior ansere Ledae

Onward she moves tossed to and fro by uncertain winds(like a tiny skiff when it follows a great fleetand an African hurricane riots upon the wintry sea)until Neptunersquos spouse queen of the azure realmsuffered it not that such a beauteous form should be harassed by the wavesand transformed the maidenrsquos sorry limbsBut even so she decided not to clothe the gentle maid with scales foreveror place her amid treacherous fishes(all too greedy is Amphitritersquos flock)rather she raised her aloft on airy wingsthat she might live on earth as Ciris named from the deed wroughtndashCiris more beautiful than Ledarsquos Amyclaean swan(trans Fairclough Goold 2000 with minor adjustments)

It is the figure of Amphitrite and her role in this context that require most atten-tion As Lyne acknowledges there seems to be lsquono parallel for Amphitrite as theagent of Scyllarsquos transformation indeed for her playing any prominent part inthe Scylla Nisi (as opposed to Scylla monstrum) storyrsquo though he concedesthat her entry is lsquofairly natural given that it is in her province that Scylla issufferingrsquosup2sup1 Shortly we shall see that the main reason for introducing Amphitriteis indeed to create a link with the story of the other Scylla

Within the quoted passage Amphitrite is named twice first by antonomasiaas coniunx Neptunia at 483 then directly at 486 The latter context is peculiar asLyne rightly points out lsquoIs Amphitrites here metonymy or proper name Neitheris particularly easy given that Amphitrite is the subject of the main sentence Iam inclined to think that it is not a metonymy [hellip] pecus A[mphitrites] is amuch livelier phrase at any rate if Amphitrites is not a metonymyrsquosup2sup2 We shallsee that Lyne is probably right in taking Amphitrites literally but the problemis deeper than Lyne realizedsup2sup3 If Amphitrites is a metonymy it reduces the ex-pression pecus Amphitrites to a metaphorical periphrasis meaning no morethan lsquoinhabitants of the searsquo which suits the context perfectly If however Am-phitrites is an actual proper name it seems natural to take pecus literally as well

Lyne Lyne Other commentators ndash Neacutemethy Lenchantin de Gubernatis Hielkema Sal-vatore Haury Knecht Dolccedil Gatti ndash are no more helpful than Lyne

280 Boris Kayachev

but then one cannot help wondering why Amphitritersquos sheep which (one as-sumes) peacefully graze in pastures of seaweed should pose a threat even toa small fish such as Scylla would be likely to become

The passage we are dealing with evokes a context from earlier in the Ciristhe section of the proem that announces the poemrsquos plot and also recounts var-iant stories told about (the other) Scylla (46ndash91)sup2⁴ In a pointed manner Amphi-tritersquos decision to turn Scylla into a bird rather than fish mirrors the narratorrsquoschoice of that particular version of Scyllarsquos metamorphosis (note potius)

aeriis potius sublimem sustulit alisesset ut in terris facti de nomine ciris (487ndash88)

Rather she raised her aloft on airy wingsthat she might live on earth as Ciris named from the deed wroughtScylla nouos auium sublimis in aere coetusuiderit et tenui conscendens aethera pennacaeruleis sua tecta super uolitauerit alis (49ndash51)Scylla saw in the sky aloft strange gatherings of birdsand mounting the heavens on slender pinionshovered on azure wings above her homehellippotius liceat notescere cirinatque unam ex multis Scyllam non esse puellis (90ndash91)Rather let Ciris become knownand not a Scylla who was but one of many maidens(trans FaircloughGoold 2000 with minor adjustments)

Likewise the preceding lines (481ndash86) telling of Amphitritersquos general intentionto transform Scylla bring to mind the account of alternative versions given inthe proem (54ndash89) That section of the Ciris is badly preserved and the textrsquosmeaning is not always clear but overall features are discernible The narratorstarts by rejecting the variant claiming that it was Scylla the daughter of Nisuswho turned into the Homeric Scylla (54ndash63)sup2⁵ Then he considers different alter-native versions of the origin of Scylla the monster (64ndash88) Firstly she may bethe daughter of either Crataeis (so Homer) or some other monster (66 f) Second-ly she may be a mere fiction an allegorical image of lust (68 f) Thirdly and thisis the most relevant version Scylla may be a beautiful girl with whom Neptunecommitted adultery and who in revenge was transformed by Amphitrite into a

On the different ancient accounts of Scylla(s) see Hopman Peirano ndash argues that Callimachus may have been an exponent of this conflat-ed version On the distinction between and conflation of the two Scyllas in Hellenistic andRoman poetry see Hopman ndash


monster (70ndash76) Finally she may be a prostitute who was thus punished for of-fending Venus (77ndash88)

The reference to Amphitrite as coniunx Neptunia at 483 is not therefore amere figure of speech but performs the function of a pointer to that earlier con-text unlike the other Scylla who slept with Neptune Scylla the daughter of Nisushas done nothing wrong to Amphitrite and consequently she is turned (482 mu-tauit uirginis artus cf 70 speciem mutata) into a beautiful bird rather than a hid-eous sea monster But the two contexts have also another deeper connection Inthe idiosyncratic account given by the Ciris the attack on Odysseus and his com-panions is viewed as Scyllarsquos revenge for what Amphitrite did to her (74ndash76)sup2⁶According to the logic of this variant of the story Odysseus must be a proteacutegeacuteof Amphitritersquos ndash and so is Scylla the daughter of Nisus Both suffer at seathe former is violently attacked (60 uexasse) by Scylla the monster the latteris tossed (481 uexarier) by the violent wavessup2⁷ and it is only through Amphi-tritersquos intervention that Nisusrsquo daughter is rescued from the menacing sea beasts(note 451ndash453 speaking of aequoreae pristes)

The most obvious source for the treatment of Scylla the monster in theproem is Homer the only poetic authority referred to by name (65 Colophoniacohellip Homero cf 62 Maeoniae hellip chartae) The mention of Crataeis as Scyllarsquos moth-er (66 ipse Crataein ait matrem) is perhaps the most precise and explicit piece ofinformation that is derived from the Odyssey (12124ndash25 Κράταιιν μητέρα τῆςΣκύλλης) but far from the only one The following passage seems particularly rel-evant (1295ndash 100)

αὐτοῦ δrsquo ἰχθυάᾳ σκόπελον περιμαιμώωσαδελφῖνάς τε κύνας τε καὶ εἴ ποθι μεῖζον ἕλῃσικῆτος ἃ μυρία βόσκει ἀγάστονος Aμφιτρίτητῇ δrsquo οὔ πώ ποτε ναῦται ἀκήριοι εὐχετόωνταιπαρφυγέειν σὺν νηίmiddot φέρει δέ τε κρατὶ ἑκάστῳφῶτrsquo ἐξαρπάξασα νεὸς κυανοπρῴροιο

She fishes there eagerly searching around the rockfor dolphins and sea-dogs and whatever greater beast she may happen to catchsuch creatures as deep-wailing Amphitrite rears in multitudes past countingBy her no sailors yet may boast that they have fled

The idiosyncrasy lies in the fact that the idea of the attack on Odysseus as a means of re-venge comes from an analogous story in which Scylla is transformed for a similar reason byCirce as Lyne points out lsquothere is no tradition that Odysseus was ever a favouriteof Amphitritersquos as he was of Circersquos ndash so Scyllarsquos actions could hardly have piqued herrsquo The connection is noted by Skutsch

282 Boris Kayachev

unharmed in their ship for with each head she carries off a mansnatching him from the dark-prowed ship(trans Murray Dimock 1995 with minor adjustments)

This is of course the subtext that underlies the description of Scyllarsquos attack onOdysseus at 59ndash61 whether it is borrowed from Virgilrsquos Eclogues (675ndash77) or isoriginal to the Ciris

candida succinctam latrantibus inguina monstrisDulichias uexasse rates et gurgite in altodeprensos nautas canibus lacerasse marinis

With howling monsters girt about her white waistshe often harried the Ithacan ships and in the swirling depthstore asunder with her sea dogs the sailors she had clutched(trans FaircloughGoold 2000 with minor adjustments)

Scyllarsquos barking (latrantibus hellip monstris) was mentioned in Homer only a fewlines before (1285 δεινὸν λελακυῖα) nautas renders ναῦται (one may also spec-ulate that timidos which in Virgil stands instead of deprensos is a learned trans-lation of ἀκήριοι as lsquospiritlessrsquo rather than lsquounharmedrsquo) and the ambiguous lsquoseadogsrsquo (canibus hellip marinis) can be linked not only to 1286 (σκύλακος νεογιλλῆς)but also ndash as we shall see more correctly ndash to 1296 (κύνας)

Now finally turning to my main point I would suggest that the phrase pecusAmphitrites at 486 picks up this Homeric allusion lsquoAmphitritersquos sheeprsquo are pre-cisely those lsquodolphins dogs and other sea beastsrsquo (infidi pisces indeed) ἃ μυρίαβόσκει ἀγάστονος Aμφιτρίτη and that is why this auidum pecus poses a threat toScylla the daughter of Nisus To start with a formal argument the spondaic end-ing Amphitrites is a lsquofigure of allusionrsquo pointing to Aμφιτρίτη at Od 1297 posi-tioned likewise at the end of the versesup2⁸ Furthermore much as the Ciris contextleaves in doubt whether pecus Amphitrites is to be taken literally or figurativelyso the Homeric one can be and in fact was interpreted in both ways The ambi-guity of the Latin phrase is arguably a response to the treatment of this Homericcontext in Hellenistic exegesisOn the one hand βόσκειν is a vox propria for tend-ing livestocksup2⁹ and at Od 4413 ndash a point made by Eustathius (215 referring to

As is observed by Wills lsquoa Latin spondeiazon can reflect an imitation of a partic-ular Greek spondeiazonrsquo So Eustathius interprets it as referring to grazing on seaweed () δῆλον δὲ καὶ ὅτι ἡ τῶνμνίων καὶ φυκίων καὶ βρύων τῶν κατὰ θάλασσαν νομὴ βόσκει τὰ νεμόμενα ἴσως δὲ καὶ ἑτέρωντινῶν φυτῶν ὡς εἰκὸς θαλαττίων θύννοι γὰρ ἱστοροῦνται ἐπέκεινα Σικελίας βαλανηφαγεῖν ἀπὸ


1173) ndash Proteus another sea deity is compared to a herdsman On the other as isstressed by Porphyry (on Il 8186) the epithet ἀγάστονος (lsquomuch groaningrsquo)points to the elemental rather than anthropomorphic embodiment of the sea(in contrast to Od 5422 οἷά [sc sea beasts] τε πολλὰ τρέφει κλυτὸς Aμφιτρίτηwhere the next line also speaks of κλυτὸς ἐννοσίγαιος)sup3⁰ Finally there is also aperfect reason why these infidi pisces are a particular threat to Scylla the daugh-ter of Nisus being constantly preyed on by Scylla the monster they will be onlytoo glad to take revenge on her fenceless namesake

Still a slightly different interpretation is possible and perhaps even prefera-ble One lesser-known rationalizing explanation of the Homeric monster frag-mentarily preserved in the scholia to Apolloniusrsquo Argonauticasup3sup1 treats lsquodolphinsdogs and other sea beastsrsquo as an integral part of the dangerous natural phenom-enon underlying Homerrsquos depiction of Scyllasup3sup2 according to these scholia Scyllais a promontory with underwater reefs at its feet full of fish of prey that attacksailors shipwrecked there This interpretation is apparently alluded to in the Ae-neid (3425 nauis in saxa trahentem there are no reefs in Homer) and it may wellbe behind the description of the Homeric Scylla in the Ciris proem at 60f uex-asse rates et gurgite in alto deprensos nautas canibus lacerasse marinis As Lyneobserves although at first sight deprensos seems to imply being snatched byScylla ldquosuch a very literal sense is in fact hard to parallelrdquo whilst ldquodeprendois in fact almost a uox propria of people being caught unaware at a disadvant-age for one reason or another (usually obviously weather) at seardquosup3sup3 If so thepassage easily allows of a rationalizing interpretation along the lines suggestedby the scholia to Apollonius (note especially ad 4825ndash831b εἶτα ἐξιόντες θαλάσ-σιοι κύνες καὶ ἕτερα διάφορα θηρία ἐσθίουσι τοὺς ἐν ταῖς ναυσὶν ἄνδρας) depre-nsos can be taken to mean lsquosuffering shipwreckrsquo and canibus lacerasse marinisto refer to attack of lsquosea dogsrsquo (θαλάσσιοι κύνες going back to Od 1296κύνας) that is either sharks or some other dangerous fish rather than lsquorealrsquo

δρυαρίων φυομένων κατὰ θάλασσαν ndash despite the fact that Homer is evidently speaking of fish ofprey Though the last argument can be turned on its head since at Od Amphitrite is clearlya deity rather than element so it should be at Od as well For texts see Ressel n who also conveniently adduces relevant fragmentsfrom Sallust and the scholia to Lycophronrsquos Alexandra Virgilrsquos description of Scyllarsquos lower half as immani corpore pistrix delphinum caudas uterocommissa luporum (Aen f) seems likewise to be interpreting δελφῖνάς τε κύνας τε καὶ εἴποθι μεῖζον ἕλῃσι κῆτος as part of the monster Lyne

284 Boris Kayachev

dogssup3⁴ Ironically enough it thus turns out that Scylla the princess is rescued inthe end on some implicit level of meaning from none other than Scylla themonster This rescue of one Scylla from the other has apparently also a poetolog-ical dimension for Scylla the daughter of Nisus is indeed saved by the authorthrough his choice of a particular variant of the myth from transforming intothe Homeric monster

However although the version that makes both Scyllas one and the same fig-ure is explicitly rejected already in the proem and after that Scylla the monstercompletely disappears from the narrative on the level of subtexts the danger isnever over As has been suggested by Wills the passage denouncing Scylla as theruin of both her father and fatherland (130 f Scylla nouo correpta furore Scyllapatris miseri patriaeque inuenta sepulcrum) contains an allusion signalled by thereduplication of Scylla to a context in the Argonautica speaking of the other Scyl-larsquos parents (4827ndash29)sup3⁵

ἠὲ παρὰ Σκύλλης στυγερὸν κευθμῶνα νέεσθαι(Σκύλλης Αὐσονίης ὀλοόφρονος ἣν τέκε Φόρκῳνυκτιπόλος Ἑκάτη τήν τε κλείουσι Κράταιιν)hellip

Nor to sail by the hideous den of Scylla(the deadly Ausonian Scylla whom night-wandering Hecatethe one called Crataeis bore to Phorcys)(trans Race 2009 with minor adjustments)

And as has been observed by Hollis the striking comparison of Scylla beingdragged behind Minosrsquo ship (478ndash80 quoted above) to ldquoa dinghy when towedbehind a cargo-boatrdquo seems to originate in an analogous simile from NicanderrsquosTheriaca that illustrates ldquothe crooked motion of a cerastesrdquosup3⁶ (268ndash70)

Furthermore succinctam latrantibus inguina monstris finds a parallel in Sallust(Hist a fragment going back to the same common source as the scholia) caninis succinc-tam capitibus quia collisi ibi fluctus latratus uidentur exprimere Wills lsquoThe recombination of the two Scyllas was a poetic favourite so the refer-ence is not impeded by the fact that Apolloniusrsquo Σκύλλη is the sea peril rather than the daughterof Nisus In fact the Scylla of the Ciris turns out to be just as ruinous (patris hellip sepulcrum) as thefabled monster (ὀλοόφρονος) The passage from Apollonius may have had further appeal as arare mention of the monstrous Scyllarsquos father since the relationship of father and daughter isat heart of the Latin poemrsquo Hollis ndash Lyne explained this simile in the Ciris lsquoas being due to theunskillful plagiarism of our poetrsquo from Stat Silv ndash


τράμπιος ὁλκαίης ἀκάτῳ ἴσος ἥ τε διrsquo ἅλμηςπλευρὸν ὅλον βάπτουσα κακοσταθέοντος ἀήτεωεἰς ἄνεμον βεβίηται ἀπόκρουστος λιβὸς οὔρῳ

Like the dinghy of a merchantman dipping its whole sidein the brine when the wind is contraryas it forces its way to windward(trans Gow Scholfield 1953)

Though hiding under the surface of the textrsquos literal meaning this sinister snakecannot but indicate to the attentive reader a far different course of metamorphoz-ing Scylla than that chosen by Amphitrite and the narrator In this way I wouldsuggest the Ciris poet acknowledges that once evoked a source text can neverbe completely obliterated once begun the process of reception will go on withinthe new text sometimes even against the authorrsquos will

As a conclusion I would like to offer tentatively some further thoughts onthe poetological implications of the Scylla myth as treated in the Ciris In a recentdiscussion of the figure of Scylla in classical Roman and Renaissance Englishpoetry Philip Hardie has pointed out that the duality of Scyllarsquos nature whichis particularly characteristic of Ovidrsquos version where she is turned into half-maid-en and half-monster reflects the readerrsquos ldquomore sophisticated response to poeticfictionsrdquo that ldquois divided between disbelief and the willing suspension of disbe-liefrdquo for ldquoin Ovidrsquos narrative of the actual transformation of Scylla the issue ofbelievability credulitas is transferred from the poetrsquos readers to the subject ofmetamorphosis herselfrdquosup3⁷ (Met 1459ndash63)

Scylla uenit mediaque tenus descenderat aluocum sua foedari latrantibus inguina monstrisadspicit ac primo credens non corporis illasesse sui partes refugitque abigitque timetqueora proterua canum sed quos fugit attrahit una

Then Scylla comes and wades waist-deep into the waterWhen all at once she sees her loins disfigured with barking monster-shapesAnd at first not believing that these are parts of her own bodyshe flees in fear and tries to drive awaythe boisterous barking things But what she flees she takes along with her(trans MillerGoold 1984 with minor adjustments)

Hardie also makes a relevant observation (this time from a slightly different per-spective) on what is the dividing plane of Scyllarsquos hybridity lsquoit is those parts of

Hardie b

286 Boris Kayachev

her body that lie beneath the surface of the water poisoned by Circersquos drugs thatundergo metamorphosisrsquosup3⁸ I would suggest that thus interpreted the quotedOvidian passage provides an excellent commentary on the way the Ciris poetdeals with variant images of Scylla(s) whether or not the Metamorphoses actual-ly postdate the Cirissup3⁹ Above the water surface that is on the literal level Scyllais a beautiful princess who is turned into a graceful bird beneath it that is onthe level of subtexts and hidden meanings she can be as monstrous and hid-eous as the Homeric beast Not only however does Ovid explicate this tensionbetween the explicit and the implicit in static terms he also depicts the dynam-ics of the reading process at first the reader can only see what is on the surfacebut gradually often against his own will and to his own disappointment he alsobecomes aware of various undertones potentially sinister and subversive ndash pro-vided of course that he looks beneath the surface at all

As noted above both the critic and the author can be thought of as readersand accordingly this pattern of progressing from the explicit to the implicit ischaracteristic of both the criticrsquos and the authorrsquos engagement with an earliertext At some point both the critic and the author lose control over the textthey are lsquoreadingrsquo which then takes over the initiative in creating ndashor sometimesdestroyingndash the meaning How to deal with this Scylla of uncontrollable intertex-tual associations is a question of great importance and moreover one that is acentral issue for the poetological agenda of the Ciris But to face it and escapethe fate of Odysseusrsquo companions we need be better equipped than we are at themoment In this paper I have tried to produce by focusing on a single case ofHomeric reception just one more piece of evidence that further demonstratesthe importance of taking into account the intertextual dimension of the CirisFor if we ignore it the Ciris as indeed any poem will turn into a lifeless ndashto re-turn to the Ovidian image (1473)ndash scopulum qui nunc quoque saxeus exstat

Hardie b Note that the collocation latrantibus inguina monstris is only attested at Ciris VergEcl and Ov Met


Andreas N Michalopoulos

Homer in LoveHomeric Reception in Propertius and Ovid

Macr Sat 631 quod quidem summus Homericae laudis cumulus est quod cum ita a pluri-mis adversus eum vigilatum sit coactaeque omnium vires manum contra fecerint ldquoIlle velutpelagi rupes inmota resistitrdquo

It is the peak of Homerrsquos glory that although he has been the target of a crowd of writers andhe has gathered against him this broad coalition however ldquolike a rock in the sea he remainsunshakenrdquo

According to Macrobius this would be the view of Servius the famous Virgiliancommentator about Homer and the timeless power of his poetry The Homericepics have been widely refigured and appropriated in the works of numerousGreek and Roman writers throughout the ages In Rome a great number of au-thors working on different literary genres have enriched their works with theuse of Homer Especially interesting is the Homeric reception in Latin loveelegy a genre of which the Romans were particularly proud considering it tobe a national creation surpassing its Greek counterpart (Quint Inst 10193)As regards its themes and poetics Latin love elegy is generically opposed toepic and claims for itself a clearly defined and independent space amongother literary genres Hence the treatment of the Homeric reception in such adissimilar genre is a fascinating challenge

In this paper I shall attempt to evaluate the reception of Homer in the elegiesof Propertius and in Ovidrsquos Amoressup1 This is certainly not a new field of researchhowever it offers a good opportunity for some useful observations I shall exam-ine which Homeric episodes and characters are more appealing to Propertiusand Ovid and why I shall also explore the type of elegiac context into which Ho-meric material is assimilated and the way in which this appropriationsup2 is ach-ieved I shall look into the objectives and the (meta)literary goals of theRoman elegists for appropriating Homeric material in their poems whether itbe characters scenes episodes or mere allusions Finally I shall seek to illus-trate the similarities and differences between Propertius and Ovid in their refigu-ration and reception of the Homeric epics

Tibullus the other great Roman elegist is more reserved in his use of Homeric material with thenotable exception of elegy which alludes to Odysseusrsquo stay at Alcinousrsquo palace on Phaeacia For the terms lsquoappropriationrsquo and lsquorefigurationrsquo see Hardwick ndash

Although Ovid was particularly fond of Tibullussup3 he also believed that he had alot in common with Propertius (Ov Tr 41045f) saepe suos solitus recitare Proper-tius ignes iure sodalicii quo mihi iunctus erat (lsquoOften Propertius would declaim hisflaming verse by right of the comradeship that joined him to mersquo transWheeler andGoold 19882) In their books of elegies ndashin fact at key positions usually at the begin-ning and at the end of a bookndash Propertius and Ovid voice their views about poetryIn these poems there are frequent references to Homer and his poetic value whichoffer a clear image as to what the Roman elegists really think of him

At 171ndash6 Propertius acknowledges Homerrsquos supremacy in epic poetry⁴ anddeclares ndashsomewhat humorously no doubt⁵ndash that his friend Ponticus who iswriting a new epic is competing with the grand master of epic poetry Neverthe-less Propertius as a praeceptor amoris⁶ clearly states his preference for elegy(cf also 1713ndash19)⁷ In a similar manner at 1911 f Propertius declares Mimner-musrsquo superiority to Homer in love matters⁸ and at 23445 f he asserts that theepic poetry of Antimachus and Homer is useless in love⁹ In 21 a typical elegiacrecusatiosup1⁰ Propertius mentions the Trojan War as a classic epic theme whichhowever he does not have the power to treat therefore he prefers elegy By thesame token at 3125ndash34 Propertius ndashadopting a well-known motif of Greek andLatin literaturesup1sup1ndash claims that the glory of Troy and of the heroes who foughtthere is due to Homer who won immortality through his poetry although evenHomer himself would not have become known had the war just endedsup1sup2

Ovid in turn at Am 1159 f defending his choice to write poetry and not topursue a military or legal career mentions Homer first in a long list of poets who

See Ov Am Tr ndash See Richardson ad loc Fedeli ad loc See Baker on Prop For Propertiusrsquo stance as a praeceptor amoris see Fedeli and Maltby ndash For the opposition between epic and elegy duritia and mollitia in Prop see Fedeli f and Kennedy ndash HeyworthMorwood f For the Gallan under-tones of the polemic between epic and elegy see Cairns a Mimnermus was considered to be the possible inventor of the elegiac distich and of elegy seeFedeli on Prop ndash On Mimnermusrsquo erotic poetry see Szaacutedeczky-Kardoss Onthe relation of Mimnermusrsquo poetry to the origins of Latin love elegy see Cairns b ndashFor the Callimachean colouring of Propertiusrsquo advice to Ponticus see Syndikus On the helplessness of the epic or tragic poet when he falls in love see Hollis andSyndikus n Other recusationes in Augustan poetry include Verg Ecl Hor Sat ndash Carm Prop ndash Ov Am For the recusationes in Ovidrsquos Amores in particularsee Deremetz ndash See Syndikus See HeyworthMorwood on Prop ndash


will remain immortal thanks to their workssup1sup3 while in his dirge for Tibullusrsquodeath he states that although all poets eventually die even the great Homer him-self their works remain in eternity (Am 3925ndash30)

It is clear that both Propertius and Ovid in their lsquoseriousrsquo poems about poetryand poetics fully agree that Homer is the greatest epic poet beyond any doubtstill this does not alter their steadfast and irrevocable decision to write love el-egies They both have a very good reason for that this is the only kind of poetrythat will enable them to win the love of the puellae (the well-establishedNuumltzlichkeit motif)sup1⁴ despite the undeniable fact of course that love is presentin the Homeric epics too There are love triangles (Achilles-Briseis-Agamemnon)illicit extra-marital affairs (Paris-Helen Odysseus-Circe Odysseus-Calypso) andconjugal love (Hector-Andromache Odysseus-Penelope) This had been noted al-ready in antiquitysup1⁵ while Ovid highlighted the erotic content of the Homericpoems in order to support his case and defend his own love poetry against Au-gustusrsquo decision to banish him (Tr 21371ndash80) With remarkable outspokennesshe interpreted the Homeric epics in erotic termssup1⁶ he summarized the Iliad as thedispute between a husband and a lover over an adulterous wife and as the dis-pute between two leaders over Briseissup1⁷ he also summarized the Odyssey as thestory of Penelopersquos erotic siege by the suitors in the absence of her husbandMoreover he pointed out that the respectable Homer wrote about the love scan-

For Homer as the poet par excellence in Ovidrsquos poetry see Skiadas ff and McKeown on Am ndash who cites Am ff Ars f fTr Pont f Both Propertius and Ovid ndashTibullus too (ndash)ndash stress the unsuitability of epic poetryof Homer in particular for love matters whereas they emphasize the suitability of elegy for win-ning their beloved puellae For a comparison of elegy with other forms of poetry and for its prev-alence in matters of love see Stroh See also Stahl ndash on Propertiusrsquo use of theusefulness motif James ndash ndash notes that elegy is a poetry full of flatteries aim-ing at winning over the beloved and that the puellae prefer it to epic See also Reinhardt Syndikus n For the usefulness motif in Ovid and in particular its use inelegy which is inspired by Prop and Tib see Booth McKeown ndash James f See Ingleheart on Ov Tr ndash who cites Priapea AP ndash Other eroticreadings of the Iliad include Hor Carm ndash Prop ndash ndash Prop andash See Buchheit n with bibliography ad loc and n with examples Call-ebat on CP with bibiography See also Ingleheart on Ov Tr ndash According to Ingleheart on Tr ndash Ovid does not parody earlier literature toridicule Augustusrsquo interpretation of the Ars but reworks previous literature to emphasize ele-ments in it which anticipate Latin love elegy Cf Hor Epist f ff f Carm f Prop cited by Luck on OvTr ndash


dal of Aphrodite and Ares and about the love of two goddesses Calypso andCirce for the mortal Odysseus (Od 513 ff and 10133 ff)sup1⁸

Comparison of the poetic personawith Homeric heroes

For reasons of space I shall discuss a particular type of Homeric reception inPropertius and Ovid namely cases in which the poetic persona is comparedwith a certain Homeric herosup1⁹ In elegy 28 Propertius is mourning because Cyn-thia is now with somebody else The poet is so despaired that he declares hisdecision to die after killing her first He then narrates Achillesrsquo conduct after Aga-memnon took Briseis away from him (29ndash40)

ille etiam abrepta desertus coniuge Achillescessare in Teucris pertulit arma suaviderat ille fuga stratos in litore Achivosfervere et Hectorea Dorica castra faceviderat informem multa Patroclon harenaporrectum et sparsas caede iacere comasomnia formosam propter Briseida passustantus in erepto saevit amore dolorat postquam sera captivast reddita poenafortem illum Haemoniis Hectora traxit equisinferior multo cum sim vel matre vel armismirum si de me iure triumphat Amor

After his sweetheart was abducted lonely Achillesallowed his weapons to lie idle in his hutHe saw the Achaeans cut down in flight along the shorethe Greek camp ablaze with Hectorrsquos torchHe saw Patroclusrsquo mutilated body sprawledin the dust his locks matted with bloodhe endured all this for the sake of beautiful Breseisso cruel the grief when love is wrenched awayBut after late amends restored the captive to him

Ingleheart on Tr ndash juxtaposes Ovidrsquos summaries of the Iliad and the Odysseyto Horacersquos corresponding summaries (Epist ndash [the Iliad] and ndash [the Odyssey])and notes that Horacersquos focus ldquois narrowly ethicalrdquo Nevertheless at Sat ndash Horacenames Helenrsquos cunnus as the cause of the Trojan war On a wide variety of possible engagements with Homeric epic in antiquity see Graziosia ndash


he dragged the valiant Hector behind his Thessalian horsesSince I am far inferior to him in birth and battleno wonder love can triumph over me(trans Lee 1994 with adjustments)

Propertius portrays Achilles as a lover-fighter who in the name of love left hisfellow Greeks defenceless and even suffered to lose his closest friendPatroclussup2⁰ In only ten lines (42ndash50) Propertius summarizes a very big part ofthe Iliadsup2sup1 On a metapoetic level this compression is very indicative of the trans-formation and adaptation of the lengthy and grandiose epic into the narrow andhumble generic framework of elegy On the level of the story itself Propertiusrsquo ar-gument is based on the arbitrary and clearly elegiac interpretation that Achillesrsquoactions were dictated by his great love for the formosa Briseissup2sup2 and not by Aga-memnonrsquos huge insult to his personal honoursup2sup3 It is also worth noting that inorder to strengthen his argument Propertius calls Briseis the coniunx ldquowiferdquo ofAchilles (2829)sup2⁴ whereas she only was his slave a spoil of war (Il 9343δουρικτητή)sup2⁵ Nowhere in the Iliad is Briseis called the lsquowifersquo of Achilles exceptin lines 19297ndash99 where Briseis herself ndash but not the poet ndash recalls Patroclusrsquopromise that Achilles would take her back to Greece as his wife ἀλλά μrsquo ἔφασκεςAχιλλῆος θείοιο κουριδίην ἄλοχον θήσειν ἄξειν τrsquo ἐνὶ νηυσὶν ἐς Φθίην δαίσειν δὲγάμον μετὰ Μυρμιδόνεσσιsup2⁶

According to Knoche ndash there are three motifs as points of comparison betweenPropertius and Achilles the abduction of the beloved the pain suffered thereupon and the turnto extreme actions See also Fedeli on ndash For this summary of the Iliad and the one at Prop ndash which focuses on Briseisrsquo ab-duction by Agamemnon and its effect on Achilles and the Achaeans see Berthet In the Iliad Achilles declares his love for Briseis only once (ndash) however this serveshis goal to show that losing her is equal to Menelausrsquo loss of Helen See Hainsworth on Achillesrsquo relationship with Briseis was eroticized after Homer Ingleheart on OvTr ndash offers several parallels (Bacch ndash Prop ndash Ov Tr ndash Am ndash Her Ars ndash Rem ndash) and cites NisbetHubbard on Hor Carm ndash Noted in passing by Syndikus And this is not the only inaccuracy As Papanghe-lis f rightly notes lines f presuppose a version of the story with lsquoun-HomericemphasishellipΙn the Iliad the return of Briseis is not enough to bring Achilles back on the battlefieldnor is her return a condition for the latterrsquos reconciliation with Agamemnonrsquo Cf also Richardson on Prop ndash who attributes Propertiusrsquo distortion of the Iliadic account to theldquohalf-deliberate falsification of his fevered imaginationrdquo Cf Prop where Briseis is listed along with Penelope among the loyal and devoted wives See Richardson on Likewise at Il Achilles calls her his ἄλοχον θυμαρέα however this is a formulaic expres-sion and the term ἄλοχος of Briseis is surprising lsquosince the term normally denotes a wife (κουρίδιος


Propertius re-reads and reinterprets the heroic epic through his personal el-egiac viewpoint and transfigures it through the elegiac-erotic system of valuesThe epic system of values is pushed to the margin or rather is reshaped in elegiacmanner Achillesrsquo personal honour which suffered badly by Agamemnon andbecame the main theme of the greatest Greek epic has no place in the elegiacworld Propertius adjusts the epic system of values to his own case in orderto serve his goal which is clearly stated at lines 39 f in the form of an ex minoriargument since such an important hero and fighter (armis) of divine origin(matre Thetis) behaved in this way because of love ndashor at least this is what Prop-ertius believes and wants us to believendash why is it strange for him to become avictim in the triumph of the god Amorsup2⁷

Propertius returns to Achilles in elegy 222a where he explains to his friendDemophoon that his passion for women neither weakens him nor wears himdown on the contrary he is ready to take up any kind of erotic challenge Tostrengthen his point he once again draws an exemplum from the Iliad thistime adding Hector to the picture Propertius portrays Achilles and Hector as her-oes who distinguished themselves in war despite the fact that they enjoyed thelove of Briseis and Andromache respectively before going to battle (222a29ndash34)

quid cum e complexu Briseidos iret Achillesnum fugere minus Thessala tela Phrygesquid ferus Andromachae lecto cum surgeret Hectorbella Mycenaeae non timuere ratesilli vel classes poterant vel perdere muroshic ego Pelides hic ferus Hector ego

Think of Achilles when he left Briseisrsquo embrace ndashdid the Trojans stop running from his spearOr when fierce Hector rose from Andromachersquos beddidnrsquot Mycenaean ships fear battleThose heroes could destroy barriers and fleetsin my field Irsquom fierce Hector and Achilles(trans Lee 1994 with adjustments)

Once again Propertiusrsquo appropriation of Homer is clearly elegiac and erotic Onthe one hand he acknowledges the military prowess of the two top fighters ofthe Greeks and the Trojans who wreak havoc on their opponents In this respect

is its regular epithet) and is contrasted with δούλη ldquoconcubinerdquo at rsquo see Hainsworth onIl Ovid picks up this relationship in Briseisrsquo letter to Achilles (Her f ) Whitaker notes that Achillesrsquo success serves to demonstrate the hopelessness ofPropertiusrsquo case


he is consistent with the epic tradition On the other hand Propertius associatestheir bravery and effectiveness in war with their erotic activity and this is ofcourse unprecedented and subversive Achillesrsquo and Hectorrsquos sexual activitydoes not affect their military activity in the least in fact their military successmatches their success in bed To put it a bit more boldly their sexual activity ac-tually enhances their military prowess

To take it even further one may also detect a sexual innuendo in Propertiusrsquoreference to Achillesrsquo military valour The use of the noun telum (30) is perfectlynormal for Achillesrsquo arms at the same time however this is a well-establishedsexual euphemism for lsquopenisrsquosup2⁸ Since in the previous line Propertius refers toAchillesrsquo intercourse with Briseis it is not hard for the Roman readers whoare well-versed in such matters to make the proper associations and recognizethe allusion

This is a very symptomatic case of the elegiac ldquodeflationrdquo of heroic epic es-pecially as regards the top two heroes of the Iliad Nowhere in the Iliad is there areference to the sexual union of Achilles and Briseissup2⁹ or of Hector andAndromachesup3⁰ Far from it Hector the protector of Troy reprimands his brotherParis for indulging in lovesup3sup1 or for spending his time fondling his armour (6321 f)and neglecting his military dutiessup3sup2 The conversion of Achilles and Hector intolovers-fighters is their passport into the world of elegy and is achieved throughthe militia amoris motifsup3sup3 the lover is compared with a soldier in the service ei-

See Adams According to A Arding to ndash demonstrate Propertiusrsquoamong omerlove of the puellaeOtto the scene of Achilles going to battle from the arms of Briseis may be posthomericor Hellenistic whereas Whitaker assumes that it may have been invented by Proper-tiusrsquo ldquohumorous ingenuityrdquo At Il ndash Agamemnon swears that he did not sleep with Bri-seis Cf Andromachersquos words to Hector at their last meeting (Il ndash in particular f)Ἕκτορ ἀτὰρ σύ μοί ἐσσι πατὴρ καὶ πότνια μήτηρ ἠδὲ κασίγνητος σὺ δέ μοι θαλερὸς παρακοίτηςldquoΠαρακοίτηςrdquomeans lsquohusbandrsquo not lsquoloverrsquo (LSJ sv) For this passage see also Georgopoulou inthis volume Cf also Prop ndash for Parisrsquo erotic battles with Helen as a detailed development of thetheme of militia amoris with Maltby f Hector often blames Paris for starting the war and reprimands him for his passiveness andhis unwillingness to take part in the battle (Il ndash ndash ndash) For these pas-sages see also Karamanou in this volume Ovid treats the motif of the militia amoris extensively in Am For the motif see Brandt on Οv Am Spies La Penna ndash Thomas Baker Murga-troyd and on Tib ndash Lier f Fedeli on Prop Lyne ndash ndash Cairns Cahoon Bellido Maltby on Tib f


ther of the god Amor or of his beloved Thanks to this motif epic and elegy twoapparently disparate genres unexpectedly display common features within thecultural and literary landscape of Augustan Rome

Apart from highlighting Achillesrsquo and Hectorrsquos love life which is bold andinnovative as such Propertius moves a step furtherWhereas in the case just dis-cussed (2829ndash40) he had set up an ex minori argument stating that he was in-ferior to Achilles now (222a34) he does not hesitate to equate himself with Ili-adrsquos top heroes His approach is cheeky and irreverentsup3⁴ he calls himself ferusHector and adopts the epic and grandiose patronymic Pelides

I shall soon get back to Propertius but for the moment I am going to discussHomerrsquos reception in Ovidrsquos AmoresWriting after Propertius and Tibullus Ovidhad the opportunity ndashand also felt the needndash to renovate the genre of loveelegy His novel approach is evident in the way he appropriates and refigures Ho-meric epic material a very suggestive example is provided in Amores 17 Ovid isfurious and blames himself for beating his belovedsup3⁵ After noting that even withher disheveled hair his mistress is most beautiful (he likens her with AtalantaAriadne and Cassandra at 1711ndash 18) he denounces his hands as sacrilegious(1727ndash28) and makes a very interesting comparison (1731ndash34)

pessima Tydides scelerum monimenta reliquitille deam primus perculit alter egoet minus ille nocens mihi quam profitebar amarelaesa est Tydides saevus in hoste fuitDiomedesrsquo crime set the worst examplehe first to strike a goddess second meHis guilt was less I harmed the girl I professed to loveDiomedes raged against his enemy(trans Melville 1990 with minor adjustments)

Ovid compares his crimesup3⁶ with Aphroditersquos injury by Diomedes while she wastrying to save her son Aeneas from certain death (Il 5297ndash351) This is probablythe most typical case of sacrilege in literary tradition In order to imbue his versewith epic colour Ovid calls Diomedes by the grandiose patronymic Tydidessup3⁷First he equates himself with the great epic hero (31 f) yet another cheeky appli-

For Propertiusrsquo humour at f see Papanghelis Heyworth picksup Propertiusrsquo humorous intention when he calls himself Achilles and Hector in love See also Michalopoulos For the peccatorum comparatio see McKeownrsquos detailed discussion on Ov Am ndash Cf Propertiusrsquo use of the patronymic Pelides for Achilles at a discussed above


cation of the militia amoris motif Necessary for this equation is the equally boldequation of his beloved puella with Aphrodite within the framework of anotherwell-established elegiac motif the puella divina motifsup3⁸

Ovid however does not stop here In the following couplet he claims that heis more sacrilegious than Diomedes His argument is that whereas the son of Ty-deus (Tydides again) attacked an enemy ndashAphrodite fighting on the Trojan sidendashhe attacked the woman he claimed to love Through this sophistic exaggeration(hyperbole) Ovid portrays himself as historyrsquos worst criminal Humour is effort-lessly producedsup3⁹

Nevertheless this is not just another appropriation of Homeric materialwithin a mythological exemplum The comparison between Diomedes and Ovidis also a comparison (and conflict) between two genres epic and elegy Ovid(the elegist) is shown to be bolder than Homer (the epic poet) the elegiac writingand way of life (ἐρωτικῶς ζῆν καὶ ἐλεγειακῶς γράφειν) is shown to be more ad-vanced than epic writing and the military world of epic Elegy surpasses epicand moves into an area where epic had not dared to go Love and love poetryappear to be more dangerous than epic which had been the military and violentgenre par excellence so far Ovid brings elegy to a higher level

Before Ovid Propertius too had shown the will to outdo epic by refiguring itin fact he does that in a particularly erotic elegy 214 The poet is excited andcelebrates a night of love with Cynthia The beginning of the poem is really im-pressive in four successive couplets each beginning in a similar or identical way(non ita and nec sic x3)⁴⁰ Propertius proudly states that his joy surpasses the joyof famous literary persons at the peak of their success (2141ndash8)⁴sup1

See Lieberg passim Kost on Musaeus Sabot ff Lyne n Cf also Prop (vel in sanctos verbera ferre deos) and Ov Am f (quid mihi vo-biscum caedis scelerumque ministraedebita sacrilegae vincla subite manus) where Ovid pre-pares the way for the portrayal of his beloved as a goddess See Barsby

See McKeown and Whitaker on Ovidrsquos flippant irreverent wit For Proper-tiusrsquo influence on Ovidrsquos Amores see Berman and Du Quesnay Morgan McKeown ndash Boyd OrsquoNeill Heyworth See Syndikus Whitaker points out that the mythological exempla at the beginning of the poemare closely associated with Propertiusrsquo case since they illustrate not only his excessive happi-ness at his erotic success but also his joy won after ldquolong hard toilrdquo Many scholars have rightlynoted that these exempla are somewhat ambivalent since the careers of these mythological fig-ures were marred by unpleasant events See Lyne Ruhl ndash Syndikus and Heyworth


Non ita Dardanio gavisus Atrida triumphorsquoscum caderent magnae Laomedontis opesnec sic errore exacto laetatus Ulixescum tetigit carae litora Dulichiaenec sic Electra salvum cum aspexit Orestencuius falsa tenens fleverat ossa sorornec sic cum incolumem Minois Thesea viditDaedalium lino cui duce rexit iterquanta ego praeterita collegi gaudia nocteimmortalis ero si altera talis erit

ldquoAtridesrsquo pride in his triumph over Troywhen Laomedonrsquos great power collapsedUlyssesrsquo delight at the end of his wanderingswhen he touched the beloved shore of DulichiaElectrarsquos when she saw her brother Orestes safewhile she was weeping over his false bonesAriadnersquos when she saw Theseus unharmed led backby flaxen thread from his Daedalian quest-these joys were less keen than my rapture last nightanother such will make me immortal(trans Lee 1994 with adjustments)

In lines 5ndash8 Propertius treats non-Homeric exempla he states that his joy isgreater than Electrarsquos when she saw her brother Orestes alive and greaterthan Ariadnersquos when she saw Theseus emerging from the labyrinth I shallfocus on the first two ldquoHomericrdquo couplets which are in any case more importantbecause of their prominent position Strikingly enough Propertius measureshimself against Agamemnon and Odysseus and claims that his own joy for hisintercourse with Cynthia surpasses their joy when they finally managed to ach-ieve their goals Agamemnon to capture Troy after ten years of war and Odysseusto return to Ithaca after twenty years of absence

This is one of the most characteristic cases of Homeric reception in elegiaccontext Once again the reception follows the rules of the lsquohumblerrsquo genre Aga-memnon and Odysseus ie the Iliad and the Odyssey are considered inferior toPropertius ie inferior to elegy itself Subjectivity a defining feature of elegyprevails over epic objectivity Triumphantly irreverently and cheekily elegy andPropertiusrsquo love life are placed above Homer his great epics (the Iliad and theOdyssey) and his great heroes (Agamemnon and Odysseus)

On the whole the following conclusions may be drawn about the Homericreception in the elegists Propertius and Ovid


(i) Although the two genres epic and elegy are directly opposed to each otheras regards their themes and poetics Propertius and Ovid frequently appro-priate Homeric material in their elegies

(ii) In their poetological elegies both poets pay their respects to Homer and ac-knowledge him as an unsurpassable epic poet avoiding direct comparisonwith him Nevertheless they defend resolutely their choice to write love ele-gies

(iii) Despite their respect for Homer and his poetry Propertius and Ovid do notrefrain from adopting and refiguring Homeric characters and episodes withhumour liberty and irreverence The elegists do not feel inferior to epic onthe contrary they feel confident to measure themselves against it⁴sup2

(iv) The elegists compare themselves with emblematic Homeric heroes andprove to be better superior or sometimes inferior to them By comparingthemselves with the great and famous epic heroes the elegists automatical-ly acquire a higher status

(v) The confrontation between epic and elegy takes place at the highest levelsince the elegists mostly prefer top Homeric heroes such as Achilles Aga-memnon and Hector

(vi) Propertius is more reserved towards Homer in his first book of elegiesThen in his second and third book when he has gained confidence afterentering the circle of Maecenas he feels able to emulate with epic andto highlight both his own poetic power and the power of elegy On theother hand Ovid does not display ldquoself-restraintrdquo because when he startswriting the Amores elegy he is already well-established in the literaryscene and has acquired his own means of expression and his own partic-ular voice As a result Ovid is cheekier and more irreverent than Proper-tius towards Homeric epics

(vii) The elegists strive to create their own system of values and ideas within anantagonistic context They define themselves and their genre through com-parison with other genres and writers The comparison with epic consti-tutes a means of conquering new literary ground

(viii) The elegists interpret Homer from the firmly subjective and erotic stand-point of elegy They accommodate Homeric heroes into their elegies bymeans of emphasizing their love life rather than their military statusRoman elegy challenges epic conventions and deflates epic values Theepic poem epic heroes and epic episodes are all being ldquoelegizedrdquo The ac-

On Virgilrsquos similar confidence in his aemulatio with Homer see Armstrong


tions of Homeric heroes become an example that elegiac lovers and theirmistresses should either imitate or avoid

(ix) The fact that Homeric epics can be appropriated and assimilated into di-verse genres and contexts illustrates their superior merit and their classicquality Through an elegiac and metaliterary reading and by means of lit-erary creativity and innovation Homeric texts can constantly generate newinterpretations and meanings

(x) It is manifest that the elegists enjoy playing with epic transforming it re-reading it and reinterpreting it from an elegiac perspective This is a con-frontation of poets genres themes and poetics The elegists are well awareof the fact that they deal with something ldquosacredrdquo ldquoloftyrdquo and ever-present⁴sup3 yet they enjoy using it with liberty and irreverence This is liter-ary emancipation artistic creativity and ingenuity at its best

Hardwick rightly claims that reception is proof that classical texts images andideas are culturally active presences


Part VI Homeric Scholarship at the Intersectionof Traditions

Robert Maltby

Homer in Servius A Judgement on Serviusas a Commentator on Virgil

When the late lamented Professor Harry Jocelyn was asked by a keen researchstudent which was the best commentary on Virgil he is said to have replied with-out hesitation lsquoServiusrsquo The purpose of the present paper on Serviusrsquo intertex-tual references to Homer is to show that this magisterial judgement cannot per-haps be accepted without some qualification

When individual passages of Homer and Virgil are compared in Servius orin the later scholar known as Servius auctus or Servius Danielis who augmentedhis Servius with material found in earlier commentaries such as that now lostof Donatus the modern reader especially one well versed in the sophisticatedgames of contemporary literary criticism may at first be shocked by the apparentnaivety and literal-mindedness of the comments he finds The reason for this is Ithink two-fold Firstly the ancient commentators looked upon the epic narra-tives of Homer and Virgil as in some real sense historical rather than mytholog-icalWhat was important above all in such a context was that the author shouldget his facts right The narrative should give a plausible account of events withthe correct characters carrying out the right actions in the right order for the rightreasonsWhen passages are compared an important criterion of literary worth isthe historical credibility of the narrative The second concern of these commen-tators was one of generic appropriateness Each genre as Servius tells us in hisprefaces to the Aeneid and the Eclogues of Virgil has an appropriate style andcontent humilis for pastoral medius for the didactic and grandiloquus forepicsup1 Failure to make the style and content of a particular passage appropriateto the lofty requirements of epic either on the part of Homer or on the part ofVirgil will entail the commentatorrsquos censure The four concrete examples that fol-low will serve to illustrate these points

Serv Aen praef p (Thilo-Hagen) scimus enim tria esse genera dicendi humile mediumgrandiloquum Serv Ecl praef p ndash tres enim sunt characteres humilis medius gran-diloquus quos omnes in hoc inuenimus poeta nam in Aeneide grandiloquum habet in geor-gicis medium in bucolicis humilem See further Maltby

a A Storm at Sea

Verg Aen 192ndash96

extemplo Aeneae soluuntur frigore membraingemit et duplicis tendens ad sidera palmastalia uoce refert lsquoO terque quaterque beatiquis ante ora patrum Troiae sub moenibus altiscontigit oppetere

Straightaway Aeneasrsquo limbs weaken with chilling dreadhe groans and stretching his two upturned hands to heaventhus cries aloud lsquoO three and four times blessedwhose lot it was to meet death before their fathersrsquo eyesbeneath the lofty walls of Troyrsquo(trans Fairclough Goold 1999 with minor adjustments)

Hom Od 5406ndash07

καὶ τότrsquo ᾿Οδυσσῆος λύτο γούνατα καὶ φίλον ἧτορὀχθήσας δrsquoἄρα εἶπε πρὸς ὃν μεγαλήτορα θυμόν

Then the knees of Odysseus were loosened and his heart meltedand deeply moved he spoke to his own mighty spirit(trans Murray Dimock 1995 with minor adjustments)

Serv auct Aen 192 reprehenditur sane hoc loco Vergilius quod improprie hos versus Homeritranstulerit (Od 5406ndash7) καὶ τότrsquo ᾿Οδυσσῆος λύτο γούνατα καὶ φίλον ἧτορ ὀχθήσας δrsquoἄραεἶπε πρὸς ὃν μεγαλήτορα θυμόν nam lsquosoluuntur frigore membrarsquo longe aliud est quam λύτογούνατα et lsquoduplices tendens ad sidera palmas talia uoce refertrsquo molle cum illud magisaltum et heroicae personae πρὸς ὃν μεγαλήτορα θυμόν praetera quis interdiu manus ad side-ra tollit aut quis ad caelum manum tendens non aliud precatur potius quam dicit lsquoo terquequaterque beatirsquo et ille intra se ne exaudiant socii et timidiores despondeant animo hic verovociferatur

In his comment on Aen 192 comparing Virgilrsquos account of the storm at sea stirredup for Aeneas and his comrades by Aeolus at the bidding of Juno in Aen 180 ffwith the storm sent against Odysseus by Poseidon in Od 5291 ff Servius auctussup2

draws a detailed comparison with Od 5406ndash07 to the disadvantage of VirgilVirgil he says has not translated his original properly (improprie) Soluuntur fri-gore membra lsquohis limbs dissolved with chill (dread)rsquo is in his view quite different

Following the convention of Thilo-Hagen edition comments from Servius auctus are printedin italics to distinguish them from those of Servius himself printed in roman type

304 Robert Maltby

from λύτο γούνατα lsquohis knees were loosenedrsquo His first criticism of Virgil then isone of loose translation Next duplices tendens ad sidera palmas talia uoce refertlsquostretching his two palms to the stars he cries out thusrsquo is according to Serviusauctus lsquosoftrsquo (molle) in comparison with Homerrsquos πρὸς ὃν μεγαλήτορα θυμόνwhich he sees as higher style (altum) and more fitting for a heroic characterHis second criticism of Virgil then is that he uses of the wrong stylistic levelVirgil fails to achieve the lofty tone of his original Finally the commentator ac-cuses Virgil of lacking narrative credibility Who in the daytime (interdiu) heasks would lift their hands to the stars And if you were lifting your hands tothe stars who would say lsquoThree and four times lucky were they to diersquo insteadof uttering the expected supplication Lastly Homer makes Odysseus speak tohimself so his comrades do not hear and become despondent whereas Aeneasblurts out his pain in front of them Overall the comment on Aen 192 provides agood illustration of Servius auctusrsquo dual concern for narrative credibility and sty-listic appropriateness Macrobius at a later date compares the same two passagesin his Saturnalia but has little to add apart from the fact that Virgil takes thefreezing with fear metaphor from elsewhere in Homersup3

Keeping with the storm scene and the question of narrative credibility weturn now to Serviusrsquo comment on Aen 185 concerning the winds that were blow-ing Looking first at Verg Aen 184ndash86

incubuere mari totumque a sedibus imisuna Eurusque Notusque runt creberque procellisAfricus et vastos volvunt ad litora fluctus

They swoop down upon the sea and from its lowest depthsupheave it all East wind and Southand the African gale thick with tempests and shoreward roll vast billows(trans FaircloughGoold 1999 with adjustments)

and comparing it with Hom Od 5295ndash96

σὺν δrsquo Εὖρός τε Νότος τrsquo ἔπεσον Ζέφυρός τε δυσαὴςκαὶ Βορέης αἰθρηγενέτης μέγα κῦμα κυλίνδων

The East Wind and the South Wind clashed together and the fierce-blowing West Windand the North Wind born in the bright heaven rolling before him a mighty wave(trans Murray Dimock 1995 with minor adjustments)

Macrob Sat καὶ τότrsquo ᾿Οδυσσῆος λύτο γούνατα καὶ φίλον ἧτορ (Od ) et alibi Αἴαςδrsquoἐρρίγησε κασιγνήτοιο πεσόντος (Il + Il ) hic de duobus unum fabricatus est ex-templo Aeneae soluuntur frigore membra (Aen )


we see that Homer has four winds East (Euros) South (Notos) West (Zephyros)and North (Boreas) one that is from each point of the compass whereas Virgilhas only three Euros and Notos just like Homer but then missing out Zephyrosthe West wind which is replaced by Africus the South West wind and not men-tioning the North wind (AquiloBoreas) at all Servius tells us that the Northwind is picked up later by Virgil at Aen 1102

Serv Aen 185 EVRVSQVE NOTVSQVE cardinales quattuor uenti sunt de quibus nunc tresponit paulo post unum quem omiserat reddit (Aen 1102) lsquostridens Aquilone procellarsquo

This point is missed by Servius auctus who comments on the line as follows

Serv auct Aen 185 EVRVSQVE NOTVSQVE ET AFRICUS bene modo hos tres uentos inferi-ores tantum nominauit qui a sedibus imis mare commouent Zephyrum et Aquilonem tacuitZephyrum qui ad Italiam ducit Aquilonem qui desuper flat ideo Homerus de eo Od5296 καὶβορέης αἰθρηγενέτης μέγα κῦμα κυλίνδων

Modern critics like Austin are not worried by the choice of winds here Accordingto them Virgil is just putting together an epic storm without any realistic mete-orological considerations on wind direction The ancients however were moreliteral-minded Seneca sees the passage as unrealistic because all these windscould not blow together the same time (as Aristotle had shown) complaininghoc non fieri potest⁴ and this literal view of literary criticism is again reflectedin Servius auctus who this time praises Virgil for omitting the West wind Zeph-yr because it would blow Aeneas back to Italy and the North wind Aquilo be-cause it blows vertically down desuper flat This literal approach persists withearlier modern editors who from the time of Mackail praise Virgil for giving agood description of a Mediterranean cyclone a view supported by Conwaywho gives us a vivid account of his personal experience in suffering one How-ever wrong-minded the Servius auctus comment is here and I offer it as anotherexample of the concern of ancient commentators for narrative credibility

b The Cyclopes

A similar case concerns Servius auctusrsquo comments on Aeneasrsquo visit to the land ofthe Cyclopes and his meeting with one of Odysseus crew Achaemenides who

On the impossibility of all the winds blowing at the same time see Arist Met a δῆλονὅτι ἅμα πνεῖν τοὺς μὲν ἐναντίους οὐχ οἷόν τε and Sen QN quod fieri nullo modo potest

306 Robert Maltby

had been left behind when Odysseus and the remainder of the Greeks had sailedaway (on this episode see Ch Michalopoulos in this volume)

Serv auct Aen 3590 CVM SVBITO E SILVIS arguitur in hac Achaemenidis descriptione Ver-gilius neglegentiae Homericae narrationis Ulixes enim inter initia erroris sui ad Cyclopasuenit quemadmodum ergo Aeneas post septimum annum quem a Troia profectus est soci-um Ulixis inuenit praesertim cum eum tribus mensibus in regione Cyclopum dicat moratumet mox Aeneas de Sicilia ad Africam uenisse dicatur

Here Servius auctus tells us that fault is found (arguitur) with Virgil in his de-scription of Achaemenides for ignorance of the Homeric narrative at thispoint He does not say who finds fault but such criticisms may well originatewith one of the first century AD commentators on Virgil Here the problem isone of chronology Odysseus visited the Cyclopes at the beginning of his journeyhome from Troy (inter initia erroris) according to Homer whereas according toVirgil Aeneas only reached their land seven years after setting sail from TroyAchaemenides himself says at Aen 3645 that he has only been there threemonths⁵ Similar criticism is found in Servius

Serv Aen 3623 VIDI EGOMET DVO Homerus (Od 9289 and 311) quattuor dicit ergo autdissentit ab eo ut etiam in temporibus nam ante ad Siciliam Aeneas quam Ulixes uenissedicitur aut certe hoc dicit duo uidisse se quot autem occiderit ignorare

Serv Aen 3678 AETNAEOS FRATRES aut similes aut feritate germanoshellipnam non sunt Pol-yphemi fratres quem Neptuni filium Homerus dicit (Od 168 ff) unde eo occaecato Ulixespertulit tempestatem qui ad eum uenit derelicta Calypso cum qua decem annis fueratunde ut supra (ad 3623) diximus Vergilii dictis dissentit temporum ratio

But Servius here offers a different (and wrong) chronological discrepancy with Ae-neas arriving before Odysseus The criticism here then as in 3623 on how many ofAchaemenides colleagues were killed and in 3678 on whether the Cyclopes werebrothers is based on a belief that Homerrsquos version of events is correct and departurefrom this narrative by Virgil is a sign of negligence Servius however in his notes onboth 3623 and 3678 makes some attempt to square the Homeric and Virgilian ac-counts A possible difference here is emerging between Servius auctus who aswe saw in his discussion of the storm at sea is willing to criticise Virgil openlyand Servius himself who in both cases offers Virgil an excuse

Verg Aen (Achaemenides) tertia iam lunae se cornua lumine complent


c Jove threatens Juno

Our third example moves on from arguments about the credibility of narrative tothe question of stylistic appropriateness that was touched upon earlier under (a)above

In this case in his comment on Aen 9801 describing Jupiterrsquos threat sent viaIris to Juno not to help Turnus in the fight Servius argues that Virgil is betterthan Homer

Serv Aen 9801 HAVD MOLLIA IVSSA FERENTEM melius quam Homerus (Il 8402 ff) hunclocum executus est saluo enim sensu uitauit et fabulosa et uilia nam ille ipsas minas ex-sequitur

The passage from Homer he has in mind is Il 8402 ff where Zeus sends Iris towarn Athena and Hera not to help the Greeks

γυιώσω μέν σφωϊν ὑφrsquo ἁρμασιν ὠκέας ἵππουςαὐτὰς δrsquo ἐκ δίφρου βαλέω κατά θrsquo ἅρματα ἄξωmiddotοὐδέ κεν ἐς δεκάτους περιτελλομένους ἐνιαυτοὺςἕλκεrsquo ἀπαλθήσεσθον ἅ κεν μάρπτῃσι κεραυνόςmiddot(Il 8402ndash05)

I shall maim their swift horses beneath the chariothurl them from the chariot and shatter it to piecesnor in ten yearsrsquo circuitwill they be healed of the wounds which the thunderbolt inflicts(trans MurrayWyatt 1999 with adjustments)

In the Virgil passage in question Jupiter sends Iris with haud mollia iussa to Junowithout spelling out what these harsh commands are

nec contra uiris audit Saturnia Iunosufficere aeriam caelo nam Iuppiter Irimdemisit germanae haud mollia iussa ferentemni Turnus cedat Teucrorum moenibus altis(Verg Aen 9802ndash05)

And Saturnian Juno did not dare grant him strength to oppose themfor Jupiter sent Iris down through the sky from heavencharged with no gentle commands for his sistershould Turnus not leave the Teucriansrsquo lofty ramparts(trans Fairclough Goold 1999 with minor adjustments)

308 Robert Maltby

In Homer however Zeus is more specific he will maim the goddessesrsquo swifthorses hurl them from their chariot smash it to smithereens with his thunder-bolt and inflict such wounds as will take ten years to heal Here then Virgil ispraised for suggesting horrible punishment without actually spelling it out Forto spell out the threats in the way Homer does is in Serviusrsquo view to includewithin the narrative elements that are fabulosa and uilia lsquodifficult to creditrsquoand lsquoof a low stylersquo not compatible with the dignity of epic In fact it couldbe argued that both Virgil and Homer have plenty of elements that are fabulosaand uilia throughout their epics but what is important here is the ancient criticsrsquobelief that an appropriately elevated epic style and content should be main-tained at all times Again the positive comments on Virgil tend to come from Ser-vius rather than Servius auctus who is happier to relay criticism

d Even Homer nods

One of these criticisms comes in Servius auctusrsquo note on 12538

Servauct Aen 12 538 CRETHEV hellipet quidam reprehendunt poetam hoc loco quod in nominuminuentione deficitur iam enim in 9771 sq Crethea a Turno occisum induxit ut 775 lsquoCrethea Mu-sarum comitemrsquo sed et Homerus et Pylaemenem et Adrastum bis ponit et alios complures

Again as with the vague reprehenditur in his note on Aen 192 and with arguiturin that on 3590 here the vague quidam seems to refer back to unspecified anti-Virgilian critics of an earlier age In this case Virgil is guilty of killing off thesame warrior twice Cretheus in fact had already been killed by Turnus atAen 9771 and here he is again falling to the same warrior at 12538 This consti-tutes a serious slip in narrative credibility but one which even Servius auctus iswilling to admit that it occurs frequently enough in Homer as he illustrates withthe cases of Pylaemenes Adrastus and others This perhaps is one of the incon-sistencies Virgil himself would have corrected had he lived long enough to editthe final version of his poem

The two remaining detailed comparisons of Homer and Virgil in Servius canbe treated more briefly


e The shields of Aeneas and Achilles

The shield of Achilles is described by Homer as lsquoshiningrsquo or lsquoflashingrsquo μαρμαρέην(Il 18480) and μαρμαίροντα (Il 18617) and this provokes from the commenta-tors on Virgilrsquos description of Aeneasrsquo shield the following comments

Serv Aen 8527 non autem mirum est a Venere allatis armis inesse fulgorem nam Homerusdicit a Thetide oblata arma habere motum quondam et spiritum quae duo in aqua essemanifestum est Thetidem autem nouimus nympham esse

Serv auct Aen 8529 PVLSATONARE recte arma quae iisdem ignibus quibus fulmina factasunt ait tonare pulsa et hic magis proprie quam Homerus ille enim spirare ait et moueri hicvero armis Aeneae caelestem sonitum dedit unde ueniebant

In a reversal of the trend mentioned above it is here Servius auctus who finds Vir-gilrsquos description more fitting than that of Homer Aeneasrsquo shield thunders whenstruck revealing its divine origin in the forge of Hephaestus maker of thunderboltsServius by contrast finds good points in both descriptions with Homerrsquos epithetsrelating Achillesrsquo shield with his mother Thetis the shining sea nymph

A little later in the same passage Servius auctus approves of the fact that Vir-gil unlike Homer does not describe in detail the shield before it is brought toAeneas For him Homerrsquos long description is unconvincing as it suggests thatthe shield can be made as quickly as it can be described

Serv auct Aen 8625 sane interest inter hunc et Homeri clipeum illic enim singularia dumfiunt narrantur hic uero pro perfecto opere noscuntur nam et hic arma prius accipit Aeneasquam spectaret ibi postquam omnia narrata sunt sic a Thetide deferuntur ad Achillem op-portune ergo fecit Vergilius quia non uidetur simul et narrationis celeritas potuisse conecti etopus tam uelociter expediri ut ad uerbum posset occurrere

f The flaming helmets of Aeneas and Diomedes

At Aen 10270ndash75 the flames flashing from Aeneasrsquo helmet are likened to thebaleful blood-red glow of a comet in the night sky or to the ill-omened Dog-star (Sirius) which threatens mortals with drought and plague The shining hel-met element of this comparison comes from Il 54ndash6 where Athena causes abright light to shine from Diomedesrsquo helmet and shield which is likened tothe Dog-star⁶ Servius is correct in seeing that the passage in Il 54ndash6 does

For Virgilrsquos fondness for imitating this passage see Macr Sat hoc (ie Il ) mir-

310 Robert Maltby

not mention any baleful effects of the Dog-star whereas Virgil mentions such ef-fects to foreshadow the doom to be brought by Aeneas on the Rutulians

Serv Aen 10270 ARDET APEX CAPITI hellip est autem Homeri (Il 54) et locus et comparatiohoc autem iste uiolentius posuit quod ille stellae tantum facit comparationem hic etiamstellae pestiferae respiciens quas clades Rutulis sit inlaturus Aeneas

But what the commentator has missed is that Virgil here is combining theIl 54ndash6 reference with a reference to Il 2226ndash31 where the bronze breastplate of Achilles as he pursues Hector shines like the Dog-star which bringsfever to wretched mortals in a double allusion technique common in Virgilwhich we saw mentioned by Macrobius above (n 3)

All six passages where significant literary comparisons are made betweenVirgil and Homer in Servius or Servius auctus have now been discussedThese I think throw significant light on the differences between modern and an-cient concerns in this area as well as illustrating some interesting if less funda-mental distinctions between Servius and Servius auctus with the former on thewhole being less willing to criticize Virgil than the latter

g Concluding statistics on mentions of Homerin Servius

In order to set the six detailed comparisons discussed above in context I set outhere in descending order of frequency all the types of Homeric reference occur-ring in Servius and Servius auctus There are in all some 151 references in whichHomer is actually named in Servius and 37 in Servius auctus By far the majorityof these are concerned with showing that Virgil follows Homer either in plot eg

Serv Aen 14 VI SVPERVM uiolentia deorum secundum Homerum qui dicit a Iunone ro-gatos esse deos in odium Trioanorum


atus supra modum Virgilius immodice est usus (Aen [Turnus] Aen [Aeneas])


or in translating a Homeric word or phrase eg

Serv Aen 1379 fama super aethera notus Od 919 καί μευ κλέος οὐρανὸν ἵκει


The third most common category in both is where Homer is used to establishsome factual point for example that Homeric heroes did not recline to eatbut simply sat or that Hera (Juno) commonly made use of a chariot in war eg

Serv Aen 117 CVRRVS aut uere currum quo secundum Homerum in bello utitur (sc Iuno)significat


The detailed literary comparisons which form the main discussion of this paperabove come next in frequency They constitute a relatively low proportion of allHomeric references for Servius 3= 2 with a much higher proportion (6=16)coming from Servius auctus who as we have seen is less hesitant about relay-ing criticism of Virgil

Next in frequency come comments on differences between Virgil and Homerwhich are far fewer than those on similarities eg

Serv Aen 8670 HIS DANTEM IVRA CATONEM hellipet supergressus est hoc loco Homeri dis-positionem siquidem ille Minoem Rhadamanthyn Aeacum e impiis iudicare dicit hic Ro-manum ducem innocentibus dare iura commemorat


The remaining six categories in descending order of frequency may be classedunder the following headings

(i) Homeric epithets eg

Serv Aen 7550 INSANI MARTIS AMORE Homeri epitheton


(ii) Homeric imagery eg

Serv Aen 9435 lsquoLASSOVE PAPAVERA COLLO DEMISERE CAPVT Homeri (Il 8306f) etcomparatio et figura nam et ille sic ait ut multorum unum dicere caput

Servius 7 = 5 Servius auctus 1 = 3

312 Robert Maltby

(iii) Homeric calques eg

Serv Aen 135 SALIS maris secundum Homerum (cf Homeric ἅλς )

Servius 6 = 4 Servius auctus 1 =3

(iv) natural philosophy eg

Serv Aen 193 INGEMIT non propter mortem ingemit hellipsed propter mortis genus graueenim est secundum Homerum perire naufragio quia anima ignea est et extingui uideturin mare id est elemento contrario


(v) morphology metre eg

Serv Aen 1100 SARPEDON et in ultima possumus accentum ponere et in paenultima namHomerus et lsquoSarpedonisrsquo declinauit et lsquoSarpedontisrsquo unde et uarius accentus est (= 10471)


(vi) etymology eg

Serv Aen 6132 Cocytusque fluuius inferorum est dictus ἀπὸ τοῦ κωκύειν id est lugerenam Homerus sic posuit Od 10514


Information under the final three headings may have originated in the Homericscholia but this must remain for the present the subject of another paper

The focus on Homer in this paper should not obscure the fact that the mainaim of Serviusrsquo commentary is to instruct his pupils on points of Latin languageby using Virgilrsquos text as a source of exempla⁷ Whereas two notes in every threefocus on Virgilrsquos language only one note in seven is concerned with the broaderliterary mythological and historical background⁸

In conclusion we can say that Serviusrsquo interest in the Homeric backgroundto Virgilrsquos epic though an important element is not his main focus of attentionwhich is directed towards Virgilrsquos use of the Latin language Furthermore theway in which the Homeric literary background is discussed in the ancient com-mentators differs considerably from approaches found in modern criticism BothHomer and Virgil are expected to abide by ancient ideas of narrative credibility

On this function of the commentary see in particular Uhl Figures in Kaster


and stylistic appropriateness Most detailed literary comparisons between thetwo authors are centred on a consideration of these two criteria More oftenthan not especially in Servius auctus it is Homer who is held up as themodel and Virgil who fails to live up to his expertise but both commentatorsare willing to concede that on occasion it is the Roman poet who surpasseshis teacher Servius comes at the end of a long tradition of scholarly commenta-ries and although he himself may not have had direct knowledge of AlexandrianHomeric scholia the methodology and much of the technical terminology to befound in Servius clearly has its origins in the Greek scholarship of that period astransferred to the Latin tradition by earlier scholars such as Valerius Probus ofBeirut writing in the Flavian period⁹ The emphasis on a clear and credible nar-rative expressed in a style appropriate to the epic genre which has been shownas central to Serviusrsquo literary critical approach to both Homer and Virgil in hiscomparisons of the two derives ultimately from Aristarchus and his fellowGreek commentators on Homer

Maltby ndash

314 Robert Maltby

Ivana Petrovic

On Finding Homer The Impact of HomericScholarship on the Perception of SouthSlavic Οral Traditional Poetry

That Homer was not a person but an embodiment of a bardic institution the an-thropomorphization of the epic tradition is an idea with ancient roots Questionsregarding the origin and ancestry of Homer were notorious in the Ancient worldNot only did many Greek states vie for the honour of being his native-city he alsoreceived cultic honours in many of themsup1 Ascribing divine origins or heroic sta-tus to Homer in Antiquity can be interpreted as a way to acknowledge the impactand importance of his poetry but also as an expression of doubt regarding hisexistence as a historical character

Flavius Josephus (Contra Apionem 12) first raised the question whether writ-ing actually existed in the ninth-century BC Greece the traditional date forHomer and thus laid the foundations of the oral-traditional theory (for Homericorality see also Papaioannou Efstathiou and Michelakis in this volume) In the18th century several scholars promulgated the idea that Homer was neither a his-torical person nor the author of the Iliad and the Odyssey but that the epics werea result of compilation of older traditional poetrysup2 Franccedilois Heacutedelin abbeacute drsquoAu-bignac was the first modern scholar who argued that the Homeric poems werecollections of shorter songs stitched together by a compiler (Conjectures acadeacutem-iques ou dissertation sur lrsquoIliade drsquoHomegravere written in 1670 and published in 1715forty years after the authorrsquos death)sup3 In 1730 Giambattista Vico published a sec-ond edition of his monumental and influential book Scienza nuova In a chapterentitled lsquoThe discovery of the New Homerrsquo Vico advanced the thesis that Homerwas not a person but an idea created by the Greeks⁴ However it was the clas-sicist Friedrich August Wolf whose theories about Homer turned out to be themost influential In his Prolegomena ad Homerum published in 1795 Wolf ar-gued that the process of composing the Homeric poems was exceptionally com-plex According to Wolf Homer lived in an illiterate age his poems were theproduct of a long tradition of oral composition and compilation finally collected

On the status of Homer in the ancient world see Porter b with bibliography On the cultsof Homer Petrovic ndash (with bibliography) Grafton On DrsquoAubignac see Porter b Porter b ndash

and edited under Peisistratus or his sonsWolf saw the Iliad and the Odyssey as acollection of popular songs a multi-layered text containing lays from differentperiods and the task of a philologist in detecting the older genuinely Homericparts of the songs from younger parts of poems which according to Wolf were aproduct of later tradition and inferior bards⁵

The Homeric question gained renewed momentum in the twentieth centurywith the work of Harvard linguist Milman Parry who argued that Homeric languageis fundamentally traditional in character According to Parry the epic poet was acraftsman who skilfully manipulated the stock of metrically suitable phrases he in-herited from his predecessors Fieldwork in the countries of former Yugoslavia wasof crucial importance for Parryrsquos hypothesis and had focused the attention of inter-national scholarly community on the local Yugoslavian forms of oral traditional po-etryWhile Parry was working on his PhD at the Sorbonne his supervisor eminentlinguist Antoine Meillet introduced him to Matija Murko an expert in Slavic philol-ogy Murko was at the time studying the local oral epic traditions in Bosnia and hadeven made recordings of Bosnian bards Since Parry was interested in the waysbards use formulaic expressions he decided to learn Serbian and to visit Yugoslaviain order to observe traditional singers at work Between 1933 and 1935 Parry madetwo trips to Yugoslavia where he studied and recorded local oral traditional poetrywith the help of his assistant Albert Lord As a result of their fieldwork Parry intro-duced the hypothesis that the formulaic character of Homeric style is to be ex-plained as characteristic of oral composition Parryrsquos pupil Albert Lord further ex-panded and refined his teacherrsquos theory⁶

The orthodox view of the impact of Parry-Lord hypothesis is that it had es-tablished not only a new way of contextualizing and understanding Homeric po-etry but that it had also paved the way for a new branch of literary studiesmdashcomparative approach to the study of traditional epics from all over the worldThe assessment and understanding of many different branches of local oral tra-ditional literature changed dramatically as a result of Parry and Lordrsquos hypoth-esis once they were perceived as akin to Homeric poetry many local traditionaltexts were elevated in status and became objects of keen scholarly attentionlsquoWorld literaturersquo was born as a genre with Homer as its figurehead⁷

See introduction to Wolf Grafton Fowler and Porter b Lord and

Parry The texts of South Slavic lore and the recordings of bardsParry and Lord made in Yugoslavia are part of the Milman Parry Collection kept in Harvard

http wwwchsharvardedumpc On the impact of Homeric studies on the creation of world literature see general discussions inGraziosiGreenwood (eds) and Haubold (with bibliography) Recent samples of compa-rative approach to oral poetry are Foley and as well as Martin (with bibliography)

316 Ivana Petrovic

In this paper I shall question this orthodoxy and posit that Wolf rsquos work al-ready had a decisive influence on the establishment preservation and assess-ment of world literaturemdash at least in the Balkan area It is a little known factthat the most famous and influential collection of the South Slavic oral tradition-al lore was compiled edited and published partly as a result of Wolf rsquos theoriesEven in Serbia where the editor of this collection Vuk Stefanović Karadžić hasthe status of father of the nation (so much so he is universally known by hisforename only) the impact of Wolf rsquos theories on his activity as collector and ed-itor is little known

I shall demonstrate that Homeric scholarship exercised an indirect but cru-cial influence on Vukrsquos activity as compiler and editor of Serbian traditional lit-erature Furthermore Homer as a figure of international renown the fountain-head of European literature was repeatedly employed by Vuk in order to bestowauthority to the collection of folk poems he edited In his theoretical writings Vukdefended his work as collector and publisher by calling upon Homer the highestpossible poetic authority in Europe As collector and editor of Serbian traditionalliteratureVuk made conscious attempts to illustrate his editions with depictionsof bards similar to Homer This strategy had an immediate impact even on theway the local Serbian population came to view its own poetic tradition Morethan a century before Parry and Lord commenced their fieldwork in Yugoslavialocal bards were represented in the visual arts as resembling the traditional por-trait of Homer Last but not least the figure of Homer was employed as a shieldin order to counter the ban on circulation of Vukrsquos collection in Europe wheretraditional Serbian poems celebrating recent uprisings against the Turks wereseen as potentially dangerous and politically charged material

a Homeric scholarship and the first systematiccollection of Serbian oral literature

Vuk was born in 1787 in a poor peasant family in a Serbian village which thenbelonged to the territory of the Ottoman Empire He lived in tumultuous timesand had survived two bloody uprisings against the Turks Vuk contributed hissurvival to his physical impediment (he was lame) which prevented him fromtaking an active part in the battles and to his desire for learning which repeat-

For criticism of Parry Lord hypothesis de Vet and The objective of my paper doesnot concern the validity of the theory per se but the impact of Homeric scholarship on the percep-tion of South-Slavic traditional poetry and on the formation of written collections


edly drew him beyond the boundaries of Serbia⁸ A crucial event in Vukrsquos life washis arrival at Vienna where he met the Imperial censor dealing with Slavonicsubjects Jernej Kopitar in 1813 Kopitar was an astonishingly versatile andwell-educated scholar Politically he supported Austroslavism a doctrine thatsought to create a unity of Slavic peoples within the Austrian empire⁹ Austriawas interested in strengthening the national pride of its Slav subjects mostly be-cause it saw it as the best defence against the strong Russian influence in theBalkan area An important part of this policy was the encouragement of Slavpopulations to develop and strengthen their national identities Special effortswere made to encourage the development of national literature As a linguistby education and a true child of his times profoundly influenced by Herder Ko-pitar emphasized the importance of language and popular literature as expres-sions of national spirit It was Kopitarrsquos idea that Vuk adopted as his lifeworkhe took it to himself to comprise a grammar and a dictionary of Serbian languageand to collect and publish Serbian popular songs folk-tales and proverbs Vuknever subscribed to Kopitarrsquos political agenda and often actively opposed itbut he nevertheless wholeheartedly unreservedly and with great acknowledge-ment and gratitude adopted Kopitarrsquos literary programme

Whereas Serbian educational establishment saw it as necessary and urgentto produce a grammar and a dictionary of Serbian language collecting and edit-ing Serbian folk poetry and prose was in the eyes of many a futile and uselessendeavour In this respectVuk was going against the grain In the early 19th cen-tury oral tradition was very much alive in the Balkans As Vuk wrote himselfgusle the instrument that was used to accompany epic performance could inhis time be found in every house in Bosnia Hercegovina Montenegro and thesouthern parts of Serbia The art of performing was widespread especially inthe villages away from urban centres Apart from amateur performers therealso existed a guild of professional singers usually those who were blind or oth-erwise physically disabled and could not support themselves and their family byfarming This is how Vuk described performers of male or heroic songs in thepreface to the first edition of his collection

In the districts mentioned where heroic songs are still most often sung there will not be anyonewho does not know a number of songs (if not completely at least in part) and there will be somewho know more than fifty perhaps even up to a hundred Now anyone who knows fifty differentsongs if he has any gift for it will easily be able to compose a new one [hellip] Heroic songs are

There is a plethora of scholarly literature on Vukrsquos oeuvre in Serbian A well-researched andaccessible monograph on Vukrsquos life and times in English is Wilson On Vuk and Austroslavism Bonazza

318 Ivana Petrovic

circulated mainly by blind men travellers and hajdukssup1⁰ The blind men go begging from house tohouse right round the country In front of every house they sing a song and then ask for somethingto be given to them When something is offered they will sing more On holidays they go to themonasteries and churches for the services and sing the whole day long Again when a travellerarrives at a house for lodging it is usual to ask him to sing to the gusle so that travellers singand listen in the evening Then the hajduks in winter [hellip] drink and sing to the gusle all nightmainly songs about hajdukssup1sup1

Professional singers were not revered by their community on the contrary theywere beggars usually living in poverty This is the reason why the epic stories ofthe past were also called lsquosongs of beggarsrsquo in Serbian Those inhabiting urbancentres dismissed them as low peasantsrsquo songs and perceived them as possess-ing no literary value Consequently Vukrsquos attempts to collect and publish themwere viewed with suspicion and ridicule by the intellectual establishment ofhis native land Nevertheless Vuk worked tirelessly and had under great finan-cial strain managed to publish the first systematic collection of Serbian folksongs tales riddles and proverbs in the following orderndash A Small Simple-Folk Slavonic-Serbian Songbook Vienna 1814ndash Serbian Folk Song-Book (Vol Indash IV Leipzig edition 1823ndash33 Vol Indash IV Vien-

na edition 1841ndash62)ndash Serbian Folk Tales (1821 with 166 riddles and 1853)ndash Serbian Folk Proverbs and Other Common Expressions 1834ndash A book of lsquoWomenrsquos Songsrsquo from Herzegovina (1866) which was collected by

Karadžićrsquos collaborator and assistant Vuk Vrčević Vuk Karadžić preparedthem for publication just before his death

The preface to the first volume A Small Simple-Folk Slavonic-Serbian Songbookpublished in 1814 and partially quoted above is a fascinating document whereVuk also outlines the reasons for embarking on his project and provides valuableinformation about the dispersion and categories of Serbian oral lore Most puz-zling is the following passage

I am publishing these someone else could perhaps work to collect similar songs in Srem andothers still in Bačka Banat Slavonia Croatia and Dalmatia and if fate wills someone couldcollect further songs in Serbia Bosnia Hercegovina and Montenegro And then perhaps aman will be found whom God has endowed with gifts of poetry and who has had the chance

Hajduks were local brigands See also below From Vukrsquos introduction to book I of his lsquoLeipzig collectionsrsquo of Serb Popular songs InAppendix E of his monograph Wilson ( ndash) provides the English translation ofmost important passages


of learning its rules in the Latin or German tongue he may try to sift all these collections andwrite some poems himself according to the taste and manner of his race and thus out of allthese small collections create one big wholesup1sup2

This passage betrays the Janus-faced character Vuk intended for his collectionNot only was the collection of oral traditional poetry meant to serve as amodel for the standardization and establishment of the reformed Serbian lan-guage these poems were also meant to provide poetic material for foreign audi-ences Paradoxically whereas there was very little interest in the traditional orallore amongst Serbian intellectuals in the European literary circles traditionallsquonationalrsquo poetry was very much in vogue Especially popular were the worksof James Macpherson such as Fragments of Ancient Poetry collected in the high-lands of Scotland and translated from the Galic [sic] or Erse language a collectionof 16 poems which he published in 1760 claiming that it was a translation of laysadapted from old Irish songs Two subsequently published lsquotranslationsrsquo ofpoems Macpherson attributed to Ossian a Gaelic bard who was allegedly activein the third centuryWhereas the scholarly community denounced these transla-tions as extremely free adaptations of popular songs or even inventions literaryEurope was enchanted by Ossian Editions and translations of various local tra-ditional poems appeared en masse bringing fame to the nations that producedthem Kopitar and Vuk had very probably hoped that Serbian folklore would alsoattract the attention of some enthusiastic European poet like Macpherson How-ever the idea of making one big whole out of individual local lays betrays someknowledge of modern philological theories especially Wolf rsquos ideas on Homer

Commenting on this passage Wilson astutely notes that it may be lsquoan indi-rect reference to current theories of Homeric scholarship with which he (scVuk)could have become acquainted through Kopitar (1970 95)Wilson also notes thatKopitar as one of the leading intellectuals in Vienna must have been aware ofWolf rsquos Prolegomena ad Homerumsup1sup3

In fact we have definitive evidence not only that Kopitar was aware of Wolf rsquoswork but that they knew each other and even collaborated Kopitar and Wolfhad met in Vienna in 1810 and corresponded from 1811 to 1819sup1⁴ At that timeWolf was editing three dialogues of Plato and had asked Kopitar for help withmanuscripts form the Vienna librarysup1⁵ In 1819 Kopitar wrote to Wolf in order

TransWilson ndash Wilson Seleškovic In the preface to the Platonis dialogorum delectus which Wolf had published in hethanks Kopitar for his help with the manuscripts

320 Ivana Petrovic

to draw his attention to the four German translations of South Slavic poetry fromVukrsquos collection which he probably completed himself The reason why theseshould interest Wolf he explained as follows

Nirgends gibt es heut zu Tage treffender Pendants zu Ihren Homeriden als in Serbien undBosnien Ein Exemplar von (Hormayrrsquos) hier erscheinendem Journal Archiv fur GeographieHistorie Staats- und Kriegskunst mag doch auch Berlin erreichen Dort habe ich nun vierRhapsodien aus dem Freyheitskriege von 1804 uumlbersetzt [hellip] Par curiositeacute sehen Siersquos doch anIm illyrischen Original sind auf meine Veranslassung bereits 2 Bde solcherley serbischerVolkspoesie heraus 2 neue liegen druckfertig in allem koumlnnten 10 voll werden

Kopitarrsquos comparison of Serbian bards with Homeric rhapsodes is a first known in-stance of comparative approach to the study of South Slavic oral traditional poetryIn my opinion even the choice of poems for translation into German was Kopitarrsquosbow to Wolfrsquos theories out of many poems Vuk had already gathered by 1818 Ko-pitar had picked four lays depicting the recent Serbian uprising against the Turksand the events spanning from 1804 to 1809 one depicting its very origins and trac-ing the history of the Turkish rule from the battle of Kosovo in 1389 and the otherthree ordered chronologically and celebrating the decisive battles which took placein 1806 and 1809 All four were noted down from one bard Philip Višnjicsup1⁶ Takentogether these four poems convey an impression that a large-scale continuous nar-rative depicting the origins and the development of the uprising could originate ei-ther in the hands of one skilful traditional poet or as Vuk suggests in his prefacequoted above in the hands of a gifted foreigner and that lsquoone big wholersquo couldbe created lsquoout of all these small collectionsrsquo Kopitarrsquos translation into Germanwas probably published with the intention of attracting the attention of Germanscholars who were familiar with Wolfrsquos ideas and could be inclined to comparehis Homerids with the Serbian illiterate blind singers This would not only lend sup-port to Wolfrsquos theory but would in turn also support the Serbian national causefor surely a tradition capable of producing someone like Homer was worthy of beingconsidered a nation in the first place Furthermore all four lays were noted downfrom the same bard one who was already groomed to become a Serbian Homeras I shall argue below

However anyone truly familiar with the Serbian oral traditional poetry like Vukmdashwho after all not only had an expert knowledge of the tradition as a collector butknew it intimately having grown up in the area where the tradition was very muchalivemdashknew that Serbian songs fall naturally into cycles but do not tend to exceed500ndash700 lines These cycles roughly correspond to the early history of the Serbian

On Philip Višnjic see below


Empire The oldest strata of Serbian oral poetry accessible in Vukrsquos time he calledthe lsquoPoems of the earliest daysrsquo They depict the Serbian rulers before the Battleof Kosovo (1389) the building of cities churches and monasteries royal weddingsquarrels and minor wars Due to the historical importance of the battle of Kosovo awhole cluster of poems centred on it and was called lsquoThe Kosovo Cyclersquo Thesepoems commemorate the Serbian Empirersquos defeat at the hands of the Turks inthe late fourteenth century all are grouped around the historic decisive battlebut most depict events preceding the battle and the aftermath Most famousamong these are lsquoThe fall of the Serbian Empirersquo lsquoThe mother of the Jugovicirsquoand lsquoThe maiden of Kosovorsquo One of the most popular characters of Serbian tradi-tional poetry was Marko Kraljević There is a whole cycle dedicated to him a ple-thora of poems from various times depicting the exploits of prince Marko wholsquocame too late to the battle of Kosovorsquo Marko was in fact a historic character anda vassal of the Turkish sultan but the figure of Marko from popular lore stubbornlyresists the Turks and dedicates his life to defending the orthodox population JakobGrimmwho followed Vukrsquos work from the very beginning and paved the way for thereception of his collection in Germany by publishing a very influential and favour-able reviewsup1⁷ was struck by the Marko cycle and had asked Vuk whether it might bepossible to construct one continuous epic on Marko out of all these DoubtlesslyGrimm too was influenced by Wolfrsquos Prolegomena Also popular was the cycle ofpoems depicting the exploits of lsquoHajducirsquo Serbian brigands Finally the lastcycle contemporary with Vuk was the group of poems about the uprising againstthe Turks

In a society with no local courts such as Serbia under the Ottoman Empirethere were no aristocrats who would reward the singers for their praise Therewas no native-speaking ruling class with enough leisure for listening to oldsongs and stories Traditional storytelling took place in private houses andthe art of singing traditional poems was usually transmitted from father toson In Bosnia however the situation was quite different In the parts of thecountry where Muslim religion spread and became dominant local aristocratsembraced the oral tradition and the heroes of the poems changed places theMuslim lords became the heroes and the orthodox populace the enemy RichMuslim aristocrats supported the singers and awarded them generously This isthe reason why Muslim culture developed songs much longer than Christians

The review by Jakob Grimm of book III of Vukrsquos Leipzig collection of Serb popular songs waspublished in Goumlttingsche Gelehrte Anzeigen ndash November Wilson AppendixD provides a full English translation

322 Ivana Petrovic

and this was the area where Parry and Lord were to find their lsquoYugoslav Homerrsquoin the early twentieth century

Consequently there was no reason to expect a monumental epic of Homericproportions to originate in Serbia This state of affairs did little to prevent Vukand Kopitar from searching for Homer among Serbian bards One guslar provedto be a particularly good fit for the role It was the blind singer Philip Višnjićwhom Vuk met in the monastery Šišatovac and described in the following way

Philip Višnjić crossed into Serbia in 1804 the summer that the Serbian forces retreated overthe Drina and from then until 1813 he lived only in the Serbian camps around the Drina [hellip] In1813 when the Turks reconquered Serbia he fled with his family to the Srem and settled in thevillage of Grk I had heard that he knew some good songs particularly about the times ofKaradjordjesup1⁸ and got him to come to Šišatovac in 1815 [hellip] I then took down from himnot only the songs here printed but also a further three from Karadjordjersquos timesup1⁹ which Ihave left over to make a fifth book with if God grant me health By and large I think thatPhilip himself composed all those new songs of the times of Karadjordje He told me thathe had become blind as a young man as a result of smallpox and then went around thewhole Pashalik (province) of Bosnia and right down to Skadar begging and singing to theguslesup2⁰

The blindness of the bard his journeys and the subject matter of his poems in-stantly reminded both Vuk and Kopitar of Homer It is not a surprise that the por-trait of Višnjić was meant to illustrate the whole collection In March 1817 Vukwrote to Lukijan Mušicki eminent poet and archimandrite of the monastery Ši-šatovac specifically requesting a portrait of Višnjić to be taken but to no availsup2sup1

Due to unfortunate circumstances no portrait was made of Višnjić during hislifetime However the most popular depiction of the bard both in Serbia andabroad one that is nowadays also used as an emblem of the Oral Tradition jour-nal is meant to represent Višnjić As argued by Vojislav Jovanović in 1954 thisportrait had nothing to do with Višnjić but presents an idealized representationof a type called lsquoSerbian Homerrsquo an image which Jovanovic aptly calls lsquoapocry-phal iconrsquo It was painted by the Croatian artist Josip Danilovic in 1901 and was

Karadjordje was the leader of the First Serbian uprising against the Turks (ndash) Afterthe failure of the uprising he was forced to leave the country and was assassinated upon hisreturn in probably upon the order of the new Serbian ruler Miloš Obrenović Visnjicrsquos most famous poems were the compositions commemorating historical events hewitnessed himself such as Početak bune protiv dahija (The Beginning of the Revolt against Da-hijas) Boj na Čokešini (Battle of Čokešina) Boj na Mišaru (Battle of Mišar) Wilsonrsquos translation of Vukrsquos preface to the Book IV of the Leipzig collection ofpopular songs published in The letter is quoted in Jovanović


immediately accepted as the exemplary portrait of a bard The similarities of thispresentation with the blind Homer type (as presented by Raphael or Mattia Preti)are immediately obvious

An image of Višnjić was not destined to adorn Vukrsquos edition of Serbian tradi-tional poetry but Kopitar and Vuk did not abandon the idea of linking Homer tothe collection visually In 1823 Kopitar sent an illustration of the instrumentgusle to Vuk and wrote with regard to the cover illustration of the Leipzig edition

I think however that we should provide a group-scenemdashperhaps a Homer surrounded by lis-teners young and oldsup2sup2

At the end a lithography was made of a guslar surrounded by listeners Themodel for the bard was not Višnjić but probably Vuk himselfsup2sup3 However theidea of a traditional Serbian guslar resembling Homer somehow took roots In1839 a famous painter Katarina Ivanović published a lithograph in a Serbian lit-erary magazine with wide circulation called lsquoSrpski narodni listrsquo It depicts abard with gusle surrounded by an admiring audience a maiden in the right cor-ner and two young men in the left corner of the pictureWhat is most interestingabout this representation of a bard is the title Srpski Omir lsquoSerbian Homerrsquo Byproviding her lithography meant for popular circulation with such a title Katar-ina Ivanović must have been stating what had by that time become obvious toSerbian educated audiences

b Homer as a shield in the creationof Serbian national identity

The year is 1842 By that time Vuk was an eminent scholar in his 50s who hadalmost single-handedly created the basis for a national literature and yet hewas repeatedly forced to defend his endeavour from bitter critical attacks Asthe first systematic collection of Serbian oral literature Vukrsquos edition played acentral role in the development of Serbian literature it was translated into Ger-man and French very soon after its original publication and had a major impacton European literature Jakob Grimm Goethe Alexander Puškin Prosper Meacuteri-meacuteeWalter Scott and many other European scholars and writers admired Serbi-

Ibid Ibid

324 Ivana Petrovic

an poetrysup2⁴ but at home Vuk encountered less enthusiasm for his editorialwork The new Serbian state soon established an uneasy peace with the OttomanEmpire and the publishing of Vukrsquos editions was banned on Serbian territory Bytheir very nature since they depicted the recent uprising these poems were ca-pable of stirring patriotism and inciting Serbs to new uprisings The new ruler ofSerbia Miloš Obrenović found personal offence in the publication of the poemsdepicting recent political events since they did not celebrate his own roleenough and glorified instead the leader of the first uprising Karadjordjesup2⁵

The second wave of opposition came from Serbian intellectuals who per-ceived folk poetry as unworthy of scholarly attention being a product of illiteratepeasants They complained about Vukrsquos striking practice of writing down thepoems precisely as he heard them without correcting the grammar or changingthe lines to comply with the standards of poetry composed with the aid of writ-ing A formidable opponent of Vukrsquos language reforms Metropolitan of KarlovciStefan Stratimirović remarked lsquoIf we see a drunken man stumble and fall wewould help him rise againrsquosup2⁶ thus suggesting that Vuk ought to have changedthe grammar and language of the common folk in order to closer resemblethe written discourse Furthermore Vuk was slighted for publishing the songsof lsquoblind beggarsrsquo In his response to the critics published in 1842Vuk defendedhis collecting methodology and the editing programme on the whole Vukrsquos col-lecting method was in fact exemplary even by modern standardsmdashas a memberof the oral society he fully understood the nature of the songs and their contex-tual importance and had made transcriptions which were completely faithful tothe song as sungWhen accepting transcriptions from others he insisted on ver-ifying himself that the song in question was actually sung that way among thefolk In his defence Vuk argued that the songs of the common people whichhe had published were not less worthy simply because some singers wereblind and reduced to begging and wrote lsquoWhoever has any sense and criticalacumen will understand upon reading these poems that there is no shame atall in the fact that they are performed by blind beggars In fact in this respectthe Serbs should be no more ashamed than the Greeks who are certainly not

On the international reception of Vukrsquos edition see Wilson Wilson ( ) provides an English translation of Miloš Obrenovićrsquos letter to Vuk from where the new ruler of Serbia is expressing his dissatisfaction with the way he has beenportrayed in contemporary oral poetry The following passages illustrate his point sufficientlylsquoAll of us who were present at these events and witnessed them were disgusted at the lies inyour (sic) songs which ought to have been founded on truth seeing that they are about myown times [hellip] I shall not permit you to circulate among our people lies about my exploitsrsquo Quoted in Karadžic a


ashamed of the fact that their Homer was a blind beggar In fact were he alivenow kings and emperors would pay him heedrsquosup2⁷ Vuk goes on to argue that thelanguage used in the Serbian oral poems is the best possible example of Serbianand should become a standard and serve as a measuring rod due to its purityand simple beauty of the vernacular

By this time Homer had already served as a very useful point of defence forKopitar as well In 1824 the highest Austrian police authorities viewed the circu-lation of poems glorifying recent Serbian uprising with suspicion and fearedsimilarly to the Serbian establishment a renewed stirring up of anti-Turkish sen-timent It was Kopitarrsquos duty as censor for Slavonic languages to express an opin-ion regarding the circulation of the book Kopitar argued in favour of the circu-lation advancing the policy of Austroslavism and comparing Vuk to Homer

The fruits which this book will bear in providing the Serbs with their own independent andmuch-loved literature (which will soon outstrip the Russian in favour since it will rallythem around a national centre) would easily outweigh through the spirit and tendency onthe whole collection any objections against individual and temporarily perhaps harmful de-tails [hellip] Given that this collection is part of a three-volume edition with quite different con-tents and a purely scientific tendency (as shown in the preface to the Dictionary) the censoralready advised by competent critics of the author (who is recognized as the Illyrian HomerOssian etc) found no difficulty in approving ithellipsup2⁸

Kopitarrsquos defence was successful and the circulation of Vukrsquos collection in Aus-tria was allowed

In the age that had produced many attempts to renounce Homerrsquos very exis-tence he needed to be drafted in order to defend his fellow oral poets The mod-ern enlightened Europe in the 18th and 19th century killed Homer only to imme-diately resurrect him To use a popular modern phenomenon as an illustrationHomer became the vampire king of European literature He represents the end ofAncient Greek oral tradition that once written down ceased to exist in its pre-vious form as a composition in performance Once written down it embarks onan after-life as a relatively stable unchangeable written text Comparing a livingand existing local oral tradition with Homeric poetry brings to it renown andprestige but ultimately as it is written down it too ceases to exist in its naturalform It dies as an oral text only to be resurrected as a written one from then onremaining forever unchanged Comparing a local tradition with Homer is thus akiss of deathmdashbut a kiss from a vampire since it brings with it both death and inits final metamorphosis immortality The metamorphosis from traditional oral

Karadžic b Translation Wilson

326 Ivana Petrovic

literature to a published manuscript affiliated with Homeric poetry brings re-nown and prestige both to local traditional poetry and to the people that createdit The political repercussions of affiliating local poetic traditions to Homer werevast Comparison of Serbian bards with Homer were consciously employed inorder to bestow a hitherto little known Serbian nation with renown and prestigeOnce an analogy with Homer was made Serbian traditional poetry became partof the family of European literature The nation that gave birth to it came to beperceived as a part of Europe too The way was paved for the Serbian state toemerge from the Ottoman Empire and take its place in the European family

Finally more than a century after Vukrsquos collection was published it was Ho-meric scholarship again that exercised an impact in the way South Slavic poetrywas perceived in the Western world This time it was not Serbia but a relativelynew country Yugoslavia that profited from association with Homeric poetrysup2⁹Lord and Parry completed what Wolf had started though they placed a roofon the house of world literature it was Wolf who had laid its foundations

See on this Graziosi ndash



Katerina Mikellidou

Aeschylus reading HomerThe Case of the Psychagogoi

Aeschylusrsquo fragmentarily preserved Psychagogoi has at its core possibly as itstheme a dramatised adaptation of a well-known Homeric episode ndash the NekyiaThe meagre surviving fragments suggest that in broad strokes the story goes asfollowssup1 Odysseus travels to a lsquofearsomersquo lake (frr 273 273a2 R cf 276 R) andunder the guidance of local necromancers (frr 273 273a R) contacts Teiresiaswho gives him a prophecy about his death (fr 275 R) The subject-matter perse points to a by definition lsquoHomerisingrsquo play Book 11 of the Odyssey is usedas a source text and a point of departure The aim of the present paper is to in-vestigate this intertextual network between the Homeric Nekyia and its Aeschy-lean version As will emerge Aeschylus opens a persistent dialogue with the epictext and establishes a network of competitive dynamics Yet as well as persis-tently recalling his archetype he also makes a systematic attempt to revise itby endowing this distinctively Homeric episode with a diametrically oppositemeaning while in Homer necromancy unfolds the full proportions of Odysseusrsquoboldness courage and extraordinariness in its Aeschylean adaptation it is partof a process of bringing him closer to the ordinary man The normalisation ofOdysseus is carried out both by his prophesied death which is ignominiousand trivial (fr 275 R) and by the introduction of realistic and familiar elementsinto the necromantic ritual Though the practice registers some exotic featuresand retains a degree of its Homeric outlandishness it is in many respectsbrought closer to reality As we shall see the reduced exoticism of necromancyand the concomitant detachment of the Aeschylean Odysseus from the fantasticatmosphere of the Odyssey produce some very complex effects

On this play see the edition of PKoumlln (= fr a R) in Kramer ndash and thediscussions in Gelzer Lloyd-Jones Katsouris ndash Rusten Henrichs ndash Bardel ndash Cousin Dios ndash Discussions prior toKramerrsquos edition are useful (see Leeuwen ndash Mette ndash) but they ignorethe existence of fr a R The date of the play is uncertain The abbreviation R stands for thenumbering of Aeschylean fragments in Radt

The prediction of Odysseusrsquo death

The deconstruction of Odysseusrsquo Homeric presentation is first and foremost evi-dent in fr 275 R which is delivered by the summoned Teiresias and preserves aprophecy about Odysseusrsquo death The motif clearly derives from the Homeric Ne-kyia where the seer concludes his predictions about the herorsquos nostos (on theOdyssean nostos motif see Jacob and Thliveri in this volume) and the due pro-pitiatory activities by referring to the end of his life (Od 11134ndash37) As he says avery gentle death will come to him ΕΞΑΛΟCwhen he reaches old age Accordingto the ancient scholia this prophecy lends itself to a double interpretation de-pending on the rendering of ΕΞΑΛΟCOdysseus may die lsquoaway from the searsquo (ἔξα-λος) or lsquofrom the searsquo (ἐξ ἁλός) namely a marine death The poet of Telegony pres-ents us with a version that relies upon the inherent ambiguity of the Homericpassage as it actually combines both interpretations Odysseus is killed ondry land by Telegonusrsquo arrowwhose edge is made by the spine of a stingray (κέν-τρον τρυγόνος) Aeschylus chooses to differentiate himself from both epics andput forward his own distinctive version (fr 275 R)sup2

ἐρωδιὸς γὰρ ὑψόθεν ποτώμενοςὄνθῳ σε πλήξει νηδύος χαλώμασινmiddotἐκ τοῦδrsquo ἄκανθα ποντίου βοσκήματοςσήψει παλαιὸν δέρμα καὶ τριχορρυές

For a heron in flightwill strike you from above with its dung when it opens its bowelsand from this the barb of a sea-creaturewill rot your aged hairless skin(trans Sommerstein 2008)

The Aeschylean prophecy echoes the Homeric idea of the peaceful death in oldage as well as the Telegonian motif of κέντρον τρυγόνος However in this ver-sion a heron flying overhead will strike and infect Odysseusrsquo aged skin withhis dung that will contain a fatal spine of fishsup3 In this way Aeschylus keepsthe authority of the epic narrative but at the same time adjusts it to serve hisown dramatic ends

For the different versions of Odysseusrsquo death see Hartmann ndash Severyns f ndash The uniqueness of the Aeschylean version is underlined in scholium V on Od (Din-dorf) Αἰσχύλος δὲ ἐν Ψυχαγωγοῖς ἰδίως λέγει lsquoἐρρωδιὸς γὰρhellipτριχορρυέςrsquo


In the Odyssey the hero may not meet a glorious death in the battlefield butthe rhetoric used by Teiresias elevates his predicted peaceful end to an ideal in-cident As the seer puts it Odysseusrsquo death will be lsquovery gentle (Od 11135 ἀμβλη-χρὸς μάλα) and will come when the hero is overcome with lsquosleek old agersquo(Od 11136 γήρᾳ ὕπο λιπαρῷ ἀρημένον) and his people will lsquodwell in prosperityrsquoaround him (Od 11137 ὄλβιοι ἔσσονται) The adjective λιπαρός qualifies this oldage as wealthy and healthy-looking strengthening the notion of the perfectdeath⁴ In contrast the prophecy in fr 275 R gives an ignominious twist tothe Homeric model by introducing the factor of the dung and by presentingold age in a negative light The Homeric λιπαρὸν γῆρας gives way to παλαιὸνδέρμα καὶ τριχορρυές that conjures up the image of a scrawny and wretchedold man The Homeric echoes of ὄνθος are suggestive There are only three occur-rences of the term in the Iliad all in the context of the footrace between Odys-seus Ajax and Antilochus during the funeral games in honour of PatroclusThere Athena wanting to help Odysseus intervenes and makes Ajax slip onthe dung of the sacrificed bulls as he runs The irony is obviousWhile in the Ho-meric passage ὄνθος grants an athletic victory to Odysseus in Troy in the Aeschy-lean play it causes him a totally unheroic and almost ridiculous death The ap-plication of the epic language to describe a reality that opposes the epicgrandeur underscores the distance from the epic world⁵ The process of sepsiscaused by the dung trivialises the herorsquos death yet more

Aeschylusrsquo departure from the Homeric archetype with reference to Odys-seusrsquo death must have resulted in diverse and complex effects On the onehand this is the kind of bridging of the divide between heroic past and contem-porary present which finds expression in a whole range of tragic effects mostnotably but not exclusively anachronism Part of the result is an enhancedsense of the relevance of what happens in the play to the world of the audiencerather than a dramatisation of a closed and distant past At the same time theignominious end reflects and further develops some aspects of Odysseusrsquo tragicprofile as well as making him more ordinary and contemporary it also under-mines his heroic status and undercuts his dignityWe may even have somethingof the belittling of Odysseus later found in Sophoclesrsquo Philoctetes The Aeschy-lean version of the hero should be understood as part of a larger tragic tendencyto underscore the less elevated aspects that surrounded Odysseusrsquo character ex-perience and behaviour from the start and were already magnified in the archaic

Cf Heubeck Hoekstra See Cousin


period⁶ This is not to say that the reduction of Odysseusrsquo heroic status is a dra-matic end in itself As will be noted below it may be a means of exploring largerissues such as the idea of human limitations

a The institutionalisation of necromancy

The proximity of Odysseus to the audience is enhanced by the lsquonormalisationrsquo ofnecromancy This process is mostly achieved through the institutionalisation ofthe practice which distances the episode from the impromptu and mythical na-ture of the Homeric source text and presents us with an Odysseus who now en-gages not in a dangerous and bold mission at the edge of the Ocean but ratherin an officially prescribed ritual within historical and recognisable surroundingsThere exist two indications that point to the institutionalisation of necromancythe locale of the ritual and the introduction of professional practitioners

Let us take the parameter of the locale first The main features of the spotwhere necromancy is performed can be deduced from fragments 273 273aand 276 RFr 273 R

Ἑρμᾶν μὲν πρόγονον τίομεν γένος οἱ περὶ λίμναν

We the folk that dwell around the lake honour Hermes as our ancestor

Fr 273a R

ἄγε νυν ὦ ξεῖνrsquo ἐπὶ ποιοφύτωνἵστω σηκῶν φοβερᾶς λίμναςὑπό τrsquo αὐχένιον λαιμὸν ἀμήσαςτοῦδε σφαγίου ποτὸν ἀψύχοιςαἷμα μεθίει 5δονάκων εἰς βένθος ἀμαυρόνΧθόνα δrsquo ὠγυγίαν ἐπικεκλόμενοςχθόνιόν θrsquo Ἑρμῆν πομπὸν φθιμένωναἰτοῦ χθόνιον Δία νυκτιπόλωνἑσμὸν ἀνεῖναι ποταμοῦ στομάτων 10οὗ τόδrsquo ἀπορρὼξ ἀμέγαρτον ὕδωρκἀχέρνιπτονΣτυγίοις νασμοῖσιν ἀνεῖται

See Stanford ndash cf Deforge n Cousin ndash


Come now stranger stand on the grassyprecincts of the fearful lake andwhen you have cut the throatof this victim let fall the blood for the lifeless onesto drinkinto the dim depths of the reedsInvoking ancient Earthand chthonian Hermes conveyor of the deadimplore chthonian Zeus to send upthe swarm of the night-wanderers from the mouths of the riverthe river whose branch this unenviable waterwhich washes no handis sent forth by the streams of the Styx

Fr 276 R

σταθεροῦ χεύματος

of stagnant current(trans Bardel 2005 with slight adjustments)

The geomorphology and hydrography of the landscape are modeled upon thetopographical instructions of Circe (Od 10513ndash 15)⁷ This is particularly noticea-ble with reference to the dominant role of water which becomes the hallmark ofthis unusual place and evokes the Homeric description of the infernal rivers Aseries of oxymora employed for the description of the setting presage the abnor-mal reversion of the natural order that necromancy inherently involves For in-stance in fr 273a R the notion of fertility denoted by ποιοφύτων σηκῶν is coun-tered by the reeds (δονάκων) that can only be found in marshy stagnant watersand are here closely connected with death and the Underworld⁸ the water a nat-ural source of life-giving and purification is unenviable (ἀμέγαρτον)⁹ andἀχέρνιπτονsup1⁰ namely unsuitable for ritual use and in fr 276 R the lake is descri-bed as a lsquostagnant currentrsquo (σταθεροῦ χεύματος)sup1sup1 combining contradictory qual-

See Ogden a ndash Cousin ndash Compare also σηκός (fr a R) toπέτρη (Od ) In Pythonrsquos Agen the landscape of necromancy seems to be very similar(cf fr Sn κάλαμος fr Sn ἄορνον) Reeds often form part of infernal vegetation cf Polygnotusrsquo painting in Paus Elpenorvase (Boston ARV

) On the vegetation in the Psychagogoi see Cousin τομεγαρτουδωρ emended to ἀμέγαρτον ὕδωρ by Kramer ndash According to the necromantic traditions the lake of Avernus exhaled noxious fumes that kil-led birds See Rusten ndash Ogden cf Paus f Call fr Pf For the meaning of this contradictory phrase see Cousin ndash


ities Also terms that denote death (ἀψύχοις φθιμένων σφαγίου αἷμα) and fear(φοβερά) or belong to the linguistic field of the Underworld (Χθόνα ὠγυγίανχθόνιον χθόνιον Στυγίοις ἀμαυρόν νυκτιπόλων) endow the landscape withstrong infernal connotationssup1sup2

Notwithstanding these numinous elements of otherworldliness and the aw-fulness that the description of the setting involves the Aeschylean Odysseus isunambiguously on the surface The upward movement of the souls (ἀνεῖναι)and the water (ἀνεῖται) cancels the Homeric blurring of necromancy and kataba-sis and locates the activities of the hero in the world of the living removing amodicum of their boldness and dangerousness Also the Aeschylean Odysseusno longer operates ldquooff the maprdquo and outside the world of human experienceas the necromantic incident seems to have been relocated from its literal escha-tological position at the end of the Ocean to a more realistic environment eventhough the place is not explicitly specified This transfer of the Nekyia into his-torical surroundings may also be dictated by the nature of the tragic genre as ittends to favour the unfolding of the action in existing locations In the Aeschy-lean plays in particular the first speaking character reveals the spatial coordi-nates of the plot which even though they are not always familiar to the audi-ence are still geographically identifiablesup1sup3

If the existence of the professional necromancers clearly points to an institu-tionalised framework the lake (frr 273 273a2 R) which constitutes the focalpoint of the ritual gives clues for the identification of the place with a real-life ne-kuomanteion-site Indeed the lake is a distinct topographical trait of two importanthistorical oracles of the dead the Acheron and Avernus nekuomanteiasup1⁴ Each iden-tification has its supporterssup1⁵ but arguing for the former or the latter is I thinkpointlessWhat really matters is the fact that Aeschylus deviates from the Homericexample by locating his Nekyia in a remote albeit historical spot Even if we as-

See Cousin ndash See Ag Ch (corrupted text) Eum Pers ndash PV ndash Supp Th See Ogden a ndash and b ndash Acheron oracle Katsouris n Ogden a b and Cousin Avernus oracle Max Tyr Wilamowitz-Moellendorf n Hart-mann Wikeacuten Phillips Hardie Kramer Gelzer f Rusten f Dunbar HurstKolde For furtherbibliography see Ogden a n A scholium in Ar Ra makes the Chorus inhabitnear the lake Stymphalus in Arcadia where Hermes was widely worshipped Lloyd-Jones and Dover on Ra were convinced by this but Wilamowitz-Moellendorf n rightly rejected it as lsquomodernrsquo Indeed lake Stymphalus is not a nekuomanteion siteand Hermes was not there worshipped as a chthonic deity or as psychopompos Besides thislake could not be reached by ship


sume that by Aeschylusrsquo time the specific nekuomanteion fell into disuse from theaudiencersquos viewpoint it would still form part of their cultural landscape and wouldbe connected with a real-life identifiable and accessible location In such surround-ings the practice loses a great deal of its exceptional character something that cer-tainly pulls Odysseus and his heroic world closer to the audience

Let us now move on to the identity of the Chorus which is an additionalpiece of evidence for the localisation of the ritual at a nekuomanteion-site andits resultant institutionalisation Ancient testimonia support the existence of aresident staff at the oracles of the dead who were often called ψυχαγωγοίsup1⁶while Maximus of Tyre explicitly locates this institutionalised group of professio-nal necromancers at Avernussup1⁷ In the Psychagogoi the title of the play is evident-ly borrowed from the identity of the Chorussup1⁸ One could perhaps argue that theirdesignation as psychagogoi derives from their specific activities in the narrowcontext of the dramatic plot rather than their actual and regular profession Inthis case their instructive role as can be seen in fr 273a Rsup1⁹ would parallelthat of Choephoroi just as the women instruct Electra on how to offer the liba-tions so do the choreutai here guide Odysseus in the process of ghost-raisingHowever fr 273 R suggests that the members of the Chorus actually profess ex-pertise in this ritual practicesup2⁰ This fragment is recited or sung by the Chorusand since it contains a self-introductory statement it must be located nearthe opening of the play perhaps at the beginning of the first stasimonsup2sup1 Itwould seem that the Chorus consists of native people who live by the shoreof the lake and honour Hermes as their ancestor The formal overtones of theverb τίομεν the designation of the group as a lsquoracersquo as well as their self-presen-

See Ogden b ndash Max Tyr cf Ephor FGrH F Plu Mor EndashF According to tradition Italianpsychagogoi were called to Sparta in order to lay the restless soul of Pausanias and release thecity from the plight (see Plu Mor EndashF fr Sandbach) On this episode see Burkert Faraone ndash Ogden a ndash The titles of the Aeschylean plays very often denote the Chorusrsquo identity or performative ac-tivities (eg Choephoroi Eumenides Suppliants Persae) Noteworthy is the fact that fr R belongs to those few examples of tragic verses deliveredin hexameters (see West ) This metrical pattern adds to the formality of the Chorusrsquolanguage but it also points to the subversive attitude of Aeschylus toward Homer epic styleis adopted only to be employed by a Chorus that corresponds to one of the most conspicuousinnovations in the dramatisation of the Homeric Nekyia Besides in ancient accounts ψυχαγωγός the term used to define the identity of the Chorusoften points to a regular and official profession rather than a one-off activity See eg Phryn PS schol in E Alc (Schwartz) Paus See also the oracular tablet from Dodona(Evangelidis no ) lsquoShall we hire Dorios the psychagogos or notrsquo See Mette


tation with reference to Hermes imply that the Chorus is constituted by officialattendants that preside over the operation of the sanctuary which is explicitlymentioned in fr 273a2 R (σηκῶν)

Aeschylus therefore introduces a Chorus of specialised necromancers whoreside in and attend the operation of a lake nekuomanteion possibly located atCumae This choice is not accidental The dramatist could well remain close tothe epic source text by presenting a Chorus of sailors accompanying Odysseusin his necromantic activities However the insertion of professionals reducesthe exotic element and contributes to the construction of less mythic andmore real surroundings The fact that Odysseus now acts under their official au-thority and practical assistance not only distances him from the fairytale worldof the Homeric Nekyia but it also subtracts from him part of his boldness Thiscontrolled and guided performance of the ritual differs from the Homeric versionof the episode in which Odysseus had a leading role There even though he fol-lowed Circersquos instructions he was certainly helpless and unprotected for Circewas physically absent throughout the ritual

It is tempting to suppose that Aeschylus in line with the complex intertex-tuality that he develops with the Homeric text assigns the role of the psychago-goi to the Homeric Cimmerians Just as the Homeric necromancy takes place atthe lsquoland and city of the Cimmeriansrsquo (Od 1115 ff) so its Aeschylean dramatisa-tion is spatially related to this tribe In fact the Chorus represents the native pop-ulation of the place from their viewpoint Odysseus is a stranger (fr 273a1 R ὦξεῖνε) and they call themselves a lsquoracersquo (γένος) In Ephorusrsquo account (4th centuryBC) the mythical Cimmerians are explicitly associated with the lake Avernussup2sup2

but germs of this tradition may be traced back to Sophoclesrsquo time if we assumethat frr 1060 R and 682 N2 belong to the same play The latter refers to an oracleof the dead at Aornos lake probably meaning the lake Avernus and comes ei-ther from Odysseus Acanthoplex or from Euryalussup2sup3 The former preserves thename Κερβέριοι which is in all likelihood an alternative designation of the Cim-merians The association of the Cimmerians with the oracle of the dead at Aver-nus seems reasonable enough in view of the growing tendency to attribute anItalian background to Odysseusrsquo adventures The localisation of the Cimmeriansin Italy turned out to be considerably influential and it might well be the casethat Aeschylus was the first to initiate itsup2⁴ If the tragic Chorus was indeed com-posed of representatives of this race this would lend further support to the al-

See Ephor FGrH F a See Phillips and n See Plin HN Silius Italicus Lactantius Diu Inst Origo Gentis Romanae Lyc [Orph] A ff


ready stated assumption that Aeschylus draws on his epic model with a view tosubverting it The Cimmerians like Odysseus would be displaced into real sur-roundings and their exotic lsquoland and cityrsquo would become identifiable to a spotwhich albeit remote would still be accessible to an ordinary man

b The profile of the dead

The above analysis shows that Aeschylus reworks the theme of Homeric necro-mancy in a variety of ways Inasmuch as he departs from it by imbuing it withrealistic elements he also recalls it by employing some distinctively Homeric fea-tures Aeschylusrsquo debt to Homer is evident also in the profile of the dead TheAeschylean dead are defined as ἄψυχοι In post-Homeric literature the termpsychē acquires an expanded semantic fieldWhile in Homer it denotes the spiritthat abandons the body at death outside the epics it is also loaded with thesense of the Homeric phrēn noos and thymos qualities that refer to the seatof emotions or the emotions themselvessup2⁵ In this vein a post-Homeric terminol-ogy is used to bring to the fore the Homeric concept of the senseless shadowsthat lack φρένες (Od 10494ndash95) and μένος (Od 10521 1129 49 ἀμενηνὰ κάρη-να) Lloyd-Jonesrsquo acute remark that the adjective here contrasts with πάμψυχος inSophoclesrsquo Electra (839ndash40) corroborates this viewsup2⁶ as opposed to Amphiarauswho exceptionally retains his consciousness in Hades the Aeschylean souls arehere deprived of it It is not surprising that ἀψύχοις appears closely connectedwith the motif of blood-drinking (ποτὸν ἀψύχοις)sup2⁷ which itself presupposesthe idea of the witless shadow as in the Homeric Nekyiasup2⁸ the witless deadneed the blood in order to regain their mental faculties However in an episodethat draws so heavily on Homer psychē is expected to retain to some extent itsinitial meaning creating an ostensible and purposeful paradox the same deadthat are mentioned throughout the Homeric Nekyia as ψυχαί are here defined asἄψυχοιsup2⁹ This contradiction which denies the dead the very essence of their ex-istence stresses even more their insubstantiality

The designation of the dead as νυκτίπολοι and the description of their gatheringin terms of a ἑσμός function as additional indications of their weakness Henrichs

See Solmsen ndash Sullivan ndash Bremmer ndash Lloyd-Jones See also Henrichs See Henrichs ndash See Sourvinou-Inwood ndash Ogden a Heath Contrast Bremmer n and Henrichs n who endeavour to provethat the contradiction is only superficial


argues that the adjective νυκτίπολος alludes to the nocturnal activities of the dead inthe terrestrial world and thus illuminates their alternative more active dimensionsup3⁰He bases his assumption on the fact that in its pre-Hellenistic occurrences the termbears Dionysiac ritualistic and mystic connotations that allow its transference fromthe nighttime mystic celebrations to the nocturnal wanderings of the dead in theworld of the living under the guise of dream-apparitionssup3sup1 Although Henrichsrsquo inter-pretation is possible it is more likely that in the framework of the Aeschylean Ne-kyia νυκτίπολοι refers to the inactive wanderers in the sunless and gloomyUnderworldsup3sup2 The term ἑσμός along with the plural of their representation (ἀψύ-χοις φθιμένων νυκτιπόλων) sheds light on another aspect of the witless andweak dead ndash their impersonal collectivitysup3sup3 This recalls the Homeric references tomassive and indiscriminate swarms of ψυχαί that rush toward the blood(Od 10529ndash30 1136ndash37 42ndash43 632ndash33) or are likened to birds (Od 11605ndash06cf S OT 175) and throngs of bats (Od 246ndash9)sup3⁴ In addition given that in AeschylusrsquoSuppliant Women (223ndash24) the term is used to convey the state of the frightened Da-naids it may here qualify the dead as skittish and cowardly This idea is further cor-roborated by the term ἄψυχος as in some contexts psychē can acquire the meaningof couragesup3⁵ Last but not least the emphatic use of the blood sacrifice is consistentwith the concept of the weak and witless dead who need blood to restore their men-tal faculties

The lsquoHomerizedrsquo profile of the dead not only reflects the resourcefulnesswith which Aeschylus interacts with the Homeric text but also shows the flexi-bility with which he refigures the same motif in different plays The dead as de-scribed in the Psychagogoi are far removed from the delineation of Darius theother Aeschylean summoned dead These multiple and insubstantial souls

Henrichs So Rusten n and Henrichs ndash On the association between dreamsand the nether powers see eg Od ndash A Ch ndash ndash Pers ndash SEl ndash E Hec ndash IT ndash TrGF II fr adesp Kn-Sn Ar Ra ndash cf Od ndash (see Van Lieshout ndash Padel ndash) For thedead in dreams see eg Il ndash Pi P ndash A Eum ndash Pers ndash EAlc ndash Hec ndash Cf S OC See Cousin and n On the association of this collectivity with a purposeless and insignificant infernal life seeBremmer cf Henrichs f Rusten ( f) assumes that S fr R (βομβεῖ δὲ νεκρῶν σμῆνος ἔρχεταί τrsquo ἄνω)must have drawn on the Aeschylean perception of the souls On the comparison of the deadto bats bees and birds see Ogden a ndash For the concept of the winged soul see Ver-meule f n On psychē as lsquocouragersquo see eg Ar Eq Th cf E Alc


that seem to be without power have nothing in common with the fearsome andawe-inspiring Darius who commands the stage in the Persians This discrepancybetween two plays composed by the same dramatist not only reflects the diversetreatments to which the necromantic motif can be subjected or the fluidity of itsadjacent eschatology but also shows that there is no single Aeschylean model ofnecromancy the dramatist varies the motif from play to play and manipulates itcreatively to serve his purposes

Concluding remarks

Aeschylus employs the Nekyia a distinctively Homeric episode to achieve an ef-fect which is the opposite of that achieved in the Homeric source text Odysseusthe cleverest of men is met with his limitations and human nature Of course aspointed out above this cannot just be about Odysseus The play touches uponbroader issues whose nature can be guessed at even though we lack the evi-dence to fully support our assumptions The normalisation of Odysseus is per-haps the concomitant of the line the play takes about heroism human potentialand human boldness Aeschylus brings the symbol of ultimate endurance andintelligence closer to the ordinary man and invites us to look at heroism in a dif-ferent way even the greatest have limits This idea is consistent with readings ofmyth in fifth-century tragedy which tend to place the emphasis as much on limitas on potential and achievement In the Sophoclean corpus Oedipus the clever-est of men is unable to escape his destiny in Aeschylusrsquo Myrmidons (fr 132c R)Achilles is threatened with stoning by the army in Euripidesrsquo Medea (1386ndash88)Jason is destined to be killed by part of his ship Similarly the normalisation ofOdysseus in the Psychagogoi probably initiates the audience into the larger ideaof human limits At the same time the Psychagogoi exemplifies the resourceful-ness of Aeschylusrsquo interplay with and manipulation of the Homeric source text


Daniel J Jacob

Symbolic Remarriage in Homerrsquos Odysseyand Euripidesrsquo Alcestis

The reunion between Admetus and Alcestis at the end of Euripidesrsquo Alcestis hasoften been described as a symbolic remarriage of the royal couple of Pheressup1

Capitalizing on this view Halleran (1988) maintained that the text offers severalclues of this symbolic matrimoniumsup2 since it suggests the ritual in which a fa-ther in legal possession of the bride delivers her to the groom (ἐγγύη) alongwith the ἀνακαλυπτήρια that is the unveiling of the bride in front of thegroom and the guests This view is further supported by the fact that the unveil-ing was normally accompanied by the bridersquos silence as I have suggestedelsewheresup3 which is in agreement with the heroinersquos silence at the end of theplay although the cause of the silence there is as we shall see differentEven if we are not prepared however to accept Halleranrsquos view there is a strongsense of the beginning of a new life that is a symbolic remarriage at the end ofthe play In what follows I shall try to show that this marriage creatively alludesto Homerrsquos Odyssey which is not in itself surprising if we consider that Euripi-des like so many other poets is deeply indebted to Homer⁴

Alcestis can be characterized as a play of nostos⁵ in that it displays the typ-ical phases of plays about a characterrsquos return and reintegration into the familyseparation hardshipstruggle recognition reunion⁶ In the play under discus-sion of course the type of nostos in question is singular and strange namely

A version of this paper was delivered at the international conference on the Homeric Recep-tions in Literature and the Performing Arts organized by the History Department of the IonianUniversity 7ndash9 November 2011 My warmest thanks go to the organizers of the conferenceAthanasios Efstathiou and Ioanna Karamanou for the invitation to David Konstan for hisgenerous comments in reading a draft of this paper and to Antonios Rengakos Stavros Fran-goulidis Yannis Tzifopoulos and Evangelos Karakasis for their valuable help For relevant bibliography see Halleran n The opposite view was formulated by Telograve ndash as well as Parker and Seeck in the relevant comments of their respective commentaries on the play See Jacob a See Lange Lange demonstrated the intertextual debts of Euripides to Homer in the so-called plays of nostos In pp ff he parallels Alcestisrsquo death with the demise of Patroclus andHector in the Iliad but he does not discuss at all the theme of the symbolic marriage in the play On the topic apart from the aforementioned book by Lange see the monograph by Alexopou-lou Cf Lange and Houmllscher

the heroinersquos return from Hades and her restoration to the palace Its strangenessis also underlined by an additional feature the fact that the separation is notlong-lasting as happens in analogous cases As a result the recognition doesnot require specific signs (γνωρίσματα) to confirm the identity of the personwho returns This is due also to the fact that according to the well-known dra-matic convention the play maintains the unity of time that is the confinementof the action within a single day which is that of the queenrsquos death and burial⁷The recognition takes place at once and it is superfluous to pose over subtlequestions as to why Admetus did not recognize his veil-wearing wife by herclothes⁸ and the jewelry with which he had buried her earlier on The king ofcourse realized that the figure and the age of the stranger matched his wifersquosappearance ndashand this accounts for his persistent refusal to receive her to his pal-acendash but understandably enough he fails to perceive that the dead woman hascome back to life Admetus in his lament had already stressed that the presenceoutside the palace of a company of women having the same age as Alcestis willcause him sorrow (951ndash52) let alone I might add the continuous presence inthe palace of a woman so similar to his wife

The stranger offers Heracles the chance to organize a well-intentioned gameat his hostrsquos expense In this way the saviour of Alcestis exacts his revenge con-cealing the identity of the veiled woman just as Admetus had earlier concealedthe identity of the dead person he was mourning in the palace⁹ each time bymeans of ambiguous phrases This game results to a dramatic retardation thatis necessary for the king to adjust to the presence of the stranger During the en-tire conversation with Admetus Heracles ambiguously argues that he wasawarded the woman as a prize in an athletic match a fact which only partly cor-responds to the truth as it was not a public and common athletic contest butrather a personal struggle with Thanatossup1⁰ In addition he refers to a new mar-riage though implying of course the reunion of Admetus with Alcestissup1sup1 Theking is certainly not able to decode the ambiguous words of his friend and ter-

In the Helen where the separation lasts for years ndash years have passed since the breakout ofthe Trojan warndash the meeting recognition and escape of the spouses take place on the crucial dayof the impending wedding of the heroine to Theoclymenus In the Odyssey Arete understands that the clothes Odysseus wears must have been given tohim by Nausicaa But there the clothes perform a different function Cf Houmllscher For this mirror scene see Jacob Here too one should not ask logical questions for example why the guest Heracles sud-denly decided to abandon the palace and what urged him to take part in athletic games Inany case Admetus does not doubt or regard his friendrsquos words as impossible Halleran ( ) points out that Heracles repeatedly uses the word γυνή in both itsmeanings woman and wife

344 Daniel J Jacob

rified he copes with obviously ironically the eventual settlement of the strangerin the marital room which would actually amount to a second marriage (1055)

However it turns out that this remarriage involves the same woman just asin the case of the Helen where Menelaus meets the very same Helen who re-mained pure in Egypt The cause is a strange phenomenon Hera created anidol or image of Helen which Paris fetched to Troy The stunning similarity ofthe two women initially causes comic awkwardnesssup1sup2 as Menelaus recognizeshis real wife only when it is announced to him that lsquoHelenrsquo who had been carriedfrom Troy was an idol and had dematerialized in the air Here the play betweentruth and appearances reaches the limits of absurdity as it leads the spectator toconclude that a ten-year war with thousands of victims on both sides was con-ducted for the recovery of a non-existent person In any case a death occurs inthe Helen as well the difference being that it is only verbal as in the case also ofOrestes in Aeschylusrsquo Choephori and in Sophoclesrsquo Electra In the eve of her un-wanted marriage to Theoclymenus the heroine announces the death of her firsthusband and expresses her wish to pay him the last tribute In this manner shemanages to escape with Menelaus on the ship assigned to her for the ceremonyThe so-called death leads to a reversal the reunion of the spouses in a symbolicremarriagesup1sup3 Another reunion not of spouses but of a brother and a sister oc-curs in the Iphigenia in Tauris where the Greeks believe that Iphigenia is dead(IT 8) while she is still living in Tauris All three plays are conditioned by a com-mon theme the miracle return from Hades duplication of a person mysteriousdisappearance of the victim from the altar

But let us return to the Alcestis An immediate meeting of Admetus with hisresurrected wife would not only cause him surprise but also great confusionsince Heracles would not have had enough time to give his friend the necessaryexplanations That an immediate recognition of the dead Alcestis would be psy-chologically damaging is further evidenced by the meeting of Odysseus andLaertes in the Odyssey (24224 ff) Odysseus finds his father alone in the gardenDevastated by years of suffering the old man is unwashed and poorly-dressedas his son observes a sign that he has given up the daily care of himself becauseit no longer affords him any pleasure It is noteworthy that Laertesrsquo appearance istransformed after the recognition of his son The hero oscillates between twoplans as the poet explicitly indicates (24235 ff) either to immediately disclose

See Seidensticker ff See Hel for the renewed ὑμέναιον It is worth noting that Heraclesrsquo expected reunionwith Deianeira in their marital home (S Tr ) is joyfully received by the Chorus but as isoften happens in Sophoclean drama it will be annulled by the death of the protagonists (seeDavies ) For a conflation of marital and funeral customs see Rehm


his identity to his father or to test his fatherrsquos reactions first He goes for the sec-ond plan apparently out of fear that a sudden recognition might have dangerouspsychological repercussionssup1⁴ Therefore he gives a false genealogy and originand claims to have offered hospitality to Odysseus some time ago in order to fa-miliarize the old man with the idea of his sonrsquos return the fact that Odysseus isstill alive is a positive indication The old man bursts into tears At this pointOdysseus yields to the sight of his devastated father and decides to disclosehis identity The old man asks for incontestable signs confirming the strangerrsquosclaim Odysseus shows him the scarsup1⁵ a sign also used in previous recognitionsin the Odyssey and additionally mentions the kind and the exact number oftrees Laertes offered him when Odysseus was a child Hence the moving recog-nition of father and son takes place

A further example is offered by Charitonrsquos Callirhoe (31) a novel with whichI am dealing below Dionysius convinced that Callirhoe has turned down hismarriage proposal decides to starve himself to death Plangon however sud-denly announces to him that Callirhoe has accepted his proposal Overwhelmedby the good news he falls senseless to the ground and the servants believe thathe is dead Odysseus knows from the beginning whom he is talking with as isalso the case with Heracles and the spectator who are both aware of the strang-errsquos identity All can see that a certain period of time has to lapse so that unwel-come side-effects resulting from unexpected joy are avoided Coming back fromHades is an extremely rare event The Chorus had already underlined that such areturn was impossible νῦν δὲ βίου τίνrsquo ἔτrsquo ἐλπίδα προσδέχωμαι (130) οὐδrsquo ἔστικακῶν ἄκος οὐδέν (135)sup1⁶ From this perspective the heroinersquos silence is also jus-tified Adjustment to the world of the living requires time and above all a rite ofpassage which even if not foreseen is completely understandable and expect-ed Certainly the playwright was not interested in describing this ritual more pre-cisely and for this reason postpones it for three days a number with obvious re-ligious connotations It is also worth mentioning that Heracles speaks ofἀφαγνισμός (1146) while Thanatos had used the verb ἁγνίζω indicating that Al-cestis definitely belongs to Hades (76)sup1⁷ I believe that views like those of Naiden

See scholia Q on line (Dindorf) ἵνα μὴ τῆι αἰφνιδίωι χαρᾶι ἀποψύξει ὁ γέρων ὥσπερκαὶ ὁ κύων ἀπώλετο Compare Heubeck Danek ff Woumlhrle ndash For the scar see Houmllscher ff The ghost of Darius in Aeschylusrsquo Persians points out how rarely the Underworld gods con-sent to a dead personrsquos exit from Hades (ndash) See Naiden n Halleran found a further correspondence between Alces-tisrsquo farewell to life and her return to it the use of antilabe with lexical similarities Objectionsagainst Halleran were raised by Telograve ndash

346 Daniel J Jacob

(1998) eliminate the autonomy of poetry and undermine its lsquologicrsquo because theyattempt to define with precision the nature of the resurrected Alcestis that iswhether she is a ghost or a body still dead able to move but not yet able tospeakWhat matters is the fact that the heroine returns to life and not the actualcircumstances of this return namely how Heracles manages to free the queenrsquosshadow from the arms of Thanatos and bring it back to the dead body lying inthe grave Similar realistic problems concern neither the poet nor the spectatorAlcestisrsquo silence is therefore imposed by religionsup1⁸ and is complementary to thebridersquos silence during the ἀνακαλυπτήριa as I mentioned above The view thatAlcestisrsquo silence expressly betrays her disappointment coldness and probablyher anger also against her selfish husband is groundless The interpretation isin opposition to the heroinersquos personal and explicit statement that she sacrificedherself because she could not continue her life with their orphan children onher own in separation from Admetus forever (287ndash88) Of course a few linesearlier (285ndash86) she had claimed that she could remarry the husband of herchoice who would not only be well-off but would also have royal status It isapparent however that this is an ad hoc statement to stress the magnitude ofher sacrifice because the law at least in fifth-century Athens did not providefor a choice of husband by a widow After all it would be contradictory onher part to impose a stepfather on her children once she has demanded that Ad-metus should avoid imposing a stepmother on them (305) There is therefore noindication that Alcestisrsquo attitude to her husband has changed let alone that ithas turned negative

Heracles as already observed recovers Alcestis after a struggle with Thana-tos of a kind which as a rule leads to the acquisition of a wife or her retrieval incase of separation the difference being that in our play the recovered wife is as-signed to her husband by the winner in return for his generosity and hospitalityThis development is necessitated by the plot as Heracles was the only onesup1⁹ who

See Trammel and Betts Compare Riemer ndash This unique event evokes the archery contest in book of the Odyssey where as we shallsee Odysseus is the only one able to stretch the bow (compare Houmllscher ) In both casesthe result is the same the reunion of the couple Lesky ( ) cites the view of Maas only toreject it ( n ) according to Maas the invincible Admetus as the etymology of hisname suggests fights with Thanatos and thus secures his wife However such a version wouldrun counter to the plot of the drama On the husbandrsquos combat with his rival see Houmllscher and Admetus of course wishes he had Orpheusrsquo melodic voice in order to descend toHades and bring his wife back to life ( ff) nonetheless his unfulfilled wish stresses the in-feasibility of the undertaking Assael claims that the play includes references to mysticrites In my opinion the characterization of Alcestis as μάκαιρα δαίμων () might refer tothe apotheosis of the dead known from later golden tablets See Jacob b


had the ability to descend to Hades and return alive ndashhe is to repeat this achieve-ment after the accomplishment of his last deed carrying Cerberusrsquo back up tothe earth An example of a similar recovery on the husbandrsquos part is offeredin Menelausrsquo conflict with the Egyptians on the ship at the moment of the escape(Hel 1592 ff) the hero had previously expressed his wish to fight with Theocly-menus (843ndash50) but his duel is cancelled after the plot against the Egyptianking has been planned

Two instances of lsquowife-acquisitionrsquo after a struggle are cited below They de-viate from the classical procedure in which the bridersquos father invites the suitorsto perform a feat or solve a difficult riddle in order to be given her hand becausemarriage is by no means the initial goal of the deedssup2⁰ The first comes up asearly as in book 6 of the Iliad In the belief that Bellerophon has tried to rapehis wife Anteia Proetus commissions a relative of his to kill the presumed cul-prit (160 ff) Proetusrsquo father-in-law wishing to avoid defiling his hands withhuman blood orders Bellerophon to murder the Chimaera believing that this at-tempt will cost Bellerophon his life However he kills the Chimaera and success-fully performs further exploits such as his battle with the Solymoi the Amazonsand finally the elite Lycians who had ambushed him Then the king of the Ly-cians convinced of the herorsquos innocence gives him his daughter as a wife alongwith half of his kingdom In other instances a successful outcome has tragicconsequences In the prologue of Euripidesrsquo Phoenissae Jocasta informs usthat she has been given to Oedipus as a wife along with the kingdom becausehe was the only one who was able to solve the enigma of the Sphinx and freeThebes from her predations (50 ff)

In my opinion the case of Alcestis directly alludes to the archery contest inthe Odyssey Penelope postpones an undesirable marriage with one of the suitorsfor quite a long time by using various tricks After her delaying tactics are re-vealed she is obliged to choose a second husband For this purpose she sug-gests upon Athenarsquos advice that the suitors perform a deed entirely compatiblewith the occasion to stretch Odysseusrsquo bow and make the arrow pass throughtwelve axes (211 ff) Penelope states that even if Odysseus disguised as a beg-gar manages to stretch the bow she is not going to marry him (21310ff) thusnullifying the deeper narrative reason for this contest in advance The ironic cor-

On the motif in question and its use in the Odyssey see Krischer Krischer conclusivelyremarks that it is not about a simple archery contest it is instead about a concrete attempt of thesuitors to stretch Odysseusrsquo bow so that a suitor having a potential equivalent to that of themissing hero would be chosen Accordingly the event betrays psychological motives Themain deviation of course lies in the fact that the contest is not organized by the bridersquos fatherbut by the bride herself who is about to have a second marriage

348 Daniel J Jacob

respondences with the Alcestis are obvious the disguised Odysseus correspondsto the veiled heroine and Penelopersquos rejection of Odysseus the beggar has itsparallel in Admetusrsquo refusal to welcome the unknown woman Both situationsresult in a happy reunion the unknown figure to be rejected is revealed to beno other than the spouse The reunion in epos is postponed because of the inter-vening narrative of mnēstērophonia whereas in the Alcestis the reunion of thecouple is immediately achieved Heraclesrsquo struggle with Death underlies theshort and vague comment that he participated in an athletic contest and isnot described in an elaborate messengerrsquos rhēsis due to Heraclesrsquo well inten-tioned deception of Admetus As in the Odyssey in the Helen too the heroineis on the threshold of a new and unpleasant marriage cancelled at the last mi-nute when the separated spouses are reunited

In the Alcestis the new marriage of which Heracles speaks persistently andironically eventually proves to be identical with the first one in contrast withboth previously cited instances What constitutes a real threat in the Odysseyand the Helen is in the Alcestis only a seeming danger The reason is that the pro-posal for a new marriage comes from a trusted friend of Admetus who is by nomeans willing to harm his companion Heracles is one of those loyal friends alsoknown from other Euripidean plays Pylades in the Electra and above all in theOrestes and in the IT as well as Theseus in the Heracles At this point it is worthnoting that the friend either accompanies his comrade or appears as the crisisreaches its peak In the Alcestis in particular the guest Heracles learns thetruth about the identity of the dead woman too late but his intervention turnsout to be beneficial Thus what seems to be a violation of Admetusrsquo promiseto his wife namely that he will never remarry ends up as a happy reunionwith her Furthermore one more characteristic reversal is to be observed theperson who is subjected to Heraclesrsquo noble yet at the same time ironical pressureto remarry is this time not a woman (Penelope Helen) but a man who acceptsthe proposal and is reunited with his wife

In the Alcestis therefore the typical phases of nostos are present separa-tion more precisely the final separation due to death trial (here representedby Heraclesrsquo struggle with Thanatos for the reasons I mentioned above) recog-nition and reunion This thematic sequence recurs later in the Hellenisticnovel A typical example appears in an early example namely CharitonrsquosCallirhoesup2sup1 which presents some notable similarities with the Alcestissup2sup2 Chaereas

See Reardon A list of parallels between Chariton and other Greek novels is offered byGarin ndash


On Callirhoersquos relation to tragedy see in general Trzskoma n with earlier bib-liography On Callirhoersquos relation to the Alcestis see Alvares ndash Alvares points outtwo similarities between the novel and the drama Admetusrsquo wish that the dead Alcestis mayappear in his dreams (Alc ndash compare Callirhoe ) and Alcestisrsquo wish that Admetusshould not impose a stepmother on their children (Alc ff compare Callirhoe ) The lattersimilarity had already been observed by Hirschberger ( ) but like Alvares she too isunaware of the fact that the concern of the heroine as is also the case with Alcestis in her pray-ers to Hestia ( ff) is her childrsquos marriage and what is more that in the novel the bride isknown in advance it is the orphan daughter of Dionysius I also do not believe that Hirschberger( ) is right in maintaining that Hermocratesrsquo claim concerning his daughterrsquos wish thatChaereas may outlive her () alludes to the Alcestis because the issue is not her sacrifice forher husband but the longevity of Chaereas after her death as well Her view ( ) that theChorus refers to the means of Admetusrsquo suicide (ndash) is also groundless The Chorus comesto realize that the situation is so desperate that it can only be cured by suicide This realizationhowever which also occurs in other dramas as a rhetorical way to describe despair is not direct-ly associated with Admetus On the contrary Hirschberger correctly believes ( ) thatPheresrsquo accusation that Admetus killed his wife () is repeated in Dionysiusrsquo allegationagainst Chaereas (Callirhoe ) as well as that the beautiful woman in Arados can makeup for the loss of Callirhoe just as a new marriage can console Admetus ( compare Cal-lirhoe ) Finally Hirschberger ( ) correctly points out that the veiled strangerChaereas meets in Arados (ndash) who upsets him because of her similarity with Callirhoerefers to the veiled Alcestis at the end of the play (ndash) Of course we must note that Cal-lirhoe in unescorted and alive and it is she who recognizes Chaereas by his voice and accord-ingly reveals her identity In any case it is thanks to this strange ἀνακαλυπτήρια that the reunionof the separated spouses is attained in the novel as well However I believe that further simi-larities exist Callirhoersquos assumption that the gods of the Underworld are summoning herwhen she regains her senses in the grave () evokes the hallucinations which the dying her-oine experiences in the drama (Alc ff) In after the unexpected meeting of Chaereasand Callirhoe in the court the heroine wonders whether what she saw was simply the ghostof Chaereas recalled by some Persian magus Admetus also similarly wonders about Alcestisrsquoreturn to life (Alc ndash) In contrast however to the silent Alcestis Chaereas not onlyspeaks but is also aware of the relevant facts It is notable that Dionysius even after receivingCallirhoersquos letter still believes that the child is his as also happens with Xuthus in Euripidesrsquo Ion(see Ruiz-Montero ) Two further yet stereotyped passages may also be informed by theAlcestisWhen blaming Polycharmus for preventing him from killing himself during Callirhoersquosburial () Chaereas is reminiscent of Admetus accusing the Chorus of not letting him fall intohis wifersquos grave ( ff) After Callirhoe and Chaereas have fled to Syracuse Artaxerxes announ-ces that he is not able to give him Callirhoe although he wants to and therefore assigns himpower over Ionia () Heracles also appeals to the same inability but ironically the veiled Al-cestis is by his side ( ff) The similarities between Callirhoe and the Alcestis lead to the hy-pothesis which however cannot be elaborated in the present paper that the change from thepainful events in the first books of the novel to the happy endwhich is foretold at the beginningof book draws its origin from the Euripidean play The difference of course is due to the factthat in the Alcestis Apollo prophesies the rescue of the heroine as early as in the prologuewhereas in the novel the hardships of the protagonists constitute simple fiction For the relationof Chariton to theatre see Tilg ndash Tilg ( ) describes Chariton as a prisoner

350 Daniel J Jacob

and Callirhoe get married out of mutual love at first sight Chaereas falls victimof an intrigue of his wifersquos former suitors and thinks that Challirhoe is cheatingon him Out of jealousy he kicks the pregnant Callirhoesup2sup3 and she loses hersenses Believing her to be dead Chaereas lays Callirhoe to rest but the heroineregains her senses in the tomb and is then abducted by grave-robber pirates Thiscauses her separation from her husband her being sold as a slave to Dionysiusand her remarriage to him which results in the birth of Chaereasrsquo childWhen hefinds out that Callirhoe is alive Chaereas commits himself to the quest for herHe arrives at Miletus and is close to discovering her but his triremes are seton fire and he himself is captured and sold as a slave to Mithridates the satrapof Caria Callirhoe is informed of his arrival but disinformation makes her be-lieve that Chaereas and his comrades have been killed so she builds a cenotaphin his honour Mithridates is accused of adultery by Dionysius as he believesthat Chaereasrsquo letter to Callirhoe which arrived from Caria is fake and betraysthe satraprsquos own erotic interest in Callirhoe In the trial in front of the Greatking Artaxerxes Mithridates brings along Chaereas who is still alive andthus he is found not guilty The spouses finally meet each other during thetrial but their reunion is postponedWhile Artaxerxes sets a new trial date to de-cide to which of the husbands he will adjudge Callirhoe a mutiny of the Egyp-tians from Persia breaks out and Chaereas joins them as an admiral and crushesthe Persian fleet He gains possession of the island Arados where Artaxerxes hasleft the women and children There unexpectedly he comes across Callirhoe andthey happily return to Syracuse

This is not the place to discuss the problematic hermeneutics that the plot ofthis novel presents I merely limit myself to those elements which suggest vari-ous analogues between the novel and drama in general and therefore constitutethe starting point for any interpretative approach of this novel(i) The various hardships the couple goes through are due to Aphroditersquos anger

at Chaereas for abusing his wife which is congruent with the notion of di-vine wrath triggering a tragic development (cf for instance EuripidesrsquoHippolytus)sup2⁴ After the repeated predicaments of the couple have assuagedthe anger of the goddess the spouses are reunited This means that Callir-

of prose Personally I would argue that just as Isocratesrsquo encomiasticrhetorical speeches areprose equivalents to Pindaric epinician poetry Charitonrsquos novel in a similar manner may beviewed as a prose equivalent to Euripidean drama From this perspective it is not coincidentalthat Tilg often characterizes Callirhoe as tragicomedy ( ) a term which definesEuripidean plays closing with a happy ending For historical parallels of cruel conduct see Tilg See the passages collected by Helms ndash


hoersquos marriage to Dionysius must also be dealt with from this perspectivenamely as part of Chaereasrsquo punishment and not as Callirhoersquos adulterylikewise Odysseusrsquo seven-year sojourn with Calypso is not assessed nega-tively since the hero like Callirhoe has the constant painful and ferventwish for nostos

(ii) Callirhoe is the central figure of the novel and as Helen in the homonymousEuripidean playsup2⁵ she blames her beauty for making her the object of desireof many important figures including the Great king

(iii) Finally Polycharmus is Chaereasrsquo friend faithful and inseparable to death(an exact equivalent to Pylades who accompanies Orestes to the exotic landof Taurians) and will marry his friendrsquos sister (88) just as Pylades willmarry Electrasup2⁶

Certainly the comparison of the novel with drama does not indicate a direct de-pendence the birth of the Hellenistic novel is an extremely complex phenomen-on coming into existence via various sources not always exclusively Greek ac-cording to some scholarssup2⁷ and presenting multiple combinations I am simplypointing to the use of common story-patterns with intertextual references to trag-edy and other earlier literary texts including the so-called tragic historiographyand the biographical traditionsup2⁸ There is of course no doubt that the novel hasmore realistic antecedents than tragic theatre That is why the heroine does notdie but she is simply placed senseless in the grave It is thus characteristic thatlsquorationalrsquo critics of Euripides such as AW Verrallsup2⁹ surmised that no real deathoccurs in the Alcestis either In the case under discussion however one should

For bibliography on Callirhoe and Helen see Trzaskoma n Cf E El and Or ndash It is noteworthy that both Helms and Billault intheir specialized studies on the characters of the novel leave out Polycharmusrsquo characterizationalbeit without justification I believe that Polycharmus is Chaereasrsquo alter ego insomuch as herepresents his friendrsquos innermost thoughts functioning in fact as his extension For examplewhen claiming that the sacrifice of their lives on account of their siding with the Egyptian rebelsagainst Artaxerxes is preferable to Chaereasrsquo suicide without a tangible result Polycharmusbrings to mind Pyladesrsquo suggestion to Orestes namely to lose their lives after having murderedHelen (Or ff) Surely Chaereas himself could have had this very thought In other wordsPolycharmus like Pylades in the play (cf especially Ch ndash where Pylades silent through-out the play utters the crucial three lines encouraging his friend to commit matricide) consti-tutes the outward expression of Chaereasrsquo inner world a fact that renders unnecessary Polychar-musrsquo characterization as an independent person See for instance Whitmarsh On this see Ruiz-Montero ndash (especially for Euripidean drama) Verrall ndash

352 Daniel J Jacob

consider both the fairy-tale origin of the plot of the drama and its divine direc-tion evoking the Ion and the Helen in that the homonymous heroes are alsounder the invisible protection of the gods

From this perspective one is justified I believe in maintaining that Euripi-des did have in mind the Odyssean remarriage yet he developed it with notabledeviations Alcestis settles again in the palace as queen after coming back fromHades which is the place also lsquovisitedrsquo by Odysseus before his nostos withouthowever losing his life This conclusion in conjunction with a variety of altera-tions pointed out in the case of the aforementioned tragedies (belonging accord-ing to Lange to the plays of nostos lsquoconversingrsquo with the Odyssey) proves withall the clarity one might desire how flexible and multivalent the story-patternsare (in this case the nostos theme) or more precisely how flexible and multiva-lent the various subtextual basic thematic units are (here separation hardshipstruggle recognition reunion) which interconnect and add up forming a storycharacterized by a concrete functional and architecturally structured arrange-ment and specific content Despite the demonstrable intertextual relationsthere is no slavish imitation here It is more like a palimpsest in which partsof the earlier text may be read through the overwritten text In particular theway the separation is brought about the beneficial intervention and struggleof the humans (which requires as a rule the assistance of the gods) the kindof struggle and the type of opponent the time of and the means used for the re-unionndash all these elements vary creating multivalent and in some cases unex-pected relations More precisely the Alcestis includes(i) Reversals a) a new marriage is proposed for a man and not a woman b) the

victor of the contest is not wedded to the woman functioning as his prizebut gives her back to her husband who is also his friend

(ii) The second marriage is identical to the first not a union with an unwelcomeperson that is finally avoided

(iii) The superhuman nature of the rivals the contest of the semi-god Heracleswith a supernatural figure Thanatos

(iv) Nostos a return from the world of the dead not from a place on earth

In conclusion Euripides in the Alcestis refigured the reunion of Odysseus andPenelope in the Odyssey which plays an archetypal role in similar instancesthen again the fairy-tale prehistory of the play on the one hand and the flexibledynamics of the nostos story-pattern on the other contributed to the literaryprocesses shaping the transformation of the epic source text into dramatic plot


Ioanna Karamanou

Euripidesrsquo lsquoTrojan Trilogyrsquo andthe Reception of the Epic Tradition

In 415 BC Euripides produced the Alexandros Palamedes and Trojan Women fol-lowed by the satyr-play Sisyphossup1 All three tragedies draw on the Trojan myth dis-play unity of locale with Troy as the place of action and share dominant themesconcepts and dramatic characters Consequently scholarly consensus from GilbertMurray till now including the influential monograph by Ruth Scodel regards thisEuripidean production as presenting the features of a lsquoconnected trilogyrsquosup2 My pur-pose is firstly to contribute to the argumentation in favour of the thematic and ideo-logical connection of these plays which I shall argue is of a different nature thanthat of Aeschylean trilogies (it is for this reason that I shall be using the term lsquoTrojantrilogyrsquo in inverted commas) Secondly I shall explore the generic transformation ofthe epic material into tragedy in the light of fifth-century intellectual and ideologicalcontexts which could yield insight into the cultural processes filtering the Euripi-dean reworking of the Homeric source textsup3

The Alexandros treats the nostos of the ill-omened exposed baby Alexan-dros Paris to the palace of Troy following his athletic triumph in the funeralgames held in his memory a failed murder-attack against him by his mother He-cabe in ignorance of his true identity and a speech of prophetic frenzy by Cas-sandra foretelling the future disaster of Troy and of Priamrsquos royal oikos The sec-ond tragedy the Palamedes presents the victimization of the homonymous heroby Odysseus at Troy Palamedesrsquo trial before Agamemnon as a judge and his sub-

Schol Ar Vesp b (Koster) Ael VH Murray ndash and ndash (cf earlier Schoumlll ff conjecturing thatthis was a firmly connected trilogy Krausse ndash Wilamowitz

ndash)Schmid Staumlhlin ndash Menegazzi ndash Pertusi ndash Friedrich ndash Mason ndash Scarcella ndash Webster ndash Wilson ndash Stoumlssl II ndash ndash Lee x-xiv Scodel ndash Jar-kho ndash Barlow ndash Sopina ndash Ritooacutek ndash Hose ndash Kovacs ndash Falcetto ndash (with rich bibliography on thismatter) Cropp ndash Sansone ndash Di Giuseppe ndash Cf the scep-ticism expressed in Planck ndash Koniaris ndash Conacher ndash On the investigation of contexts as a fundamental concept of classical reception theory seeMartindale ndash Hardwick esp ndash ndash Hardwick Stray ndashsee further lsquoIntroductionrsquo (this volume)

sequent unjust condemnation to death⁴ The Trojan Women concludes the TrojanWar by presenting its repercussions from the side of the defeated and in partic-ular of the Trojan womenfolk

The first obvious connecting link between these three tragedies is the unityof locale with Troy as the place of action Moreover the third tragedy of this pro-duction the Trojan Women contains scenes reflecting and recalling earlierevents from the previous plays following the technique of the lsquomirror scenesrsquoof Aeschylean trilogies⁵

A striking mirror scene aiming at illustrating the antithesis before and afterthe reversal of fortune for Troy is the Cassandra episode in Tr 308ndash461 whichreflects Cassandrarsquos scene of prophetic frenzy in the Alexandros (frr 62endashhK⁶) Her prophecies in the Trojan Women involve an inversion of her earlier fore-tellings in the Alexandros in that in the latter she foretells disaster out of pros-perity while in the former she prophesies victory out of defeat⁷ The ironic an-tithesis between seeming and being is clear in both cases and Euripidesseems to be exploiting Cassandra and the implications of her prophecies (seem-ingly unbelievable albeit true) as a means of highlighting this very contrast Inboth cases her prophetic madness is described as baccheia (Tr 307 341 348ndash49366ndash67 408 414ndash 15 Alexandros fr 62e K)⁸ I would note that this term seems tobe particularly nuanced it not only alludes to bacchic frenzy but also to the col-lective character of bacchic cult not least because Cassandrarsquos prophecies affectthe whole Trojan community⁹ Apart from the visual and thematic links betweenthe two scenes already noted by Ruth Scodelsup1⁰ it should be added that Cassand-rarsquos virginal modesty in the Alexandros as expressed in fr 1733 J of EnniusrsquoAlexander which was evidently modelled upon the homonymous Euripidean

On the plot of the Alexandros see the hypothesis preserved in POxy ndash On the Pal-amedes see schol E Or (Schwartz) Hyg fab [Apollod] Epit On this Aeschylean technique see Taplin ndash ndash and on its exploitation inEuripidean drama see Strohm ndash Mastronarde ndash Burnett ndash ndash n ndash Dingel ndash Steidle ndash Haller-an ndash The abbreviation K stands for the numbering of Euripidean fragments in Kannicht Scodel Webster ndash See also Mazzoldi ndash Croally ndash Mossman ndash Gartziou-Tatti ndash See Scodel ndash Karamanou ndash On the communal dimension of bacchic rites see for instance Segal f ndashndash Guettel-Cole ndash Henrichs ndash See Scodel


playsup1sup1 provides an ironic antithesis to her imminent status as Agamemnonrsquos mis-tress in Tr 310 ff Moreover the torch imagery foreboding the Trojan disaster inher prophecies in the Alexandros (Ennius Alexander fr 1741ndash42 J) is employedantithetically in the third tragedy of this production to allude to the weddingtorch as a means of her avenging the injustice done to herself her family andTroy (Tr 308ndash325 353ndash364)

Hecabersquos ritual lamentation for Astyanax in Tr 1156ndash 1255 seems to recall apossible earlier ritual lamentation for the exposed baby Alexandros at the begin-ning of the homonymous play as I have argued in a publicationsup1sup2 More specif-ically fr 46a col ii K of the Alexandros contains the choral cry ἒ ἔ (l 41) as wellas a reference to γόοι (l 35 lsquogrieving criesrsquo) which are typical of ritual lamenta-tions revolving around a herorsquos death This scene is consistent with the testimonyof the hypothesis (hyp Alexandros POxy 3650 col i 8ndash 10) referring to He-cabersquos mourning for the apparent loss of her baby and with the consolation ad-dressed to her by the Chorus-leader (frr 44ndash46 K) earlier in the play According-ly the possible lament for the seemingly dead baby boy in the Alexandros couldbe interestingly mirrored in the actual funeral of Hecabersquos grandchild in the thirdtragedy of the lsquoTrojan trilogyrsquo ironically enough the fate of Astyanax is sealedwith Alexandrosrsquo survival

In addition the indirect evidence for the Alexandros (Hyginus fab 91 in con-junction with a group of Etruscan mirror-back relief-representations dated to thefourth and third century BC LIMC I lsquoAlexandrosrsquo figg 21ndash23) suggests thatAlexandros sought refuge at an altar to escape the attack against him organizedby Hecabe with the assistance of her son Deiphobus in ignorance of his trueidentitysup1sup3 Hyginus (fab 91) mentions that this was the altar of Zeus HerkeiosThis detail recurs only in a Coptic textile medallion (Hermitage Museum invnr 11507) which is dated to the fifth century ADsup1⁴ and could have either beenmodelled upon an earlier (and now lost) artistic representation or may havedrawn on an intermediary literary work such as Hyginusrsquo handbook whichwas a common source for mythological lore in late antiquity It is worth bearing

On Enniusrsquo use of the Euripidean Alexandros as a source text see Snell Jocelyn Timpanaro ndash Jouan van Looy ff Skutsch CollardCropp Gibert Collard Cropp I Di Giuseppe ndash The abbrevia-tion J refers to the numbering of Enniusrsquo fragments in Jocelyn Karamanou ndash On the plotting scene between Hecabe and Deiphobus (fr d ndash K) see Huys ndash For more detail on the relation of Hyg fab and the Etruscan mirror-back relief-repre-sentations to the Alexandros see Karamanou ndash See Kannicht I Nauerth pl


in mind however that though the Roman mythographerrsquos account largely re-flects elements which are congruent with the evidence for the Euripidean Alex-andros it is not a hypothesis and therefore does not necessarily report everyaspect of this tragic plot with accuracy Nonetheless if the possible implicationsof this piece of information are investigated with due caution then Alexandrosrsquoconceivable flight to the particular altar of a domestic god protecting blood tiessup1⁵may acquire special dramatic significance within the framework of this produc-tion Alexandrosrsquo supplication at this altar and in turn his rescue and recogni-tion with his family signpost the beginning of the Trojan disaster ironicallyreaching its climax in the Trojan Women in which Priamrsquos slaughter is men-tioned to have taken place at the very same altar of the god who protectedblood kinship and the integrity of his oikos (Tr 16ndash17 481ndash83) As the altar ofZeus Herkeios stands in the courtyard that is at the crossroads between privateand public sphere it serves to represent the connection of the oikos with thepolissup1⁶ in both the Alexandros and the Trojan Women the events of the house-hold (the repercussions of Parisrsquo rescue and Priamrsquos slaughter respectively) affectdirectly the city of Troy which collapses along with its royal oikos

As has already been notedsup1⁷ particular characters in the Trojan Women areclosely connected with incidents or characters in the previous plays of this produc-tion which I shall briefly mention Andromachersquos entry in a carriage with Hectorrsquosson and Hectorrsquos armour as well as her focus on her life with him in her speech(Tr 643ndash56 673ndash78) recalls Hectorrsquos role in the Alexandros which will be exploredbelow Helen as the cause of the Trojan War in Tr 914ff mirrors the figure of Alex-andros in the first play Her particular reference to the crown which she demands forher alleged contribution to the Greek victory (Tr 937) alludes to the crowned winnerAlexandros in the homonymous play (fr 61d6 K) Alexandrosrsquo brother Deiphobusappears as his athletic rival in Alexandros fr 62andashb K (see also hyp POxy 365022ndash25) and is referred to as an erotic rival in Tr 959ndash60 Odysseusrsquo ruse and maliceare brought forward in both the Palamedessup1⁸ and Tr 281ndash91 713ndash25 1224ndash25whereas the satyr-play of this production bears the name of Sisyphus Odysseusrsquo fa-ther according to a branch of the tradition adopted by Euripidessup1⁹ The figure of Sis-

On the cult of Zeus Herkeios see Il ndash Od Hdt S Ant withthe notes of Jebb

and Griffith schol Pl Euthd D (Greene) Harpocra-tion sv Ἕρκειος Ζεύς p Dindorff Nilsson

I Burkert For the spatial connotations of the altar of Zeus Herkeios in tragedy see Rehm See especially Scodel ndash See above n See Cyc and IA


yphus therefore is associated with the previous plays by means of his relation toOdysseus as well as by his incarnating the very theme of deception and ambiguityderiving from the antithesis between seeming and being which permeates this pro-duction as mentioned above in the first tragedy Alexandros is not the low-bornherdsman that he seems to be but a royal son and the seemingly happy endingof his return designates the beginning of Trojan disaster Palamedes appears tobe a traitor without really being one and the Greeks seem to have won the warwhile they are in fact defeatedsup2⁰

The latter remark sets a challenge to explore the connecting links among theseplays not only in terms of theme but with regard to concept as well It is notewor-thy that all three tragedies are named after the victims whether they are actual vic-tims as Palamedes and the women of Troy or near victims as Alexandrossup2sup1 BothAlexandros and Palamedes fall victims of their opponentsrsquo phthonos (that is resent-ful envy or indignation at onersquos prosperity)sup2sup2 I would argue that this idea culminatesat the Trojan Women in which punishment is also instigated by phthonos and inthis case divine phthonossup2sup3 since the insolent behaviour of the Greeks towardsthe gods incurs divine wrath (Tr 65ndash97) As Gilbert Murray noted the Alexandrosand the Palamedes provided a sketch of the main Trojan and Greek characters re-spectively alluding to their fatewhile the third play the Trojan Women encompass-es the fate of both the Greeks and the Trojanssup2⁴ Moreover it should be pointed outthat in the three trial-debates of these tragedies the accused is perceived as anenemy of the community The first agon in the Alexandros presents the clash ofthe royal son who has been raised as a herdsman with his fellow herdsmen Inthis trial-debate Alexandros is accused of haughty behaviour towards the othershepherds before Priam as a judge (frr 48 50 56 60 61 K and hyp POxy 365015ndash21) Subsequently Palamedes is falsely regarded as a betrayer of the Greekarmy (fr 588 K) while Helen is held responsible for communal damage and claimsto be innocent albeit guilty (Tr 860ndash1059) The idea of the clash with the commun-ity in all three plays is a factor suggestive of the political implications of this produc-tion which interwoven with the opposition of seeming and being pervading these

See also Murray ndash Scodel ndash notes that these three tragedies present lsquothe murder of the innocentrsquo See Scodel for Odysseusrsquo phthonos against Palamedes see schol E Or (Schwartz) Gorg Pal Ba D-K for an analysis of Deiphobusrsquo phthonos see Karamanou ndash For the features of divine phthonos see Walcot ndash ndash Bulman ndash Milobenski ndash Lloyd-Jones

ndash Murray ndash and ndash followed by Barlow Dunn ndash Shapiro Burian


debates evidently reflects the socio-political ambiguity of that period The brutalityand vagueness of contemporary warfare as well as the abusive power of the mightyover the weaker (an idea recalling the Melian Dialogue in Th 584ndash116 with refer-ence to events which broke out in 416 BC) are suggestive of a social and ideologicalcrisis In the Trojan Women Euripides seems to have aimed at conveying a stronganti-war message whilst powerfully illustrating throughout this dramatic produc-tion the ambiguity and frailty of human judgment in that troubled periodsup2⁵

Hence the unity of the lsquoTrojan trilogyrsquo does not rest upon a tightly construct-ed continuity of plot which is represented in most trilogies of Aeschylus As ar-gued above this production displays thematic and conceptual coherence aswell as structural links among the plays such as the aforementioned mirrorscenes Its unity may thus be perceived not as a tight sequence of plot as in Ae-schylean trilogies but rather as a sequence of thought

In his lsquoTrojan trilogyrsquo Euripides largely draws his mythical material from thecyclic epics of the seventh and sixth century BC In more specific terms the sub-ject-matter of the Palamedes is provided in the Cypria (fr 30 Bernabeacute) havingalso been treated in the Palamedes tragedies by Aeschylus and Sophocles andthat of the Trojan Women mainly derives from the cyclic poem Iliou Persis Sim-ilarly the Alexandros contains elements narrated in the Cypria such as Cassand-rarsquos foretelling of the disaster which is to be caused by Alexandrossup2⁶ and herprobable reference to the Judgmentsup2⁷ Yet the theme of Alexandrosrsquo exposureand reunion with his family which is treated in the Alexandros tragedies by Euri-pides and Sophocles does not occur in Proclusrsquo brief summary of the Cypria Theearliest evidence for the exposure motif in this legend is found in early fifth-cen-tury iconography depicting Alexandrosrsquo recognition and reunion with his natalfamilysup2⁸ Due to the fragmentary state of Pindarrsquos Eighth Paean fr 52i (A) 14ndash25 (dated to 490480 BC) there is no concrete literary reference to the boyrsquos ex-

See Murray f ndash Hose ndash ndash Falcetto ndash (withrich earlier bibliography) Croally ndash Goff ndash Mastronarde ndash Shapiro Burian ndash For the events of that period see Kagan Rhodes

ndash ndash Hornblower ndash See hyp Alex POxy ndash E Alexandros frr endashh K Ennius Alexander frr J and [Procl] Chrest ndash nonetheless in Proclusrsquo summary of the Cypria Cassandraforesees the impending disaster at the point of Alexandrosrsquo departure for Greece to gain Helen(cf similarly Pi Paean fr i (A) ndash SnndashM and schol ad i (A) ndash) and not within thecontext of the reunion with his natal family as in Euripides See Ennius Alexander fr ndash J and [Procl] Chrest ndash cf also West ndash ndash ndash On the tragic reception of the Epic Cycle see most recently Sommerstein ndash See LIMC I sv lsquoAlexandrosrsquo figg and dated to and BC respectively


posure before fifth-century tragedy apart from a description of Hecabersquos ill-om-ened dream preserved in this Pindaric passagesup2⁹

Although Euripides does not treat Homeric episodes as such in this produc-tion it is particularly interesting that he tends to reiterate Homeric characteriza-tion and ideology His appropriation of Homeric ideology probably rests uponthe widely held assumption that Homerrsquos epics superseded the other epic tradi-tions through an adaptation of the heroic tradition to the new self-image of Greekculture and the shaping of collective memory towards the end of the Archaicperiodsup3⁰ The epic tradition of the Trojan myth thus crystallized into the Homericpoems which became an indisputable frame of reference and an inseparablepart of classical Greek identity

Basic Homeric features appropriated and refigured by Euripides in his lsquoTro-jan trilogyrsquo such as the anthropomorphic gods and the character-sketching ofHecabe Helen Odysseus and Andromache have already been the subject ofmuch studysup3sup1 My purpose is to focus selectively on less studied and even unex-plored aspects of Homeric reception by Euripides from the standpoint of his trag-ic rhetoric which enables him to approach elements of the epic tradition throughlate fifth-century spectacles

In an earlier paper I argued that the fragmentary material from the Alexan-dros preserves parts of an interesting second agon clearly signposted as an ἅμιλ-λα λόγων between Hector and his brother Deiphobus before their mother Hecabeas a judgesup3sup2 The objective of this formal debate which takes place after the ath-letic triumph of the herdsman Alexandros is Hectorrsquos disagreement with hisbrotherrsquos intention to have the unknown herdsman eliminated Deiphobus re-sents the encroachment on his royal status by the socially inferior herdsmanwho deprived him of the prize at the games which the prince regards as his le-gitimate privilege and rightful possession As I mentioned above Deiphobusrsquoemotion could be best described as phthonos which involves the resentment

See also Robert ndash Snell Stinton ndash Guidorizzi Collard Cropp Gibert Tsagalis c ndash On the other hand Jouan ndash favoured the possibility that the exposure motif originates in the Cypria See Finkelberg ndash Graziosi ndash esp and on the vast impor-tance of Homer for tragedy see for instance Griffin Easterling Davidson esp ndash For Euripidesrsquo dialogue with Homer see Lange Croally ndash Mossman esp ndash Davidson ndash ndash See Poole ndash Desch Barlow ndash Garner ndash Hard-wick ndash Croally ndash Easterling ndash Worman Xanthakis-Karamanos ndash Davidson ndash ndash Davidson Worman ndash Canavero ndash Dimock ndash Montiglio ndash Marshall For the substantiation of this scene as an agon see Karamanou


one feels against people who rise above themselves violating the status rules ofa highly class conscious societysup3sup3 and is also closely related to athleticprowesssup3⁴ His ethical stance follows the requirements of a shame culture andthe attention which must be paid to acknowledge onersquos honour

Homeric ethics form part of the ideological nexus of a shame culture accordingto which a man pursues the expressed ideal norm of societywhilst internalizing theanticipated judgments of others on himself (on the distinction between shame cul-ture and guilt culture and their implications for Homeric reception in the classicalperiod see also Volonaki and Mantzouranis in this volume)sup3⁵ In the Iliad Deipho-bus participates in the battle in 13156ff 413ndash16 and asserts his honour by killingHypsenor to avenge the death of Asios and vaunting that a payment in honour forhonour has been madesup3⁶ After Homer he is also mentioned by Alcaeus (frS26212 L-P) to have been killed during the sack of Troy and is given prominenceby Euripides as rival and near-murderer of Alexandros in the homonymous playsup3⁷Deiphobusrsquo feeling of phthonos due to his defeat by the herdsman Alexandros inEuripides rests upon an ideal self-image which is placed under threat and an aware-ness of the standards under which he is liable to be criticizedsup3⁸ Accordingly he dis-parages Hectorrsquos moderate attitude towards the herdsmanrsquos victory accusing hisbrother of being conspicuous to the Trojans as inferior to a slave (fr 62a14 K)The Homeric persona of Deiphobus is thus appropriated by Euripides and presentedto commend the traditional competitive values of honour and fame of the Iliadicshame culture His persistence in reasserting his honour by going as far as attempt-ing to eliminate the triumphant herdsman makes him an unsympathetic characterin the Euripidean play

In this formal debate Deiphobusrsquo phthonos is brought into sharp contrast withHectorrsquos sōphrosynē (fr 62a7ndash8 11ndash12 16 K) and sense of justice towards the herds-manrsquos well-earned victory (fr 62b10ndash13 K)sup3⁹ His justice and moderation are co-op-erative excellences and constituent features of a quiet moral behaviour commendedin late fifth-century Athens The Euripidean depiction of Hectorrsquos moderation draws

Arist Rh bndasha EE b f EN bndash see Ben-Zersquoev ndash Konstan ndash and ndash See Scodel The term lsquoshame culturersquo was coined by Dodds ndash See also Hammer ndash Redfield

ndash Adkins ndash ndash See Wilson Kyriakou esp ndash Deiphobus is employed thereafter as a character in later literature as in the Posthomerica( ndash ff ff ff) by Quintus of Smyrna For a further description of the features of shame culture see Cairns ndash Silk

Karamanou ndash


on his Homeric portrait In the Iliad Hector who is perceived as representing Troy atits best combines the traditional qualities of high birth and valour (6403 444ndash467215ndash18 24214ndash16 258ndash59) with co-operative excellences such as justice andmoderation he has a strong sense of duty towards his family and homelandwhile at the same time his mild temper emerges from his human attitude towardsHelen by not allowing her to be mistreated (24767ndash75) and from his moderation to-wards furious Achilles in 22256ndash57⁴⁰ Hence the Euripidean agon between Hectorand Deiphobus seems to showcase the continued existence of competitive valuesalong with co-operative excellences in late fifth-century Athens⁴sup1 and Euripides ex-ploits the polarity of the argumentation of these Homeric characters to allude to thisperiod of ideological transition

In the Iliad Hectorrsquos heroic ethos is clearly defined in contrast with the lessheroic character of AlexandrosParis In books 3 (30ff 264ff) 6 (280ndash85 325ndash31 523ndash25) and 13 (769ndash73) Hector strongly disapproves of Parisrsquo reluctance tofight and his military weakness⁴sup2 AlexandrosParis seems to display an almost un-socialized attitude in that he is insensitive to the moral disapproval of others in-cluding Helen who expresses her low opinion of him in books 3 (428ndash36) and 6(349ndash53)⁴sup3 Accordingly I would suggest that in the Alexandros Euripides seemsto have taken up the Homeric idea of Parisrsquo clash with his social context as Alex-androsParis comes to conflict with his foster-environment that is the group of hisfellow-herdsmen in the aforementioned first agon of the play in which he is accusedof haughty behaviour In the argumentation employed in this trial-debate Alexan-dros is rebuked for his fondness for the noble class (fr 50 K) and for his arrogancewhich is described as useless and vile (fr 48 K) arousing the hostility of his fellow-herdsmen This accusation displays his anti-social attitude and bears serious impli-cations in a period in which onersquos usefulness to the household and the polis wasregarded as a cardinal virtue of the good citizen⁴⁴

For Hectorrsquos moderation see also Aeschylusrsquo Phrygians or The Ransoming of Hector fr R(and Sommerstein ) On the coexistence of competitive and co-operative excellences towards the end of the fifthcentury see Cairns ndash Adkins ndash See also the delineation of Hectorrsquos virtue by Priam as compared to his other sons (includingParis) in ndash For Parisrsquo unheroic portrait see for instance Gartziou-Tatti ndashndash See Redfield

ndash Dover ndash Fouchard ndash Adkins ff Bryant ndash Pearson ndash


Unlike Hector and Andromache who are presented particularly in book 6 ofthe Iliad as embodying virtue and loyalty to their household and homeland⁴⁵the figures of AlexandrosParis and Helen are displayed as representing calamityand social disorder I shall argue that book 6 also seems to provide the main ma-terial for Euripidesrsquo reception of Helenrsquos figure in his lsquoTrojan trilogyrsquo In fact itmay not be fortuitous that Euripides regularly draws on this very book for issuesof characterization and ideology particularly with regard to Helen Hector andAndromache As has been observed book 6 of the Iliad succeeds in arousingthe tragic emotions of pity and fear by underscoring the clash between individ-ual needs and social expectations and delineating the psychological complexityof the characters as well as divine detachment⁴⁶ thus providing ample materialfor the shaping of a tragic plot

Eustathius was the first to note that this book includes a manipulative mdashandalmost seductive (according to Graziosi and Haubold)mdash speech of Helen ad-dressed to Hector in front of Paris⁴⁷ To appease Hectorrsquos anger towards his broth-er she addresses him with soothing lsquohoney-sweet wordsrsquo (6343 μύθοισι hellipμειλι-χίοισι) which may well be paralleled to the honeyed dangerously seductivemanner of the Sirens in book 12 of the Odyssey (12187 μελίγηρυν)⁴⁸ Helen attrib-utes her abduction to the will of the gods and sides with Hector isolating herselffrom Paris whom she regards as morally insensitive as he does not bear the bur-den of his shameful acts (6344ndash58) At the same time she seems to be guilt-rid-den and remorseful wishing that she had died in infancy⁴⁹ and even employs arhetoric of self-abuse through which she finally succeeds in gaining sympathyand deflecting blame by others⁵⁰ Hectorrsquos reaction at her speech is self-control-led though he clearly describes her tactics as involving the rhetoric of persua-sion (6360 οὐδέ με πείσεις)

See Redfield ff Schein ndash GraziosiHaubold ndash Arthur

Katz Grethlein See Redfield

ndash GraziosiHaubold See Eust schol Il ndash ndash (Vol II van der Valk) describing Helenrsquos attitudetowards Hector as flattering and wheedling see especially II ndash (van der Valk) Ἑλένημὲν κολακεύουσα τὸν Ἕκτορα ndash ἔοικε δὲ Ἕκτωρ ἐν τούτοις ὑποπτεύειν τὸ τῆς Ἑλένηςαἱμύλον and κολακευτικῶς ἡ σοφὴ Ἑλένη ἐναβρύνεται Cf GraziosiHaubold ndash See also Arthur Katz ndash Cf similarly Il ndash ndash see Maguire ndash See Worman ndash Day ndash


I suggest that Helenrsquos speech in the Iliad seems to be echoed in her adikos logosin the formal debate in Ε Tr 914ndash65⁵sup1 Her dangerously polite and softening wordstowards Menelaus at the beginning of the agon (Tr 895ndash900 903ndash04) recall hersoothing approach of Hector in the Homeric passage Following her Homeric per-sona and appropriating Homeric argumentation Helen in Tr 935ndash37 refers to herill reputation and casts herself to the role of the victim of divine will and Parisrsquo ac-tions (Tr 919ndash31 940ndash50) in order to be released from blame Nonetheless unlikeher Iliadic remorseful self Helenrsquos persona is transformed by Euripides in that shegoes as far as explicitly and shamelessly denying her culpability (Tr 916ndash65) Thedenial of her personal responsibility is the main line of argumentation also in Gor-giasrsquo famous defence of Helen which serves to illustrate the power of rhetoricalability⁵sup2 Her seductive stance and manipulative approach based on her beautyand her soothing use of words which do not mislead Hector in the Iliadic passageare appropriated in her unjust rhetoric and provocative appearance with the pur-pose of luring Menelaus in the Euripidean agon and are strongly reprimandedby Hecabe and the female Chorus-leader (Tr 966ndash68 1022ndash28) The latter is nottaken in by Helenrsquos rhetorical skill which she regards as employed at the expenseof truth and justice (Tr 967ndash68 πειθὼ διαφθείρουσα τῆσδrsquo ἐπεὶ λέγει καλῶςκακοῦργος οὖσα) echoing Hectorrsquos aforementioned remark about her rhetoric inthe Homeric passage Furthermore in the Iliadic scene Helen sets up a triangleamong herself Paris and Hector noting their fame in future poetry (6357ndash58)⁵sup3the triangle-pattern is reconfigured in two levels within the Euripidean formal de-bate among herself Menelaus and dead Paris throughout her speech as well asamong herself Paris and his rival Deiphobus at a particular point of her rhetoricalnarration (Tr 959ndash60)

Euripidesrsquo reception of Helenrsquos seductive and manipulative rhetoric of per-suasion in the Iliadic passage may also be explored from the viewpoint of audi-ence response To gain sympathy the Homeric Helen blames herself whilst tak-ing at the same time a fatalistic view of the plight which has been caused InHomer she is the daughter of Zeus (3171 199 228 418 426) and as such she isreleased from the blame of others being presented as the means of implement-ing Zeusrsquo nemesis (3164ndash65)⁵⁴ Helenrsquos theocentric position in the Iliad is trans-

For Helenrsquos adikos logos see Basta Donzelli ndash De Romilly ndashCroally ndash Gellie Conacher ndash Lloyd ndash Meridor ndash Gregory ndash Gorg Hel Bndash D-K see Worman Consigny ndash ndash Ballif ndash Bergren ndash See GraziosiHaubold Cf Cypria fr Bernabeacute see Austin ndash and ndash Roisman ndash


planted into the Euripidean play and put into criticism within the context of theagon and in turn before the audience The dramatist introduces Hecabe as Hel-enrsquos rhetorical opponent and enters into a lsquodialoguersquo with aspects of the latterrsquosHomeric persona and the surrounding ideology Hecabersquos rationalistic refutationof Helenrsquos position unveils the injustice concealed in the latterrsquos rhetorical elab-oration and the unscrupulousness hidden behind her manipulative stance Ac-cordingly in the eyes of the fifth-century audience divine influence as suchdoes not seem to count as an excuse since passion may be involuntary thatis god-sent but onersquos response is not⁵⁵ Therefore the theocentric argumenta-tion employed by Helen would have been questionable in everyday life andtends to be commonly associated in tragedy with characters whose attitude isimmoral as the Nurse in Hipp 433ndash81 and Pasiphae in Cretans fr 472e K⁵⁶ Atthe end of the debate the irony is palpable since Helenrsquos power of words andappearancemdashalso stressed by Gorgias (82 B118ndash 14 16ndash 19 D-K)mdash leads to heractual victory in the agon in that she manages to escape death whereas Hecabeis the lsquomoralrsquo winner in the eyes of the audience⁵⁷

Consequently Euripidesrsquo response to the epic tradition in his lsquoTrojan trilogyrsquodoes not merely involve the tragic shaping of the mythical legacy of early eposRather the dramatist engages in a complex dialogue with Homeric characteriza-tion and ideology whilst regularly embedding his epic referents within agonisticcontexts in accordance with the sophistic doctrine of dissoi logoi In the Alexan-dros the distinction between Homeric competitive values and fifth-century co-op-erative excellences is eloquently drawn in the Hector-Deiphobus agon At thesame time the anti-social Iliadic portrait of AlexandrosParis seems to be appro-priated in the first formal debate of the same play and is opposed to the cardinalfifth-century virtue of usefulness Furthermore Helenrsquos Homeric persona is refig-ured and challenged in the trial-debate of the Trojan Women In the agon heroicvalues tend to be confronted with new modes of thought⁵⁸ and Euripides oftenjuxtaposes aspects of traditional and contemporary ideology within the rhetori-cal framework of his formal debates Likewise in the famous debate of the Anti-ope between Zethus and Amphion representing the vita activa and vita contem-plativa respectively Euripides draws a sharp contrast between the traditional

On this fifth-century ideological position see Adkins ndash ndash ndash Gu-thrie ndash Lloyd-Jones

ndash Dodds ndash Barrett ndash Gregory ndash Dolfi ndash Reckford ndash Rivier ndash See Dubischar esp ndash Barlow ndash See Croally ndash Goldhill ndash VernantVidal-Naquet ndashLloyd ndash Kamerbeek passim


competitive values and the quieter virtues of late fifth century⁵⁹ Euripides thusrefigures aspects of Homeric ideology by juxtaposing them to late fifth-centuryethics the dynamics of his tragic rhetoric give ample scope for a dialogue whichbrings to the fore the dialectic as well as the tension between the virtues of theepic tradition and the values of his own era

On this debate see Carter ndash Gibert ndash Slings Kerferd ndash Famous comic parallels of the clash between traditional and contemporary ideologyrepresenting the common theme of lsquoNew vs Oldrsquo are provided in the agon scenes of ArNu ndash and Ra ndash (see Dover lxii-lxiii and ndash)


Varvara Georgopoulou

Andromachersquos Tragic Personafrom the Ancient to the Modern Stage

This essay aims at exploring the reception of the Homeric figure of Andromachewithin the dramatic genre across cultural contexts The transformation of the Ho-meric material by Euripides Seneca Racine Jean Giraudoux and Akis Dimoucould provide an overview of the key stages in the reception history of this leg-end in theatre as well as of the cultural processes shaping its refiguration over awide time-span and within different intellectual and artistic contextssup1

Although Andromachersquos appearance in the Iliad occupies a rather smallspace she has become a symbolic figure in world literature This is mainlydue to the moral and aesthetic function of the famous meeting of Hector and An-dromache at the walls of Troy in the Iliadic passage (6390ndash493)Within the omi-nous war atmosphere culminating at the duel of its two protagonists (Achillesand Hector) the peaceful and harmonious encounter of the couple in a militaryepic is an impressive indication of Homerrsquos knowledge of human nature focus-ing on human needs as against social norms (on the sixth book of the Iliad andits reception see also Karamanou in this volume) Andromache the daughter ofthe great Eetion king of Cilician Thebes (6395) enjoyed the honour of becomingthe wife of brave Hector and a noblewoman of Troy The serenity and happinessof her home were suddenly overturned by the invasion of the Achaeans whichdeprived her violently of her paternal family As she says to Hector Ἕκτορἀτὰρ σύ μοί ἐσσι πατὴρ καὶ πότνια μήτηρ ἠδὲ κασίγνητος σύ δέ μοι θαλερὸςπαρακοίτης (6429ndash31 see also A Michalopoulos in this volume) One cannothelp but admire their feelings for each other and Hectorrsquos warm sympathy ex-pressing his anxiety about her fate (6429)sup2 Andromachersquos fears are soon to bejustified as she is preparing Hectorrsquos bath to relieve his exhausted body afterthe battle Achillesrsquo horses are dragging his corpse (22448) Andromache rushesout of her house μαινάδι ἴση (22461) as she sees the terrible sight she swoonsand when she comes to her senses again she bursts into a heart-rending lament(22477ndash514) τὴν δὲ κατrsquo ὀφθαλμῶν ἐρεβεννὴ νὺξ ἐκάλυψεν (22466)sup3

On the significance of the exploration of these complex processes in the field of classicalreception studies see for instance Hardwick esp ndash Hardwick Stray ndashMartindale ndash On this scene see Schein ndash Graziosi Haubold ndash For more detail see Segal ndash Grethlein ndash Dueacute ch

An eloquent contrast may be drawn between the dark atmosphere of the Ho-meric farewell scene between husband and wife and Sapphorsquos epithalamium pre-served in fr 4424ndash34 L-P which describes the arrival of the two newlyweds atTroy The latter scene is perfectly structured in both content and form reflectingsocial and artistic contexts the outer and inner world of the poetess⁴ The per-sona of Andromache the noblewoman and the model wife and mother of Ho-meric heritage losing everything and becoming a captive and a slave-concubinewas to be taken over by the tragic Muse who continued her story appropriatingas well as deviating from the Homeric source text

Greek and Roman tragedy constitute key phases in the reception history ofAndromachersquos persona not least because they provide insight into those aspectsof the Homeric legend which were refigured in later theatre Of the three greattragic poets Euripides innovated in the description of human passions and of fe-male psychology The political circumstances of the Peloponnesian War and thesocial resonances of the sophistic movement formulate the key lines of theframework within which his plays may be located and assessed⁵ Euripidestransformed the Homeric Andromache presenting her as the protagonist in thetragedy of the same title and as a secondary character in the Trojan Women

The Andromache was produced in the 420s (possibly in 425 BC)⁶ and treats theevents following the Trojan War The title-heroine lives in Phthia as a captive andconcubine of Neoptolemus the son of Achilles who was her husbandrsquos murdererNeoptolemus is absent and his lawful wife Hermione threatens to kill Andromachealong with the little son whom she has borne to Neoptolemus Andromache has fledas a suppliant to Thetisrsquo altar Her character in this play as it emerges from her for-mal debate with Hermione is consistent with her Homeric figure as far as wisdompatience and maternal love are concerned (Andr 147ndash273) At the same time Euri-pides reshapes Andromachersquos persona in that she employs rhetorical elaborationand solid argumentation This agon is most interesting not least because it toucheson issues of female psychology by presenting two diametrically opposite views ofthe female role The haughty behaviour and female independence of Hermione asa high-born wife are eloquently contrasted to Andromachersquos representation of thesubmissive devoted and tolerant wife As the latter advises the arrogant SpartanHermione φίλτρον δὲ καὶ τόδrsquomiddot οὐ τὸ κάλλος ὦ γύναι ἀλλrsquo ἁρεταὶ τέρπουσι τοὺςξυνευνέτας (Andr 207ndash08 lsquoit is not our beauty but our virtues that fascinate ourbed-partnersrsquo) This onstage conflict between the two rivals disputing over their

See Bowra ndash See for instance Conacher Egli ndash Vellacott ch See Stevens ndash Lloyd ndash


twin beds which is an innovation in the treatment of this legend is a significantpiece of evidence for Euripidean ideology aesthetics and approach to matters ofgender⁷ Euripides also exploits this particular dramatic situation to implicitly criti-cize the Spartans as well as to challenge the widely held polarity between Greeksand lsquobarbariansrsquo and the unjustified bragging of the Greeks Andromache constantlystresses that she still regards Hector as her husband and that she was coerced tobecome Neoptolemusrsquo concubine⁸

In the ensuing dialogue with Menelaus Andromache deviates from the Ho-meric standards of female virtue and argues so strongly before the Spartanking that the Chorus-leader accuses her ἄγαν ἔλεξας ὡς γυνὴ πρὸς ἄρσενας(Andr 364 lsquoyou said a lot to men you being a womanrsquo) Then in her lamentwhen Menelaus threatens to kill her son if she does not leave the altar she ispresented as the affectionate and death-stricken mother we have seen inHomer this theme recurs in the Trojan Women⁹ With regard to erotic enchant-ment and sensuality the barbarian Andromache pleads for prudence and conti-nence which is a dominant idea in Euripidesrsquo critical and poetical reflectionThis tragedy displays certain peculiarities not only with regard to its diverseplot-structure but also in terms of Andromachersquos elegiac lamentation in theDoric dialect (Andr 103ndash 16) This lament which is the only example of the ele-giac metre in extant Greek tragedy has led some critics to assume that it mayoriginate in a lost tradition of threnodic elegysup1⁰

The Trojan Women was produced later in 415 BCwhen the Athenians were pre-paring for the Sicilian expedition and had already invaded the island of Melos (inthe previous year) which they occupied having slaughtered the men and enslavedchildren and women The fate of the Homeric heroine has been interpreted as animplicit Euripidean criticism of the aggressive Athenian policy and of the effectsof war on human conditionsup1sup1 In the second episode of the Trojan Women(Tr 577ndash779) Andromache maintains her Homeric profile consisting chiefly of fe-male wisdom dignity and companionship which however enhance her miseryas they inspire Achillesrsquo son Neoptolemus with the desire to take her with himto Greece Andromache cries bitterly because she would rather die than betray Hec-tor with another man but Hecabe advises her to submit herself to her new masterand forget her dear late husband in the hope of helping the future resurrection of

See also Allan passim Gould Lloyd ndash Conacher ndash See McClure ch Mastronarde ndash See Lloyd ndash See particularly Page ndash contra Bowie See Murray ndash Croally ndash De Romilly ch ShapiroBurian ndash Delebecque ff Goossens ff


Troy perhaps through her offspring (Tr 577ndash683)sup1sup2 However a new lamentation ofAndromache follows Talthybiusrsquo announcement that Odysseus has decided to haveAstyanax thrown down from the walls of Troy (Tr 709ndash779) The image of Androm-ache clasping her little son on her bosom has been recorded in world art as a sym-bol of maternal affection as well as of the brutality of war (on the cinematic recep-tion of the Trojan Women see Bakogianni in this volume)

In his own Troades Seneca innovates compared to Euripidesrsquo Trojan Womenand Hecabe which are his main source textssup1sup3 According to his aesthetic predilec-tions he increases the pathos of his drama by adding to Astyanaxrsquos execution therepulsive sacrifice of the Trojan princess Polyxena on Achillesrsquo tomb Andromachebecomes totally obsessed with fear and lies to Odysseus about Astyanaxrsquos fate asher maternal love makes her abandon her regal dignity lsquoShow me flames woundsand the terrible art of tortures hunger cruel thirst several punishments All kindsof irons in my suffering flesh a prison with suffocating darkness and everythingthat a victor dares to do when he is angry or afraid A motherrsquos soul is not scaredrsquo(Tro 582ndash88) As with most of her literary refigurations Andromache is seeing thedead Hector in Astyanax lsquoIn my son Ηector I love only you Make him live so thatyou will live againrsquo (Tro 646ndash48) Virgilian echoes (Aen 2270ndash97) are evident inher wish that her son lives to create a new Troysup1⁴

In the context of French Classicism Racine returns to Virgil whilst bringingerotic passion to the fore Jean Racinersquos Andromaque (1667) is one of his earlyplays helping him to establish himself on the Parisian stage and emerge as aworthy rival of Pierre Corneille the dominant poet of that period Despite hisyoung age Racine was already experienced in treating human passions Accord-ing to his own account given in the prologue he had written for his play (Racine1994 15ndash 16) he derived the dramatic locale the plot and heroes from the thirdbook of Virgilrsquos Aeneid except for Hermione who originates in Euripides Hestudied and admired the plays of the latter in the humanistic environment ofthe Port-Royal monastery where he had been raised and educated Still in thesame prologue he emphatically draws attention to his conscious deviationfrom the Euripidean plot in contrast to Euripidesrsquo Andromache who had ason by Pyrrhus his own Andromache lsquodoes not recognize another husband be-sides Hector and has no other son besides Astyanaxrsquo (ibid 19) Racine defendspoetic freedom in his handling of the legend and focuses on the manner in

See Barlow ndash Dueacute ndash For more detail see Schiesaro ndash Fantham ndash Ahl ndashCalder See Schiesaro


which a poet adapts the available material to his subject thus highlighting thecomplexity of the reception processsup1⁵ He mainly draws on Virgil presenting An-dromache as married to another son of Priam the seer Helenus who grabbedfrom Aeacusrsquo son Pyrrhus his wife and royal power (Aen 3294ndash504) thus lsquoAn-dromache came again into the possession of a paternal husbandrsquo (3297) Racineretains chiefly from Virgil Andromachersquos devotion to Hector which characteristi-cally emerges from her description as lsquowife of Hectorrsquo (3488 coniugis Hectoreae)and the transfer of Troy to her new country symbolized by Hectorrsquos cenotaph andthe false Simoens (3300ndash05)sup1⁶

The French dramatist places unrequited love and passion to the core of histragedy raising issues of gender and female character-sketching his Androm-ache continues to be in love with her dead Trojan husband and albeit a captiveand a slave does not dare to reciprocate the love of her master Pyrrhus The lat-ter is enamoured of her despising Hermione provocatively Hermione is madly inlove with Pyrrhus and rejects the love of Orestes her childhood friend who iseager to commit crimes for her sake Of this group of love-stricken peopleonly Andromache has enjoyed mutual love and wants to remain faithful to Hec-torrsquos memory by adoring her son Astyanax whom she identifies with Hectorthus enraging Pyrrhus lsquoShe always talked about Hector In vain did I guaranteeher sonrsquos safety ldquohe is Hectorrdquo she said and clasped her offspring his handsldquohis lips his courage I recognize itrsquos you my precious husband the one I amnow touchingrdquo What is she thinking That I am going to leave her son withher to keep the flame of her love aliversquo (Act 2 Scene 5 650ndash56)

Racinersquos characters talk incessantly about the object of their love changemoods and feelings all the time contradicting themselvessup1⁷ only Andromache re-mains stable and clear-minded In her eyes Pyrrhus is the violent and blood-thirsty conqueror who killed her brothers and sisters during the fatal nightwhen Troy fell and nothing can erase this memory Hectorrsquos image is dominantin her thoughts which she interrupts only to address him talking to him as if hewere alive The memories of the fall of Troy of the violent extinction of her com-patriots and the atrocities of the conquerors are always present for her and byvisiting Hectorrsquos cenotaph she is searching for a solution to her dilemmaswhen Pyrrhusrsquos threat to kill her son becomes oppressive Eventually she de-cides to commit suicide immediately after the wedding in order to save herson and at the same time remain faithful to Hector Nonetheless fate works in

See for instance Goodkin See Martinez-Cuadrado ndash Otis ndash Berthelot Couprie Deacuteceacuteleacute Elliott passim Defaux ndash See De Romilly ndash Racevskis ndash


her favour Pyrrhusrsquo unexpected death releases her from her gnawing dilemmaand makes her a queen Once more the Trojan woman has the divine favour offulfilling her desire to remain faithful to her real love

Racinean passion is a substitute for God or Fate is all-powerful and thus de-structive The lovelorn Pyrhhus says lsquoLove wins and uproots perniciouslyrsquo (Act 4Scene 5 1297) He has totally succumbed to the erotic spell which leads him toconfront Trojans and Greeks and before dying he crowns Andromache as QueenIn Racinersquos plays madness and passions are dominant Pyrrhus and Hermionedie Orestes loses his mind Through Andromachersquos literary persona Racine reaf-firms Trojan merit identity and status as legend has it that French people de-scend from themsup1⁸

Some centuries later Jean Giraudoux the most prominent French playwrightof Interwar years revisited Andromache appropriating the Homeric legend tocorrespond to his antiwar visions Giraudoux had an excellent classical educa-tion and was also trained theoretically and practically in the school of war ndashhe was wounded in World War I and decorated for bravery Subsequently hehad a solid theatrical presence especially through his co-operation with a fa-mous man of the theatre Louis Jouvet who staged almost all of his plays In1936 Jouvet produced directed and played in Giraudouxrsquos The Trojan War WillNot Take Place on the Theacuteacirctre de lrsquoAtheacuteneacutee Giraudoux drew his material on an-cient myths in order to express the humanistic quests of his turbulent timesThis play presents prominent features of his dramaturgy humanism the conflictwith destiny dilemmas concerning the choice between two opposite options theemergence of simplicity in complexity and of the extraordinary in the ordinaryGiraudoux was a master of style at a time when theatre directing was takingprecedence and made stage language a sublime tool of expressionsup1⁹

Giraudoux chose Andromache in the opening scene of his play in order toexpress his ideological position ndashbased on wish and hope at the same time ndashwhen she announces to the prophetess Cassandra that lsquoThe Trojan war willnot take placersquo (Act 1 Scene 1) As always Andromache is Hectorrsquos belovedand loyal wife and is pregnant with his son to whom she sees Hector as shedid earlier in Euripides Seneca and Racine lsquoI am interested in him becausehe is yoursrsquo Her question to Hector lsquoDo you love warrsquo (Act 1 Scene 3) revealsthe pervasive influence of war on human conscience and the contradictory feel-ings towards the enemy Andromache is constantly defending peace refuting

For this legend see for instance Bizer ch See Brockett Body esp ch Reilly Moraud ndash Le Sage Mercier-Campiche


Priamrsquos arguments lsquoYou always die for your country when you have lived as aworthy active wise manrsquo (Act 1 Scene 6)

Giraudouxrsquos idiosyncratic irony which makes him resemble the playwrightsof the Absurdsup2⁰ demystifies the love affair between Paris and Helen as much asthe marital harmony between Andromache and Hector lsquoHector is my direct op-posite He does not share any of my tastesWe spend every day either by beatingone another or by sacrificing ourselves Happy spouses do not have clear facesrsquoIn his portrayal of the couple Giraudoux follows the dramatic path opened byAugust Strindbergrsquos incessantly fighting couples which will be later taken overby the hostile couples of the Absurd Andromache represents ordinary andpeaceful life and is aware of destiny whose sound and echo dominate in theplaysup2sup1 giving a tragic dimension even to humoristic scenes lsquoI do not knowwhat destiny isrsquo Andromache confesses to Cassandra whose very figure encap-sulates destiny (Act 1 Scene 1) The only power against almighty destiny is lovePerhaps love is the only thing worthy of a war so lsquoHelen must love Paris sinceno one not even destiny itself can attack destiny light-heartedlyrsquo (Act 2 Scene 8)is Andromachersquos argument towards the unrepentant Helen

Modern Greek theatre widely receives and reshapes ancient tragic myths start-ing with the Iphigenia written by the Cephalonian dramatist Petros Katsaitis in 1720Systematic refigurations of tragic legends appear from the Interwar period onwardsreaching their peak in Postwar times (on the transformation of ancient myths inmodern Greek theatre see also Petrakou in this volume) The playwrights of thatera enter into a creative dialogue with their ancient tragic models often deviatingconsciously from their source texts as in Iakovos Kambanellisrsquo trilogy O Deipnos(The Last Supper 1993)sup2sup2 The monologue Andromache or Landscape of a Womanin the Height of the Night (1999) written by the Greek playwright Akis Dimou is em-bedded within the context of postmodernist trends towards radical reworkings ofancient myths which developed at the end of the 20th and the start of the 21st cen-tury Dimou is a main representative of postmodernism in modern Greek theatreand his production belongs to the genre of poetic drama Τhe dominant featuresof all his plays are intertextual dialogue and female presencesup2sup3

In the prologue the dramatist mentions that he has selected Virgilrsquos versionaccording to which Neoptolemus gave Andromache to Helenus Hectorrsquos brotherwho is a seer and ended up being a captive and a slave like her She finds refugein a place in Epirus and settles there in a quasi Trojan landscape an imitation of

See Kofidou passim See Frois Lesot ndash Albeacuteregraves Robichez On the contexts of these refigurations see Chasapi-Christodoulou passim See Georgopoulou ndash


Troy watered by an equally artificial river Simoens a tributary of Scamander(Dimou 2006 244) Dimoursquos heroine has experienced deportation male decep-tion and violence in every possible way Hence she imagines and lsquocreatesrsquo afalse reality to which she totally adjusts and with which she identifies herselflsquoThis city is me away from citiesrsquo (ibid 246) In vain does she seek in Greek lan-guage lsquoa language that can bear the horrible burden of memoryrsquo (ibid 245)

Andromachersquos words reflect insufferable memories full of bloodshed and vio-lent loss native country husband child her bodily and moral freedom her wom-anhood The ideal vehicle to convey her despair is associative illogical speech goingfar and deeply into the dreams and the subconscious and even reaching at somemoments a real delirium Gradually however the memories fade and the feelingsbecome blunted lsquoI say Helen and I think that I am calling an old friendrsquo(ibid 247) Her female nature claims its rights as she becomes obsessed with thematter of her erotic deprivation lsquono man has touched me since the first darknessof the worldrsquo This isolation leads her imagination to her first and perhaps oneand only erotic interest lsquoIn the last summer before the war her erotic instinctwoke up and she felt a strong desire for a man who was bathing singingrsquo(ibid 251) This remembrance gives her some stamina and she reveals her sup-pressed female nature lsquoI am a woman and my knowledge what is left in the mir-rorrsquos teeth a lock of my plaits an edge of my worn out glancersquo (ibid 256)

Realizing all these she becomes stronger and comes out of the inertia of igno-rance and agony to plunge into conscious action The weak Andromache at lastmakes up her mind lsquoForget the promised epic ignore that they have you as amodel gallop deeply inside yourself so that the doctrines of time will not touchyoursquo (ibid 257) She is no more the fallen princess of Troy the devoted wife and af-fectionate mother An outcast and isolated she has found her own self and thestrength to manifest it and decide upon her own fate lsquoI shall draw vespers Ishall let no one forgetrsquo (ibid 258) Dimoursquos Andromache draws on the Iliadic An-dromache and the farewell scene sharing the theme of male cruelty with its epicmodel At the same time features drawn from the Homeric myth are interwovenwith everyday episodes and games of the imagination and the subconscious

Andromachersquos route from the walls of Troy to the postmodern paths of the sub-conscious makes her an authentic and everlasting symbol whose destiny has beenshaped by the polarity between love and war Key themes of the ancient dramatictreatments of Andromachersquos legend such as gender issues involving female other-ness as defined by war-violence and militarism are refigured in later theatre undervarying historical and socio-cultural circumstances Andromache as the protagonistin the Euripidean tragedy of the same title and as a secondary character in the Tro-jan Women is appropriated by Euripides to criticize war by castigating the militarismof the Athenian empire and the violence of human nature At the same time An-


dromachersquos rhetorically elaborate argumentation in her agon with Hermione suc-ceeds in revealing diverse views of the female role Subsequently Seneca amplifiesthe elements of revenge and bloody violence according to his aesthetic predilec-tions by adding to Astyanaxrsquos execution the repulsive sacrifice of Polyxena onAchillesrsquo tomb Racine brings erotic passion and unreciprocated love to the forein conjunction with gender relations within the literary contexts of French Classi-cism Later on the eve of the Second World War Jean Giraudoux conveys ananti-military message in his play The Trojan War Will Not Take Place Andromachebecomes his mouthpiece expressing his pacifistic ideas and at the same time hisbelief in the power of fate In the postmodern monologue of the Greek playwrightAkis Dimou Andromache or Landscape of a Woman in the Height of the Night An-dromache appears as stripped of her mythical past and as shaping a new identityThe ending of Dimoursquos Andromache perhaps the saddest of all Andromaches con-cludes the literary route of this figure through time whilst mirroring all her earlierpersonas lsquoI do not know another chain except for love that holds the other so ab-solutely boundhellip in this way born victors become slaves and the defeated triumphrsquo(ibid 248)


Kyriaki Petrakou

Odysseus Satirical The Merry Dealing ofthe Homeric Myth in Modern Greek Theatre

The title is playing with a common type of ancient satyr-play titles the differentspelling naturally indicating a different genre Odysseusrsquo figure as a Homeric in-tertext in post-antique sources makes its debut in Dantersquos Commedia Divina inwhich Odysseus does not return to Ithaca Subsequently he appears in Renais-sance tragedies drawing on the Trojan War Robert Garnierrsquos La Troade (1579)Shakespearersquos Troilus and Cressida (1602) Joost van der Vondelrsquos Palamedes(1625) Racinersquos Iphigeacutenie (1674)sup1 His figure is then employed in a whole seriesof plays none of which however are comedies By contrast in Greek antiquityOdysseus was a popular character in satyr plays (Aeschylusrsquo Circe Aristiasrsquo Cy-clops and Euripidesrsquo Cyclops ndash the only extant play) He also appeared regularlyin old comedy as in Epicharmusrsquo Cyclops Odysseus the Deserter Odysseus Ship-wrecked Sirens in Cratinusrsquo Odysseis in Theopompusrsquo Sirens Penelope Odys-seus and in Philylliusrsquo The Washing Women or Nausicaasup2 (on Odysseusrsquo parodicrefigurations in other genres see Alexandrou in this volume) In modern theatrea bitter parody of the Odysseus myth occurs in Jean Giraudouxrsquos The Trojan WarWill Not Take Place (1935) (on this play see Georgopoulou in this volume) Thissubject recurs to this day not only in drama but also in other forms of contem-porary theatre such as dance theatre and performancesup3

Mythological comedy or parody influenced by the French operetta and vaude-ville appeared in modern Greek theatre during the 1870s when neo-Classical trag-edy was the dominant genre in drama Alexandros Rizos Ragavis wrote Zeusrsquo Visit(1874) and Spyridon Vasiliadis Zeusrsquo Love Affairs or Semele (1874) The majority ofplays of ancient subject-matter written in that period were serious or tragic

Most of the plays with Odysseus as the pivotal character serious or comictreat his return to Ithaca and the murder of Penelopersquos suitors⁴ The first playof the comic genre which will be further explored was also staged (rather an ex-ception to the majority of plays written during the 19th century and being des-tined only for dramatic contests or publication⁵) It was Panagiotis Zanosrsquo lsquotragic

See Grammatas See for instance Revermann ndash and n Puchner ndash See Chasapi-Christodoulou ndash See Petrakou

comedyrsquo as he named it entitled Penelopersquos Suitors and Odysseusrsquo Homecoming(Zanos 1884) It mainly follows the Homeric plot while the comic element is pro-vided by the suitors the slaves and the folk people It supports the idea thatOdysseus is within his rights in imposing the traditional royal power as a divineprerogative The author dedicated the play to Queen Olga who accepted the ded-ication It was quite a success and remained for more than 15 years in the rep-ertory of several theatrical companies who performed it in Greece and inGreek communities abroad (Constantinople Smyrna and perhaps elsewhere)

In the first part of the 20th century satirical Odysseus seems to have appearedas a dramatic subject only in dramatic contests⁶ and in the shadow puppettheatre⁷ From the Interwar years to the present many plays of ancient sub-ject-matter have been written most of which with contemporary connotationsThe preference of the playwrights however is for serious content Of a total of130 plays written from 1930 to 1980 only 20 use the ancient myth with the pur-pose of satirizing it⁸ The satirical-political treatment of the myth started duringthe German Occupation and the Civil War with a focus on the Trojan War andOdysseus-subjects The playwrights of farce wrote some opportune and boldplays as The Trojan War (1948) by Alekos Sakellarios-Christos Giannakopoulosin which the three great ancient leaders Achilles Agamemnon and Odysseus(representing Churchill Roosevelt and Stalin) suppress the rights of the peoplesSince the Second World War a series of satirical plays have been produced byseveral Greek playwrights containing criticism of modern social and politicalcontexts in open or disguised connotations like Iakovos Kambanellisrsquo OdysseusCome Home (1952) and The Last Act (1997) Manolis Skouloudisrsquo Odyssey (1961)Demetris Christodouloursquos Hotel Circe (1966) Giorgos Charalambidisrsquo Penelopersquos300 These and other plays will be analyzed from the viewpoint of their criticalreception which tends to underscore the contemporary allusions and nuances ofthis very popular archetypal myth as well as the function of Odysseusrsquo refigura-tions within different socio-political contexts⁹

The first play of this case-study is the aforementioned comedy The TrojanWar which is thought to be a farce (the text has been lost but its writers are usu-ally labelled as farce-playwrights) On the basis of the reviews it may be inferredthat it had contemporary political implications They cannot have been very rad-ical however as the censorship of the time did not ban it

Petrakou passim Chatzipantazis ndash Chasapi-Christodoulou On the critical analysis of performances as an essential tool of exploring their reception seeHardwick ndash Bennett ndash Pavis ndash


Kambanellisrsquo Odysseus Come Home on the other hand written in 19501952could not be published or staged until 1966 and then it was understood as po-litical by the majority of the critics of its many productions In this play Odysseusdoes not really wish to return to Ithaca and regularly misleads his companionswho regularly rebel against him but in the end they succumb to his lies He is farfrom resembling the divine Homeric heromdashhe is short unattractive worn outNot even the Trojan Horse was his own invention he stole the idea from a com-mon soldier named Nikias who appears in the play but has no ambition to re-veal the truth Odysseus has arrived at an island whose irresponsible queen Ne-feli was identified by many critics as the real queen of Greece FredericaPenelope and the prime minister of Ithaca do not want him back as he is obvi-ously lesser than his myth and will damage the profits from tourism so they re-place him with Elpenor his stupid but handsomer and more virile companionOdysseus tells the truth and at first the trick works with the people who embracehim as an anti-hero and as one of them but the government puts him away anderects his statue instead For the first production of the play by Karolos KounrsquosArt Theatre in 1966 Kambanellis gave assurances (in the text he wrote for theprogramme) that his target was not to demystify and downgrade our heroesand ancestors He really wanted to make a play about those who started outfor their own Troy following their dreams and ideals They succeeded becamefamous but time transformed them into lsquomerchants of their own gloryrsquosup1⁰ Thedramatic time is defined as lsquotwenty years after the second Trojan warrsquosup1sup1 In gen-eral the playwright stressed its existential content in his statements for severalproductions of the play although its political dimension was not ignored eitherby the critics of its first production or of its second by the National Theatre in1980 However in the productions which followed the fall of the seven-year dic-tatorship (1967ndash 1974) many of them interpreted the hints as aimed also at theLeftsup1sup2 Kambanellis himself wrote that the absurd element of the play lies inthe collective situations especially those which deviated from the original inten-tions of their heroes and were transformed into something different even the re-verse of their expectations a statement that could be interpreted in a simplifiedway as the defeat of the ideals of the Left Later he explained that he used themyth in order to say something about contemporary times and he thought thewell-known ancient myth could be a vehicle for effective communicationsup1sup3

There have been more productions ndash it is a very popular play

Kambanellis Kambanellis Petrakou Kambanellis


Skouloudisrsquo Odyssey labeled as a lsquotheatrical tragic-satirical trilogyrsquo waspublished and staged in 1961 Each of the three plays has in fact the length ofan act of a rather long three-act play and it is in verse The suitors pursue Pene-lope cynically in order to acquire the royal power and then discard her Pene-lope is sorry for her incompetence as a ruler which is also the case with Telema-chus even if he does not realize it Odysseus although he is as unattractive asKambanellisrsquo hero manages to seduce Circe and Calypso while Penelope is stilldreaming of him Odysseus finishes the play by killing the suitors and this con-ventional ending combined with the subversive lines of the text perplexed thecritics In fact this play had been commissioned from the playwright by theradio authorities on the condition that he would not deviate from the Homerictraditionsup1⁴ Homer appears in it as the narrator and the characters are more orless our familiar Homeric heroes In the first play the slave Melantho conspireswith her lover Eurymachus so that the latter can marry Penelope kill Telema-chus and keep her as his mistress forever The other suitors are equally cynicalIn the second part Odysseus and his companions are on Circersquos island Circe israther disappointed in him and transforms the companions into pigs but hearouses her desire by pretending to be erotically unwilling Odysseus has a littlechat with Homer about existential philosophy and the atomic theory Homerfinds the human race funny but Odysseus warns him not to say that openlyThen he has his affair with the nymph Calypso abandons her and travels toCorfu where he seduces Nausica Penelope has a dream in which she quarrelswith her three rivals which the critics interpreted as a conflict of her threeegos Odysseus returns to Ithaca and kills the suitors after the disgusting Eury-machus has killed Melantho

In his introduction at the programme for the production (actually extendingto a whole essay) Skouloudis explained that a contemporary writer who wants touse lsquothe immortal Homeric materialrsquo has inevitably assimilated the dogmas of Ju-daism and Christianity He may have satirized the Homeric epics but in fact headores them However he disregarded this idolization and turned to satire inorder to amuse the audience and help it overcome outdated social and tyrannicalsymbols His message is that man can create his own destiny His critics had dif-fering opinions Angelos Terzakis liked Odyssey and was happy that it had nopolitical implicationssup1⁵ Alkis Thrylos was rather surprised that a talented adap-tor of dramatic texts like Skouloudis did not do better in the text Thrylos be-lieved that Skouloudis really meant to satirize contemporary events and

Skouloudis Terzakis


situationssup1⁶ Considering Skouloudisrsquo statements Oikonomidis regarded his dra-matic intentions as too ambitious in the composition of a play containing real-ism materialism idealism surrealism academicism in the way they co-existedin those crucial times He considered the play to be really innovative startingfrom Euripidesrsquo challenges which still preoccupy human thought he enrichesthem with contemporary issues like space travels Nonetheless the play cansomewhat confuse the audience despite its perfect structure Still it is a stepof progress in modern Greek dramatic productionsup1⁷ Klaras praised it as express-ing the essence of Hellenism although the Homeric material is unsuitable for atheatrical adaptationsup1⁸ We could infer rather the opposite to judge from thenumber of plays that it has inspired all over the world Most of the critics enjoyedthe ironical-satirical tone of the play its theatricality its dramatic compositionwhilst approaching with some circumspection the too complex ideological pa-rameters and their multi-dimensional treatmentsup1⁹

The play Hotel Circe (1966) of the poet Dimitris Christodoulou is described byits author as lsquoa satirical drama taking place in contemporary timesrsquo The dramat-ic space is (again) Circersquos island on which she is running a hotel with totalitarianmethods It is not difficult to interpret it as an allegory of the islands used as pla-ces of exile for the communistssup2⁰ Her general manager is Cerberus (Plutorsquos dogin Hades) who is in love with Circe He interrogates the clients and according totheir answers puts them in the basement in an ordinary room or in the pent-house The servants either do not understand what is happening or they pretendnot to Circe is looking forward to Odysseusrsquo arrival in order to get involved intoan affair with him and in the meantime transforms his companions into pigsOdysseus comes rejects her advances and her politics re-transforms the pigsinto human beings and persuades the servants and the folk people to rebelbuild a ship and go away with him to freedom

The political implications are so obvious that the fact that it was produced in1966 and then again in 1972 is rather puzzling Few critics wrote about it perhaps inorder to protect the playwright and the theatrical company from being sent to a Cir-cersquos island by the government of defection or the threatened dictatorship of whicheverybody spoke The notoriously right-wing critic Alkis Thrylos delivered the verdictthat Christodouloursquos dramatic talent did not correspond to a remarkable poetic skill

Thrylos Oikonomidis Klaras Koukoulas Varikas Kokkinakis On Greek prison islands and the particular theatrical activity developed there see recentlyVan Steen esp ndash


The style of the work is in-between the theatre of the absurd and the orthodox the-atre (meaning realistic) as well as being absolutely indifferent and disappointingsup2sup1

Varikas wrote a serious aesthetic analysis in which he understandably avoided de-ciphering the specific political implications He characterized it as lsquoa theatrical alle-goryrsquo corresponding to Christodouloursquos poetry often inspired by ancient Greekmyths and symbols According to him Odysseus and Circe represent two rival pow-ers Circe symbolizes violence while Odysseus represents the free spirit whichcomes to wake up the vision of freedom and dignity in the souls of the slaves mak-ing them realize their strength and rebel Cerberus stands for the organized violenceused by the central power whereas the two cleaning-women embody the simpleand uncorrupted folk It is a miniature of contemporary society which depicts thetragic deadlock in which people live today as well as cherishing the hope for anew and better world Although it is a rather weak play dramaturgically it is never-theless a promising first attempt of the poet to write drama its merit lies not only inits lofty ideological target and questioning but also results from its general conceptcontaining many strong pointssup2sup2

George Charalambidisrsquo Penelopersquos 300sup2sup3 is written in a very different tonefull of comical impulse It was a great success when it was produced in the mid-dle of the seven-year dictatorship (1970ndash71) although it is possible that it wasbanned by the censorship the following year Subsequently a series of produc-tions by the same and other theatre companies followed The title seems toimply the three hundred members of the Greek parliament Ithaca is presentedas a totally corrupted country to which a cunning Cephalonian comes pretend-ing to be Odysseus and the others pretend to believe him The suitors try to ap-pear as protectors of the people while the Cephalonian manages to win the peo-ple by means of his rhetoric Telemachus is fatalistically ready to succumb to therich shipowner who wants to help Ithaca financially but is really aiming at ex-ploiting its natural resources particularly the oil of the Ionian SeaWe learn thatthe suitors are Americans British and Russians and they all want the samething The Cephalonian and Telemachus somehow manage to overpower themand Homer tries to understand what is going on

The playwright stated in a preliminary press conference that his play usedmaterial from Aristophanes the Greek shadow puppet theatre (Karaghiozis)and folk culture in order to deal with the present situation satiricallysup2⁴ The play-house was always packed mainly by university students At first the production

Thrylos Varikas Charalampidis Charalambidis


escaped the notice of the regime perhaps because it was considered to be a sat-ire of the parliamentary system Later someone may have interpreted the Ceph-alonian as a caricature of the opportunist dictator (Papadopoulos) and it wasbanned (It is difficult to reconstruct the true story as the newspapers did notpublish such news at the time) A prominent critic commented that Charalambi-dis obviously aimed at political satire but the play was really confused (and con-fusing) It seemed to follow the Brechtian model though not very successfullyOther critics just dismissed it as naiumlve or indifferent but one of them regardedit as a very timely allegory of universal politics powerful governments pursuetheir own interests either by pretending to protect the weak by stirring upriots that render their intervention necessary or by causing mortal conflictsamong the weak of whom they take advantage The playwright had composeda merry comedy on these very crucial issuessup2⁵

Then in 1997 Kambanellis decided to write a sequel to his first Odysseus Hewrote The Last Αct in which Odysseus returns to Ithaca in a state of psychologicalbreak-down where everyone has forgotten him and only a young journalist thinksthat she could exploit the subject Penelope and Telemachus have invited a second-rate theatre company to play the roles of the main figures of the Odysseus-mythhoping to get him out of his amnesia The director has a long speech about Odys-seusrsquo adventures and extraordinary abilities composing a political personality com-parable only to Eleftherios Venizelos among real politicians Odysseus escapes se-cretly from his room in order to stay incognito for a while in a room which thejournalist visits disguised as a call-girl in order to extract information out of himNot only that the younger generation is eager to listen to stories about strugglesand heroes of the past even though half of them are untrue Odysseus finallydoes come out of his stupor only to follow the itinerant actors and play out hisown story with them he wants to be the interpreter of his own life

The playwright stated that he was inspired to write a kind of sequel to hisOdysseus Come Home as he was watching its second production by the Art The-atre in 1990 He felt that he had left his Odysseus on Circersquos island in abeyanceand he should really send him back to Ithaca to see what would happen Thedramatic time of this second play is lsquotime presentrsquo showing all the developmentsof the historical-social context depicted in the previous one of the Fifties and Six-ties (the time of first writing and first production) Perhaps it is not clear fromthis concise narration of the plot that Odysseus as a dramatic character neverappears In the play-dance drama Par-Odyssey (1999) written and performedby the students of Art Theatre drama school Odysseus was also non-existent

Doxas


he was a small moving light The Last Act had two productions one in Thessa-loniki (1997ndash98) and another one in Athens by a different theatre company(2001) but its existential core did not seem to instigate many reviews exceptfor theoretical criticssup2⁶ Puchner analyzed it as an appendage of OdysseusCome Home In the first play Odysseus becomes marble ndashalong with his mythmdash and his statue gets smeared in the course of time by the droppings of birdsThe somehow Pirandellian questioning about the conflict between the ego andsociety ends with the victory of societysup2⁷ In the second play Odysseus defineshimself as he likes Almost all characters in this play turn to art in order togive a new meaning to the events of their lives Penelope Telemachus Odysseushimself (another Pirandellian idea) while the media intervene to create a storythat will interest the audiences and establish the journalistrsquos career Here Kam-banellis reduces the political satire and draws emphasis on another contempo-rary phenomenon the power of persuasion exerted by the mediasup2⁸

Apart from the aforementioned plays there are some more less well-knownand unstaged Stavros Melissinos wrote Odysseusrsquo Helmet (1961) based on Iphige-nia in Aulis and parodying the homosexual tendencies of the ancients (exclusive-ly) because of which Iphigenia is sacrificed contrary to the oracle Odysseusand the wise Nestor organize things so that the leadersrsquo misconduct does notbecome known As well as ridiculing the licentiousness of the leaders theplay criticizes the scandalously unfair tax system The text is imbued with Aris-tophanic obscenities and contemporary implications The play Penelope and herSuitors (1984) by the Cypriot Kostas Sokratous also has certain Aristophanic tar-gets which he expresses by means of sexual jokes a facetious atmosphere and amodern denouement the suitors stay alive and Penelope like a modern feministwoman punishes Odysseus for his prolonged absence and his more than certaininfidelities by demanding that he should help with the housework Charis Sakel-lariou with The Sleep of the Lotus-Eaters (1990) offered a new and fanciful inter-pretation of the familiar myth The latter cannot be understood without the au-thorrsquos prologue in which he interprets lotus eating as a hypothetical regime of asocialist nature in a North African country where the citizens lived in freedomand equality with social welfare etc Odysseus got lost and his companions re-turned to Ithaca and established such a regime there The old aristocracy inan effort to get its privileges back presents a vagabond as Odysseus Penelopeaccepts him and the bard Phemius composes an epic poem

See Pefanis in Kambanellis ndash Puchner Puchner and ndash


According to a contemporary critic the literary myth functions in three waysas regards its mythical background subjectively when one of its elements is se-lected and given prominence comparatively when new and strange elements areadded to the mythical material and deductively when some part of the myth iseliminated or minimizedsup2⁹ Perhaps all those deductions additions or selectionscan be freely used in an adaptation for a novel as well as in poetry since a poemcan be either brief or extensive However in the conventional performancelength of a play (extending to two hours approximately) all these three functionsare present In our own topic it is usually the central mythical figure (Odysseus)who is also the pivotal character even when he is absent as in the two chrono-logically subsequent plays mentioned In modern Greek and European dramathe Trojan cycle provides most of the subjectssup3⁰ Odysseus is a universally fav-oured character who is appropriated mainly to pose challenges to serious exis-tential issues related to the present

On the basis of this brief mdashin terms of the real extension of the subjectmdash andunavoidably indicative examination of the satirical or lsquoparody-likersquo handling ofthe Homeric Odysseus-myth in drama it can be deduced that the majority ofthese plays belong to the Postwar era and to Greek playwrights There are numerousliterary personas of Odysseus in prose works poetry and drama within ancient an-cient-like timeless or contemporary contexts The lampooning style however israther a Greek contribution with the exception of the most famous of all LeopoldBloom in Joycersquos Ulysses which contains sparse humoristic resonances

During the 19th century the dominating ideology in Greece mostly aimed atnational and social cohesion having the proof of the continuity of Hellenismthrough its long and mostly unbroken history which stemmed from ancientGreece and had its culture as its objective There is hardly any play makingfun of this issue only some weak points in public life were targets Zanosrsquoplay was fully appreciated because his satire aimed at those who tried to over-throw the government and there was a lsquocatharsisrsquo which was attained accordingto Homeric ideology by means of the punishment of the conspirators and therestoration of the status quo In fact a previous play by the same author stageda few months before his Penelopersquos Suitors in which he handled an ancient mythmuch more subversively was severely attacked by the critics (among whom thepoet Kostis Palamas) as sacrilegious towards ancient ideals As a result Zanosnever published that play and in the next one (Penelopersquos Suitors) he changed

Durand ndash Chasapi-Christodoulou


the focus of his satire making it consistent with the official ideology which re-sulted in the great success of his play

In the course of the 20th century this ideology changed completely and be-came subversive in most of the plays and almost never supportive of the essenceof the myth Among the plays discussed here the most important is KambanellisrsquoOdysseus Come Home on which less emphasis was given in this survey as it hasbeen so widely discussed and explored If the beginning of the dramatic currentof satirical Odysseus with a focus on political satire was The Trojan War by Sa-kellarios-Giannakopoulos the real turning-point came through Kambanelliswho produced a much more subversive play with Odysseus as its hero and atthe same time fertile as regards the difficult issues he wanted to touch on Con-sidering that it was written immediately after the Greek Civil War this was a verydifficult even dangerous attempt depending on the perception of the censorThe majority of modern Greek playwrights belong to or lean towards the LeftAt the same time less politically committed playwrights wanted to write aboutcertain crucial issues as well The farce playwrights managed to pass off somesubjects that were not really politically harmless but the plays were consideredlight theatre and the censors did not pay as much attention to them as to theplays of lsquoseriousrsquo writers even if they were comedies Kambanellis later statedthat he found authentic material in those farcessup3sup1 and that through the characterof the prime-minister of Ithaca (Evandros) he really wanted to satirize the Greekprime minister of that periodsup3sup2 Contemporary theoretical critics may use varioustextual or other methods as tools in their analyses but the press reviews especiallyof the time of the first production spotted better the political implications aboutpersons events and situations when this was possible

In this chronologically successive survey the influence of Kambanellisrsquo Odys-seus on subsequent plays is made quite evident both in terms of their handlingof the myth and their contemporary connotations They reflect Postwar political con-ditions in Greece cautiously distorted and point symbolically and crypticallymdashbutnot unrecognizablymdashto the deception and exploitation of the people the persecu-tion of the Left the intrigues of the palace the incompetence and perhaps the dou-ble game of the progressive parties the use of information as a means of guidanceand suppression the confusion of political leaders and other official factors trappedin conflicting financial class interests and ideologies and the need to anticipate thepolitical tricks and reversals which must be counteracted One can see that Odys-seus appears as a regular larger-than-life hero in Zanosrsquo play in which he wins

Kambanellis b Petrakou


and restores social order according to his interests while the playwright does notdispute his role In the 20th century however after the Second World War andthe Greek Civil War Odysseus was demystified and became a genuine anti-heroHis achievements are frauds (Odysseus Come Home) he is a leader of the people(Hotel Circe) he is a false person (Penelopersquos 300 The Sleep of the Lotus-Eaters)non-existent (The Last Act Par-Odyssey) and ridiculous (Penelope and her Suitors)Still he is dominant in his environment even when his presence is a void the fig-ures surrounding him need to occupy themselves with him either to make him con-form to the new circumstances or because it is simply impossible for them to forgethim and thus eliminate his imposing even devastating presence Nikos Kazantzakisconsidered Odysseus to be a concrete symbol of the Western man and employedhim as the hero of a tragedy a long epic and a short poem Many other writersalso seem to regard him as a fundamental figure capable of conveying eternal aswell as contemporary ideas Only writers who based satirical plays on Odysseus(with the exception of the aforementioned farce writers the others did not usuallywrite comedies) depicted him as an illusion of humanity about the value of the lead-ers (essentially an anarchic message) and a utopia tending towards oblivion al-though peoples do not seem capable of handling their own fate The divine and re-sourceful Odysseus the most attractive and ever-present Homeric figure has beentotally transformed yet he is a very good bearer of a contemporary anti-myth



Pantelis Michelakis

The Reception of Homer in Silent Film

Discussions of the reception history of Homer in cinema usually begin with theearliest commercially available films on the subject which date back to the1950s Earlier films on The Fall of Troy and on Odysseusrsquo travels and return toIthaca are usually dismissed as lsquonon-Homericrsquo or are confined to passing refer-ences in online filmographies and in the footnotes of scholarly books and arti-cles However by the advent of synchronised sound in the late 1920s morethan a dozen films had been produced across Europe and North America onor at least had evoked Troy and Odysseus Some of them are now lost butthose that have survived together with press reviews posters production stillsand other ephemera testify to a whole chapter in the cinematic history ofHomer that has hitherto been neglected What follows is an attempt to situatesilent films concerned with Homerrsquos poems in relation to the larger receptionof Homeric epic but also in relation to the cinematic genre of film epic

Silent films on early Greek epic vary in length from the one-minute Judgmentof Paris which was produced in France in 1902 (Le jugement de Pacircris dir GeorgesHatot) to the forty-minute Odyssey produced in Italy in 1911 (Odissea dir Fran-cesco Bertolini Giuseppe de Liguoro and Adolfo Padovan) and the more thanthree-hour-long Helen produced in Germany in 1924 (Helena dir ManfredNoa) The earliest among these films the Judgment of Paris and the Island of Ca-lypso Ulysses and the Giant Polyphemus (Lrsquoicircle de Calypso Ulysse et le geacuteant Pol-yphegraveme France 1905 dir Georges Meacuteliegraves) can be seen as examples of how earlycinema uses classical mythology as a platform for the display of optical tricksThemes such as a journey revenge or marital life are central to the half-dozen films whose titles evoke the Odyssey and Odysseus but whose subject isdistinctively modern An Odyssey of the North (USA 1914 dir Hobart Bosworth)A Polynesian Odyssey (USA 1921 dir Burton Holmes) Circe the Enchantress(USA 1924 dir Robert Z Leonard) and the two films entitled The Return of Odys-seus produced in 1918 (Die Heimkehr des Odysseus Germany dir Rudolf Bie-brach) and 1922 (Die Heimkehr des Odysseus Germany dir Max Obal) respective-ly At least two films demonstrate the strong impact on early cinema of theatrethe 1909 Return of Ulysses (Le Retour drsquoUlysse France dir Andreacute Calmettes) andthe 1913 King Menelaus at the Movies (Koumlnig Menelaus im Kino Austria 1913 dirHans Otto Loumlwenstein) And two films use parody and burlesque to revisit the

A different version of this paper appeared in Michelakis Wyke (eds) 2013 145ndash68

associations of Greek epic in early cinema with action and romance King Mene-laus at the Movies and The Private Life of Helen of Troy (USA 1927 dir AlexanderKorda) A single chapter cannot do justice to the many issues raised by this di-verse body of films but under the headings of epic film and Homeric epic it canat least begin to explore how silent film based on Homeric themes challengescommon assumptions both about epic as a film genre and about the receptionhistory of Homer

a Epic film

The films which stand out in terms of their artistic ambition monumental scaleand wide distribution in numerous countries across Europe and North Americaare the Italian Fall of Troy of 1911 (La caduta di Troia dir Luigi Romano Borgnet-to and Giovanni Pastrone) the Italian Odyssey of the same year and the GermanHelen of 1924 (both mentioned above) Scenes with hundreds of extras massivesets siege engines naval battles aerial shots of chariot races and special effectsranging from artificial rain to man-eating monsters dominate the three filmsfrom beginning to end In Helen the title character arrives in Troy on a chariotdrawn by lions and in The Fall of Troy she is transported through the ether ina giant Botticelli-style seashell pulled by little Cupids The strong presence ofspectacle however does not detract from the romance which in all threecases plays an instrumental role in the construction of the narrative As the fore-word in the press book of Helen puts it lsquoWhile presenting to you Homeric com-bats on land and at sea with mighty warriors and engines of war in scenes andsettings on a scale so colossal as to defy description yet throughout the wonder-ful love story of Helen and Paris predominatesrsquosup1

The scale and ambition of these films have an aggressive and sensationalpublicity campaign to match lsquoNever in the history of the film businessrsquo con-cludes a review of The Odyssey lsquohas such an elaborate advertising campaignbeen outlinedhellip We have no hesitancy in saying that no motion picture hasever been so thoroughly advertised and never was so much well-designed adver-tising matter placed at the disposal of the state right buyerrsquosup2 The advertisingcampaign for The Odyssey was assigned to no other than Frank Winch the pub-licity organizer of the Buffalo Bill show who was now invited to transfer his en-

From the lsquoForewordrsquo of the press book of the film held in the collections of the British NationalFilm Archive The Moving Picture World February


trepreneurial skills to the new and promising film industrysup3 Twenty millionpieces of printed matter were claimed to have been produced lsquofor the exploita-tion of The Odysseyrsquo which included programmes music scores illustrated sou-venir booklets with the story of the Odyssey paperback cloth and leather-boundcopies of lsquothe greatest epic poem in all literaturersquo in Greek or English postcardsannouncing the playing date of The Odyssey and even printed copies of a lectureto accompany the screen viewing⁴ The advertising campaign also includedlobby displays of life-size photos as well as grottoes stucco effects lighting ef-fects plaster busts of Homer Grecian costumes for lecturers and glass-front fold-ing frames⁵ In addition to all this there were letters collected lsquofrom every uni-versity president in America commending the Odyssey as a masterpiece ofworldrsquos literaturersquo and a nationwide essay competition was launched with lsquoacash prize of $100 for the best thousand-word essay on the greatest of all epicpoemsrsquo in which a hundred thousand students were supposed to have takenpart⁶ As an advertisement in a trade journal put it probably without ironyand certainly without exaggeration lsquothere is no limit to the advertising possibil-ities that you may take advantage of rsquo⁷

It may be tempting to see the issues of length spectacle romance and pub-licity as defining the early cinematic reception of Homer in the way that theyshaped lsquothe epic filmrsquo of the Hollywood industry of the 1950s and 1960s orthe European low-budget lsquosword-and-sandalrsquo films of the same period oreven the more recent revival of epic cinema since Ridley Scottrsquos Gladiator(2000) However this would be both anachronistic and reductive doing little jus-tice not only to the many films mentioned above that would be excluded fromsuch an interpretative scheme but also to those that would be included Ameri-can film audiences first saw the journeys of Odysseus and The Fall of Troy in im-ported European productions which predated the cinemascope epics of Holly-wood by half a century In the period before the emergence of the historicalepics of DW Griffith this encounter with imported productions generated enthu-siasm and admiration rather than the derision customarily levied at non-Amer-ican cold-war attempts to deal with epic on film Generically too the diversity ofthe films under consideration speaks in favour of a more inclusive and flexibledefinition of the terms lsquoHomericrsquo and lsquoepicrsquo than those provided by epic film

Ibid Quotes from The Moving Picture World February Ibid The Moving Picture World February The Moving Picture World February


(whether old or new) The term lsquoepicrsquo was first introduced as a generic title forfilms in 1911⁸ a year when the novelty and ambition of multi-reel films was the-matically channeled not through great historical events of the past but directlythrough a literary tradition of epic poems stretching back to ancient Greece

In the first three decades of cinema lsquoHomerrsquo not only meant a combination ofthe monumental the antiquarian and the ethical (ie the trademark qualities ofwhat was to become lsquofilm epicrsquo)⁹ lsquoHomerrsquo also embraced trick cinematographyeroticism fantasy and on occasion parody and burlesque In silent cinema thegreat civilizations of the past communicated not only lsquovia the peaksrsquo as Deleuzewrites about film epics drawing on Nietzschersquos conception of history as a seriesof great momentssup1⁰ They also communicated via the troughs of the mundanethe contingent and the everyday Consider for instance the search for a lostmanuscript entitled lsquoHelen of Troyrsquo in The Target of Dreams (USA 1916 Knicker-bocker Star Features) or the presence of a manicurist possessing the beauty ofHelen of Troy in Rigadin and the Pretty Manicurist (Rigadin et la jolie manicureFrance 1915 dir Georges Monca) or even the extended use of the word lsquoOdysseyrsquoto describe the adventures of a countryman in a metropolis (Odysseacutee drsquoun paysanagrave Paris France 1905 dir Charles-Lucien Leacutepine) of an entomologist in the army(LrsquoOdysseacutee drsquoun savant Patheacute France 1908) of a spaceship (LrsquoOdysseacutee de la voi-ture astral France 1905 dir Georges Meacuteliegraves) and even of a meal (Odissea di unacomparsa Italy 1909 dir Romolo Bacchini)

In terms of narrative development too the lsquofree-wheeling approach to plotmaterial from the Iliadrsquosup1sup1 and the Odyssey is striking when compared to classicalHollywood or more recent attitudes of film epic towards authenticity and fidelityFor instance in The Private Life of Helen of Troy Helenrsquos return to Sparta at theend of the film is only the beginning of new erotic adventures for her and of adecision by Menelaus to ignore her In The Fall of Troy the central Homeric her-oes Achilles Agamemnon and Odysseus are all made irrelevant and they are noteven introduced by name In Helen Achilles and Hector are both in love withHelen Patroclus is in love with Achilles Paris unsuccessfully tries to killPriam with the poisoned arrows meant for Achilles and as Troy is in flamesPriam attempts to poison Helen to appease the gods before drinking the poison-ous potion himself Moving beyond play with the Homeric source material in

On the origins of the use of the term lsquoepicrsquo as a generic label in film criticism see Hall Neale On film epic between history and the canon of Western literary epic see Paul See especially Deleuze ndash Sobchack Burgoyne a Nietzsche [] Winkler with reference to the Queen of Sparta (USA)


what follows I offer two particularly telling examples of how silent films relatedto Homer challenge homogenizing assumptions about epic as a film genre

Epic films are often seen as vehicles for community-building narratives es-pecially for national narratives as lsquoexpressions of the myth-making impulse atthe core of national identityrsquosup1sup2 More often than not they are perceived as lsquoeffec-tive instruments of ideological control which through spectacular and engaginghistorical reconstructions manipulate their audiences to assent to a celebratorymodel of national identityrsquosup1sup3 Historical epics of the silent era are not always ex-empt from this as the hegemonist tendencies of Giovanni Pastronersquos Cabiria(Italy 1914) and D W Griffithrsquos Intolerance (USA 1916) suggest Manfred NoarsquosHelen (1924) can be seen as participating in a similar search for a nationalepic through the ancient Greeks a distinctly German epic in this case such asthose we find in the works of GWF Hegel and Richard Wagner associatedwith the Hellenization of lsquothe entire genre of epic and through this German na-tional identityrsquosup1⁴ However Helen does not produce a nostalgic longing for heroicachievements of a glorious past The intertitles convey a sense of being spokenfor everyone lsquofrom a stance of sure knowledgersquosup1⁵ of the kind associated with theepic narrator of later epic filmsYet at the same time they also convey a sense ofdoom not normally expected from the epic narrator In this sense Helen envisag-es history as tragedy rather than romance with its motivating forces being guiltambition hate and fear Grave mistakes are committed out of the best motivesand personal decisions turn out to have unintended and uncontrollable conse-quences for the community Menelaus forces Helen against her will to travel tothe games in honour of the most beautiful Greek woman which leads to hisown rivalry with Achilles and to the night that Helen spends with Paris in thetemple of Aphrodite Helen sleeps with Paris persuaded she gives herself to agod and fails to listen to his warnings that he is a simple shepherd She then fol-lows Paris to Troy out of shame for having slept with him rather than out of loveParis kills Achilles not because he wants to ndash in fact Helen asks him not to ndash butbecause Helen is the reward for which other archers are keen to shoot Achilles ifhe does not Paris does not alert the celebrating Trojans to the Greeks inside theTrojan horse in order to prove to Helen that for once he can do what she askshim to do Priamrsquos role as the patriarch who holds absolute power over the life ofhis children and subjects Parisrsquo Oedipal relation with him Helen as an object of

Burgoyne b Wyke Foster Burgoyne a


desire and the death and devastation with which the film ends play out a com-plex web of intergenerational and gender relations that are in crisis

The film was made during a time when the aftershocks of the German defeatand loss in the Great War were felt most strongly Like other German films of theperiod it can be seen as lsquopart of a widespread discourse that sought to workthrough the traumatic experience of war and national defeatrsquosup1⁶ evoking lsquofearof invasion and injuryrsquo and exuding lsquoa sense of paranoia and panicrsquosup1⁷ If epicfilms of both the silent era and of later periods commonly help celebrate an im-perial and expansionist national identity Helen does not provide its spectatorswith symbolic solutions to troubling experiences brought about by war and mili-tary defeat Although like other war films or history films of the period it is in-terested in authenticity and like war films adventure films or melodramas itplays with generic formulas in various ways it also features expressionisticand futuristic costumes harsh lighting effects fragmented or unexpected storylines and extreme psychological states triggered by defeat deceit and betrayalOffering a strong sense that decline is inevitable it provides a preoccupationwith national history which is openly political yet focused on the lsquograndeur ofdoomrsquosup1⁸ devoid of the celebratory political tone usually associated with thecanon of film epic

If epic films are often seen as vehicles for community-building narrativesand their critical success depends on their ability to appeal to critics normallykeen to rehearse arguments for their lsquopolitical bad faith and cultural vulgarityrsquosup1⁹their commercial success depends largely on their ability to appeal to broaderinternational audiences Accounting for both critics and international audiencescan cause considerable friction between (and within) film narratives and the pro-motional discourses that surround them The critical acclaim and internationalsuccess of the 1911 Odyssey provides a notable exception to this rule lsquoThe out-look is for an indefinite run for these reelsrsquo reads a report from a cinema in Bos-ton on the phenomenal success of the film in the USAsup2⁰ The film appeals equallylsquoto mass and classrsquo notes another review from New Yorksup2sup1 All types of spectatorswere targeted by the filmrsquos immense publicity discussed above from right-hold-ers and exhibitors to academics librarians lsquolovers of sensational melodramarsquo

Kaes Ibid See Kracauer Burgoyne a The Moving Picture World May The Moving Picture World March


and last but not least lsquoschools and colleges the churches and lyceumsrsquosup2sup2 Ac-cording to the filmrsquos publicity invitations to the American premiere of the filmwere sent even to lsquoPresident Taft Col Roosevelt Attorney General Wickershamand the Principals of Yale Harvard Princeton Cornell and ColumbiaUniversitiesrsquosup2sup3

In a review article published in The Moving Picture World the American filmlecturer and trade journal critic W Stephen Bush undertook to explain how a for-eign film could meet with such critical acclaim and commercial successsup2⁴ Bushclaims that The Odyssey provides education in a very broad sense that combinesentertainment and instruction He argues that as such the film appeals to dif-ferent communities of spectators including lsquoreadersrsquo and lsquostudentsrsquo of Homeron the one hand and lsquothe massesrsquo or lsquogeneral publicrsquo on the other hand in away that lsquoleaves the critic silent in admirationrsquo The agency of the film is power-ful he claims marking lsquoa new epoch in the history of the motion picture as anactor in educationrsquo But Bush also makes the film mediate invisibly betweenlsquoevery human beingrsquo and lsquothe genius of Homerrsquo through lsquofeelingrsquo lsquoinfluencersquoand the lsquobeauty of formrsquo And he proceeds by establishing an analogy betweenthe lsquoprimitiversquo audience of Homer lsquowho knew nothing of libraries and of allthe aids of modern education and who had to be moved chiefly by the beautyof formrsquo and lsquothe masses of the people todayrsquo making a case for the power ofaesthetics to move peoples across social divides ages and art forms On top ofthese broad claims and generalizations Bush makes the even bolder claimthat Homer in his cinematic guise is the educator of all America That such aclaim about the educational power of cinema could be made with the help ofa foreign film that was setting the benchmark for the nascent national industryis quite unique in the history of American cinema There is no room here for theambivalence shown by critics towards cinemarsquos preoccupation with history andits aspirations to cultural authority that we find in the post-Second World Warperiod Nor do we find here any of the Postwar derision of European epics fortheir lsquoinauthenticityrsquo and lsquobetrayal of European high-art traditionsrsquo or scorn fortheir transnational orientationsup2⁵

The 1911 Odyssey does not focus thematically on the national motifs of muchepic cinema such as lsquothe legend of a people the battles and treaties that define asacred landscape and the emergence of particular heroic and sainted figuresrsquosup2⁶

The Moving Picture World February March May The Moving Picture World February The Moving Picture World March ndash Burgoyne a Burgoyne b


Instead it features themes related to the individual to travelling to foreign landsto family values and homecoming Free of geographically or culturally-specificreferences it becomes suitable for circulation across and beyond national andcultural boundaries It is precisely through the fact that this silent epic doesnot showcase a glorious national history or a common religion language or eth-nic background that it becomes central in debates about cinema and its ability tobring together a socially and culturally heterogeneous body of spectators in thename of a common past and a shared identity

b Homeric epic

Silent films related to Homer challenge homogenizing assumptions not onlyabout epic as a film genre but also about Homerrsquos poems and the history oftheir interpretation The generic diversity of early cinema breaks down the total-izing and canonical work of Homer into component parts that are spread acrossand reconfigured within a number of artistically and culturally contingent cine-matic modes and forms Homerrsquos name can perform a number of different func-tions in relation to the complex process of reception that situates early filmswithin and against Homerrsquos history of interpretation it can symbolize this proc-ess but it can also ignore or conceal it As in antiquity the name lsquoHomerrsquo can beused not only for the Homeric poems themselves but also for other narratives ofthe myth of the Trojan Warsup2⁷ A purist strategy would reject as non-Homeric filmson the Trojan War that break down and broaden the spatial and temporal frame-work of the Iliad and the Odyssey or downplay the primacy of their narratives infavour of formal and thematic preoccupations more familiar from other poems ofthe Epic Cycle including action romance the exotic and the miraculoussup2⁸ Analternative approach would be to question the possibility or usefulness of aclear distinction between Homerrsquos Iliad and Odyssey and other poems of theEpic Cycle which may have served as sources of inspiration for the filmsunder consideration or which can be used as a basis for intertextual analysisFor instance one could explore the reasons for which the authority of Homerfeatures so prominently in the publicity of films which may have otherwisetaken little interest in the plots or characters of his poems

On the name lsquoHomerrsquo applied indiscriminately to both the Homeric poems and the poems ofthe so-called lsquoEpic Cyclersquo already in pre-classical Greece see Burgess See for instance Solomon On the uniqueness of Homerrsquos poems in relation to theEpic Cycle see Griffin


Another possibility would be to challenge the priority of the dialogue be-tween films and ancient texts over a dialogue between films and their moderncontexts from novels theatre plays and paintings to wider historical technolog-ical and ideological practices and processes associated with the culture of mod-ernity and its fascination with Homer The French Return of Ulysses of 1909 inter-acts not only with the Odyssey but also with other dramatic and non-dramaticworks inspired by it works which its screenwriter Jules Lemaicirctre composedaround the same period Similarly The Private Life of Helen of Troy invites usto think not only of Homerrsquos poems but also of John Erskinersquos almost contempo-rary novel which shares with the film its title and on whose success the filmsought to capitalize (despite its many differences from it) And the film Helendraws not on a humanistic classicizing Homer but on the lsquostrange brutal andthreateningrsquo Homer of Friedrich Nietzschesup2⁹ anticipating Sigmund Freudrsquos pessi-mistic reading of the Iliad in his Civilization and its Discontents by several yearssup3⁰

The Homer of early cinema is not only a canonical figure of the Western lit-erary tradition The Fall of Troy begins with a white-bearded bard holding a lyrein his hands reciting in front of an attentive audience The image of the bard per-forming in front of an audience reappears in the films Odyssey and Helen Thisimage engages with a pictorial rather than literary tradition for the representa-tion of the epic bard in performance that goes back to antiquityWhat is static inpaintings can now be made more vivid and lifelike being set literally in motionAnd what is only a script in the literary tradition awaiting its performance andinterpretation by readers can now appear at the moment of its realization com-plete with a bard and an audience At one level of course this plays with theparadoxes of translating words into images inherited from the pictorial traditionAt a different level however early cinema claims for itself not just the visualityof pictorial representations of Homerrsquos poetry but also the textuality of writtenepic (not least through intertitles) Even more importantly it claims for itselfthe orality of Homeric poetry the sense of a performative event associatedwith the bardrsquos recital of epic poetry in front of an audience Silent film returnsto processes of pre-literary production and dissemination of knowledge associat-ed with orality not because of any interest in how alien they are for a post-liter-ary culture but because of their perceived relevance to it Like epic bards silentcinema adopts a lsquorhetoric of traditionalityrsquo that facilitates the interplay betweenfilm viewing and audiencesup3sup1

Porter a Porter b ndash On the rhetoric of traditionality and on the interplay between oral performer and audiencesee Scodel


What attracts early cinema to this image of the epic bard in recital is not itspotential contribution to the vision of film as a universal pictorial language Or-ality holds the promise of recovering not the lost indexicality of language but awhole process of artistic production and dissemination based on the liveness ofperformance repetition and the fostering of a sense of a community In thissense the appeal for early cinema of the oral performative tradition of archaicepic is quite different from the appeal for cinema of the pictorial languages ofancient Egypt Israel and Babylon Ong speaks of a post-literary form of oralitywhich lsquohas striking resemblances to the old in its participatory mystique its fos-tering of a communal sense its concentration on the present moment and evenits use of formulas [hellip] Like primary orality secondary orality has generated astrong group sense for listening to spoken words forms hearers into a groupa true audience rsquosup3sup2 Early cinemarsquos instantaneity and complexity then must beviewed lsquoas the spatio-temporal equivalent of Ongrsquos ldquosounded wordrdquo which ldquoex-ists only when it is going out of existencehellip [and] is not simply perishable butessentially evanescent and sensed as evanescentrdquorsquosup3sup3 Ongrsquos examples of secon-dary orality include media such as the telephone radio and television Howeverearly cinema too illustrates ways in which in a post-literary world orality is re-mediated through a technologically based but performance-oriented event of im-ages and sounds

In fact one could go so far as to argue that early film does not simply rep-resent the orality of archaic Greek epic but also helps define it (on Homeric or-ality see also Papaioannou Efstathiou and I Petrovic in this volume) There isno more obvious way to illustrate this than considering very briefly Milman Par-ryrsquos research into South Slavic heroic songs to which the role of storage and re-trieval technologies of sound and vision was central (on South Slavic oral poetrysee also IPetrovic in this volume) Parryrsquos audio recordings and his 1935 filmfootage of the Yugoslav singer Avdo Medjedovic one of lsquothe earliest ethnograph-ic filmsrsquo ever made have received little attention in this respectsup3⁴ The way how-ever in which they helped define the content they were supposed to document isprofound informing as they did the very rhythm and structure of versification(octosyllabic when dictated as opposed to decasyllabic when sung)sup3⁵ From Par-ryrsquos lsquokinorsquo to recent scholarly work discussing epic formulas in terms of lsquothe cuts

Ong Joyce quoting Ong Sound recordings by Milman Parry and what his fieldnotes refer to as a lsquokinorsquo can be foundin the CD that accompanies Parry They are also available in the Online Database of Har-vardrsquos Milman Parry Collection of Oral Literature On Parryrsquos lsquokinorsquo see Mitchell Nagy vii Scaldaferri


of montage or as a kind of zooming in on a particular feature of a larger scenersquosup3⁶film technologies practices and techniques have served as an often lsquotransparentrsquoor lsquonaturalrsquo feedback loop for the scholarship on Homeric orality

There is another aspect of early cinema as a subject of historical enquiry thatcan be associated with Homerrsquos epic poetry The material specificity of early filmschallenges the fixity and rigidity of the cinematic artwork in ways that raisemethodological issues similar to those associated with the multiformity of theHomeric texts Some of the films in question are lost others damaged shortenedor re-edited for distribution in different contexts Some exist in multiple copiesand each copy is different not only in terms of its condition of preservation butalso in terms of overall length number and order of scenes and number subjectmatter and language of intertitles The drive to police the boundaries of the filmicnarrative and to protect the interests of right holders is well documented in tradejournals lsquoWilliam J Burns the worldrsquos most noted detective announced a newdeparture in his work ndash he has entered the film industry throwing his power andprestige into the protection of a company controlling a reproduction of HomerrsquosOdysseyrsquosup3⁷ But similarly well documented are the fluidity and the shifting open-ended and evanescent boundaries of film narratives as they circulate throughtime and space Noarsquos Helen reappeared in Germany four years after its originalrelease in a shortened version under the title The Hero of the Arena (Der Held DerArena 1928) Seven years later it was re-released in the USA under the Italiantitle La Regina di Sparta (The Queen of Sparta) The sets and costumes of The Pri-vate Life of Helen of Troy were recycled at least in part in Vamping Venus andits plot reappears in Manu Jacobrsquos French novel of the same name which waspublished in the immediate aftermath of the filmrsquos release (a novel thenbased on a film that in its turn draws on a novel and a play which engagewith various stories around the Trojan War)sup3⁸

Film archivists often draw on the critical methods of recension and emenda-tion to analyze the complex genealogy of film prints Consider for instance theuse of a stemma to provide the genealogy of existing prints for The Fall of Troy inMarotto Pozzi 2005 111 However fascinating technically and aesthetically resto-rations of films such as The Odyssey and Helenmight be they should not be con-fused with the quest for a lsquodefinitiversquo or lsquooriginalrsquo version nor should they de-tract from the rich and adventurous history of the filmsrsquo dissemination On theone hand there is the archival drive to fix films through storage retrieval and

Elmer The Moving Picture World February Jacob


digital or other forms of preservation On the other hand to speak of early filmson Homer as lsquocapturing the imaginationrsquo of a whole nation or as lsquobeing forgottenrsquoby film-makers for several generations are not just turns of phrase but attemptsto situate them within a cultural framework based on memory rather than his-tory and on repetition through variation


Anastasia Bakogianni

Homeric Shadows on the Silver ScreenEpic Themes in Michael Cacoyannisrsquo Trilogyof Cinematic Receptions

Michael Cacoyannisrsquo (1922ndash2011) three cinematic receptions of Greek tragedy Elec-tra (1961ndash62) The Trojan Women (1970ndash71) and Iphigenia (1976ndash77) were created inthe shade of the Homeric epicssup1 Cacoyannisrsquo trilogy is modelled on Euripidesrsquo Elec-tra Troades and Iphigenia in Aulis However other lsquohiddenrsquo or lsquomaskedrsquo layers of re-ception open up channels that lead further back to the Homeric epics themselvesThis discussion focuses on the debt that Cacoyannis owes to the Homeric poemsand the ways in which the epics shaped his directorial vision both on the visualplane as well as on the level of narrative and characterization

Michael Cacoyannisrsquo three cinematic receptions construct a complex and multi-layered relationship with ancient Greece They operate at a closely interwoven nexusof multiple strands of reception that demonstrates the sophistication of their re-sponse to the classical past within a modern Greek context Cacoyannis openly ac-knowledged his debt to Euripidean dramaturgy but his debt to the Homeric epicscan be described by using a metaphor that also applies to the medium of cinemaitself lsquoflickering shadows on a silver screenrsquosup2 Cacoyannisrsquo Euripidean trilogy canthus be classified as a lsquomaskedrsquo reception of the Homeric epics

What makes this particular case study worth examining is precisely the in-direct nature of its dialogue with the epicssup3 While on the face of it Cacoyannisrsquo

This paper is dedicated to the memory of Michael Cacoyannis who passed away on 25 July2011 With sincere thanks to Ioanna Karamanou and Athanasios Efstathiou for their editorialassistance during the revision process I would also like to acknowledge the generous help ofMike Edwards (Roehampton University) Lorna Hardwick (The Open University) and Gonda VanSteen (University of Florida) I am paraphrasing Rickrsquos title The Shade of Homer () MacKinnon argues against la-belling the three films a trilogy ( ndash) More recently Michelakis is equally sceptical( ndash) I would counter that there are enough commonalities to warrant their consid-eration as one Moreover the extent of the debt these films owe to the Homeric epics can only befully appreciated if they are examined as a unit Karalis in his A History of Greek Cinema alsoapplies the label ( ) httpwcclibrarieswordpresscomflickering-shadows-on-a-silver-screen The range of receptions of the Homeric epics some of which are showcased in the presentvolume is both rich and varied Some further representative examples of scholarship from

Euripidean trilogy is defined by its open dialogue with another ancient literarygenre that of tragedy it also enjoys a less obvious lsquomaskedrsquo relationship withancient epic that enriches and to a large extent determines the overall shapeand content of the three films This is Greek tragedy mediated through thelens of the Homeric epics an anachronistic inversion of the traditional chrono-logical narrative of the relationship between ancient Greek epic and tragic poetrythat leads us to re-examine our assumptions about the connections betweenthese two ancient genres and their dialogue with the modern world

In methodological terms this particular case study of the dialogue between pastand present falls under the purview of what Martin Winkler classifies as lsquoclassicalfilm philologyrsquo (2009 13) Indeed a close analysis of the filmic text is required inorder to discover the lsquoepicrsquo elements that exist hidden under the lsquotragicrsquo label thatCacoyannis assigned to his reception thus making his link to Greek tragedy explicitbut disguising his debt to the Homeric epics lsquoTragedyrsquo and lsquoepicrsquo are slippery termshowever our relationship to them is continuously renegotiated⁴ For the purposes ofthis paper I am focusing in particular on the ways in which they can contribute tothe project of unpicking the reception of these two ancient genres in Cacoyannisrsquocinematic trilogy but also in problematizing that very process Because ultimatelythese filmic receptions move beyond anything found in the ancient sourceswhethertragic or epic to offer a unique modern amalgamation of both ancient genres reima-gined for a cinematic audience

Cacoyannisrsquo status as an auteur is particularly relevant to this discussion Anauteur is defined as a film director who is not a mere craftsman working within aformula or simply an adaptor but one who utilises the medium to develop andexpress personal creativity Eisensteinrsquos theory of the dialectic of montage⁵ em-phasized the control that a director can exert over his film making his role anal-ogous to that of the author of a work of literature

Readerviewer response theory however complicates this equation by ac-knowledging the role of the readerspectator in the creation of meaning Cacoyan-nisrsquo receptions were created in the popular medium of cinema but appealed most-ly to art-house audiences interested in alternative types of films and to classical

this fast-growing area Graziosi Greenwood (eds) Latacz Greub Blome Wieczorek(eds) Vandiver Paulrsquos discussion of lsquoepicrsquo as a lsquoculturalrsquo phenomenon ( ) is relevant here as is her dis-cussion of the difficulties of classification and the importance of demarcating the boundaries ofonersquos own project (ndash) This refers to the process of editing a film the director chooses particular shots in order toconstruct a montage sequence that creates the desired meaning (Kolker ndash) Seealso Eisenstein


scholars who analyse films with ancient themes and use them as pedagogicaltools⁶ As a member of the latter category my reading of Cacoyannisrsquo trilogy is con-ditioned by my ongoing search for classical themes in modern culture I wouldargue however that the epic echoes in the trilogy would also resonate particularlystrongly with a large section of Cacoyannisrsquo intended audience modern Greekspectators (to which group I also belong)⁷ The Homeric epics have remained a cor-nerstone of the educational system in the modern state and have cast a long shad-ow over its cultural products Cacoyannisrsquo trilogy allows a knowledgeable audi-ence familiar with the Homeric poems the opportunity to form connectionswith the epic tradition⁸ Non-knowledgeable audience members who are howev-er familiar with the lsquosword and sandalrsquo genre could also discover epic resonancesin terms of Cacoyannisrsquo cinematic style⁹ Vrasidas Karalis criticizes Iphigenia forbeing lsquoheavy with the Hollywood aesthetic of the grand spectaclersquo but as Ihope to demonstrate below this emphasis on spectacle is not confined to thelast film in the trilogy Rather it forms part of the directorrsquos thoughtful responseto the dominant cinematic idiom of the time Cacoyannis creatively borrowed ele-ments of the Hollywood style and reconfigured them for use in his own personalvision of the classical past (Bakogianni 2011 162ndash66) Furthermore the distinctionI have drawn between knowledgeable and non-knowledgeable audiences has tobe dismantled at least in part because of the intersections in the membershipof these groups Such is the glamour and impact of the medium of cinema in mod-ern society that films provide a common point of reference a new type of lingua

For analysis of Cacoyannisrsquo trilogy from the perspective of classical film philology see Bako-gianni ndash ndash ndash a ndash and b ndashMacKinnon ndash McDonald and ndash McDonald Winkler ndash Michelakis ndash ndash ndash and ndash (Elec-tra) ndash (Iphigenia) ndash (on the use of ruins) For the use of film as a pedagogicaltool by classicists see McDonald ndash and Paul ndash The language of Electra and Iphigenia is Greek which potentially limits the filmrsquos appeal tonon-Greek speaking viewers to those viewers prepared to watch a subtitled film Both filmsdid reach foreign audiences particularly Electra which won the award for best screen adaptationat the Cannes and was nominated for an Oscar in the Best Foreign Film category Iphigenia wasalso presented at Cannes in but was less well received Even The Trojan Women with itsinternational cast which necessitated the use of English would only appeal to spectators pre-pared to engage in a film that openly acknowledges its debt to Greek tragedy I am using the term lsquotraditionrsquo here in the way that Paul defines it stressing the importance oflsquotextual relationshipsrsquo ( ) A distinction should be drawn here between contemporary cinema audiences whose point ofreference would have been the lsquosword and sandalrsquo epics of the s and s and modern au-dienceswho have also experienced the renaissance of the genre in the new millennium usheredin by Gladiator ()


franca which allows the viewer to build multiple bridging points between the Ho-meric epics and Cacoyannisrsquo trilogy

This picture is further complicated by the lsquoHomeric questionrsquo If lsquoHomerrsquo is asign that stands for the collective efforts of a number of ancient rhapsodes (Ka-hane 2005 6) who created the oral tradition on which the surviving written ver-sion of the ancient epics is based then this destabilizes further the category oflsquoauthorauteurrsquo and hisher purported control over the finished product Myreading of Cacoyannisrsquo Euripidean trilogy brings to the surface its lsquohiddenrsquoepic elements It reads counter to the directorrsquos claim to authenticity that relieson his acknowledged relationship with Greek tragedy and undermines his direc-torial control of the intended meaning of his trilogy In other words I argue thatCacoyannis like a number of other modern Greek artists produced his receptionof Greek tragedy in the long shadow of Homer but chose not to explicitly ac-knowledge this debt

a Visual echoes

In the predominantly visual medium of cinema Cacoyannisrsquo debt to the Homericepics operates most accessibly on the level of the visual The opening of his Tro-jan Women transports his cinematic audience to the ruins of Troy and the worldof the Iliad The film was shot in a ruined castle in Spain as the director was in astate of exile from Greece to escape the censorship imposed by the Greek mili-tary dictatorship that was ruling the country (1967ndash74)sup1⁰ Cacoyannisrsquo decision toexcise the divine prologue that opens Euripidesrsquo play and to replace it with alarge-scale night scene starring a large cast of Trojan prisoners being herdedby Greek soldiers signals the directorrsquos desire to set an lsquoepicrsquo tone for his recep-tion He used the freeze-frame technique to create brief but significant pauses inthe narrative flow of the film focusing the viewerrsquos attention on shots of theruined walls of the citadel the enslaved women and the carts loaded with theGreeksrsquo war booty

These opening scenes establish an lsquoepicrsquo tone for Cacoyannisrsquo cinematic re-ception of Euripidesrsquo tragedy but also one that destroys the distancing effect ofEuripidesrsquo original deus ex machina prologue Instead the audience is guided by

The Greek military dictatorship known as the lsquoΧούνταrsquo banned Cacoyannisrsquo The TrojanWomen Goff ndash The modern trend of interpreting the play as an anti-war statementwas one that Cacoyannis embraced in order to reflect contemporary concerns Bakogianni ndash As Hall demonstrates this was part of the radicalization of Greek tragedy Hall ndash


an lsquoomniscient narratorrsquo (Winkler 2009 8) into viewing the fall of Troy in polit-ical terms This authorial voice tells the spectators that Helen was just an excuseThe Greeks went to war because they coveted Trojan gold The director is thusguiding his audience towards a particular interpretation of his source text onethat is set in an lsquoepicrsquo register that helps to bring to the surface the political di-mension of the tragedy

In the popular imagination the citadel of Mycenae has become a potent andwidely recognizable visual symbol of the Homeric epics themselves (Wiener 2011535) Cacoyannisrsquo decision to set the prologue of his Electra in the ruins of theancient citadel and to have his Agamemnon (Theodoros Demetriou) walkunder that famous Lion Gate sets the tone for his reinterpretation of the Euripi-dean source text Cacoyannisrsquo choice of setting for these added scenes demon-strates how his view of ancient drama was transfigured through the prism ofthe Homeric epics The prologue thus serves a dual function It sets the sceneand tone of Cacoyannisrsquo first cinematic reception and it explains the back-story of Agamemnonrsquos return and subsequent murder to non-knowledgeable au-dience members The shock of Euripidesrsquo choice of the peasantrsquos hut as the set-ting for his Electra is thus destroyed by Cacoyannisrsquo decision to delay the scenesset at this humble dwelling to a later point in the filmic narrative Cacoyannisthus privileges the lsquoepicrsquo rather than the lsquotragicrsquo register in the opening scenesof his first cinematic reception

In Iphigenia we first encounter the heroine and her mother at Mycenae whenthey receive Agamemnonrsquos letter informing them of the false news of the pro-posed marriage to Achilles designed to lure them to Aulis This scene formspart of an added prologue that creates a sharp contrast between Agamemnonrsquosoikos and life in the Greek encampment In this third film the ruins of Mycenaerepresent a happy domestic world which Iphigenia (Tatiana Papamoskou) andClytaemestra (Irene Papas) leave behind to journey to the Greek military campat Aulis These two key scenes in Electra and Iphigenia help to construct aworld of lsquoepicrsquo proportions and to locate Cacoyannisrsquo trilogy visually in agrand heroic past They establish an lsquoepicrsquo register for Cacoyannisrsquo cinematic re-ceptions of Greek drama that is not actually present in Euripides

A larger visual analogy can usefully be drawn from the comparison of Ca-coyannisrsquo cinematic receptions to the narrative of the Homeric epics Cacoyannisrsquofilmic technique combines wide-shots of large-scale scenes with the use of themore intimate close-up during key dramatic moments He thus adapts for themodern medium of cinema the Homeric poemsrsquo alternation of large-scale sceneswith a big cast of characters with more intimate moments focusing on particularindividuals One could indeed argue that the Homeric narrative is ideally suited


to being discussed in lsquocinematographicrsquo termssup1sup1 The same does not hold true ofGreek tragedy which was confined to the performance space of ancient open-airtheatres and restricted by the genrersquos rules about the number of actors (2ndash3) andChorus members (12ndash 15) allowed

An illustrative example of Cacoyannisrsquo affinity for this element in the Homer-ic epics is the opening scene of his Iphigenia in which he establishes the scale ofthe Greek expedition by a tracking shot of the ships culminating in a wide shot ofa mass of soldiers on the beach In Euripidesrsquo play the army remains off-stage soCacoyannisrsquo vision of the Greek expeditionary force more closely echoes passag-es in the Iliad such as the extended simile that describes the Achaeans lsquoas themultitudinous nations of birds wingedhellip so of these the multitudinous tribesfrom the ships and shelters poured to the plain of Skamandros and the earthbeneath their feet and under the feet of their horses thundered horriblyrsquo(Il 2459ndash66 τῶν δrsquo ὥς τrsquo ὀρνίθων πετεηνῶν ἔθνεα πολλά [hellip] ὣς τῶν ἔθνεαπολλὰ νεῶν ἄπο καὶ κλισιάων ἐς πεδίον προχέοντο Σκαμάνδριον˙ αὐτὰρ ὑπὸχθὼν σμερδαλέον κονάβιζε ποδῶν αὐτῶν τε καὶ ἵππων) This wide-shot of theAchaean army in the epic is contrasted with close-ups of their leaders in thisparticular scene Agamemnon (Il 2477) In Iphigenia the camera also comes tofocus on Agamemnon after the opening shots of the army at Aulis Cacoyannisemphasizes Agamemnonrsquos struggle to retain control over the soldiers and to pre-vent their descent into anarchy and mob rulesup1sup2 The application of this cinematictechnique throughout the trilogy and the addedmodified prologues of all threefilms are some of the means by which the lsquoepicrsquo register of Cacoyannisrsquo cinematicreceptions is established

b Epic themes

These visual elements are reinforced by the narrative thematic connections thatunderlie the plot of Cacoyannisrsquo receptions and connect them to the Homericepics One of the overarching concerns of Cacoyannisrsquo Euripidean trilogy is theemphasis he places on the price of war that echoes the exploration of thistheme in the Iliad Cacoyannisrsquo The Trojan Women and Iphigenia in particular

My discussion of this particular Homeric narrative technique using the language of film stud-ies is indebted to Nick Lowe (Royal Holloway College University of London) For the visual im-pact of the epics see also Greenwood and in particular ndash The negative role that the army plays in the development of the plot of Iphigenia reflects con-temporary political concerns about the key role that the military played during the dictatorshipBakogianni b ndash


reflect the ancient epicrsquos emphasis on the darker aspects of the war the loss oflife and the impact on the civilian population Two well-known passages that ex-emplify the Iliadic exploration of this theme are the death of Sarpedon(Il 16462ndash505) and Hectorrsquos moving but brief reunion with Andromache(Il 6369ndash502)sup1sup3 Both Greeks and Trojans faced the possibility of death in battlebut for the Trojans defeat also meant the enslavement of non-combatants Themeeting between husband and wife foreshadows Andromachersquos fate in Euripi-desrsquo Troades enslaved and without a protector she is utterly helpless to preventthe murder of her son Astyanax In his Trojan Women Cacoyannis dramatizedthis scene for contemporary cinematic audiences expanding on the feelings ofempathy that the epic engenders for the doomed Trojans (on the transformationsof this Iliadic scene see also Karamanou and Georgopoulou in this volume)

The Iliad balances this awareness of the consequences of war with the desireof the warriors to achieve aretē and to win kleossup1⁴ Achillesrsquo choice of a short butglorious life over a long peaceful one a choice to which he recommits after Pa-troclus falls in battle (Il 1888ndash126) encapsulates the epic concept of heroismIn the justification of the heroic code provided by Sarpedon (Il 12310ndash28) a war-rior is motivated by both a desire for the material gains that he can win in battleas well as the glory that allows a herorsquos reputation to outlive him (Chiasson 2009187ndash88) Cacoyannis however disrupted this balance between the benefits andthe cost of war in the epic His films stress the negative impact the war had onthe non-combatants and diminish the kleos it confers He thus subverts both hisepic and tragic sources In order to understand his approach to this key themehis cinematic receptions must be considered within their contemporary context

Cacoyannis created his trilogy during the turbulent decades of the 1960s and1970s when wars and conflicts around the world gave rise to an increasinglyvocal peace movement Cacoyannis too raised his voice in protest and as anact of resistance (Bakogianni 2009) He had personally experienced the tollthat modern warfare takes on the civilian population He lived through theBlitz in London during World War II and he documented the Turkish invasionof his home island of Cyprus in 1974 In response to these political upheavalsand their human cost Cacoyannis focused not on the glory of war but on itsprice The Trojan Women accentuate the tragedy of the fallen city of Troy symbol-

Sarpedon is portrayed sympathetically in the epic so his death at the hands of Patroclus islsquotragicrsquo but it is also necessary if he is to achieve heroic status Janko ndash Hectorspeaks first of his duty to his family and city (ll ndash) and only gradually reveals howdeep his feelings for Andromache run and how the thought of her future suffering (ll ndash) makes his imminent death more acceptable to him Graziosi Haubold ndash For a discussion of the popularity of the theme in more recent films see Paul ndash


ized by the fate of its former queen Hecuba (Katherine Hepburn) who desperate-ly and unsuccessfully tries to hold the last remnants of her family together Overthe course of Cacoyannisrsquo film as in Euripidesrsquo play the audience watches herlose her daughter Cassandra learn the news of Polyxenarsquos sacrifice and standby unable to aid her daughter-in-law Andromache and her grandson Astyanaxwho is thrown to his death from the walls Cacoyannisrsquo sympathies lie with He-cuba as demonstrated in the agon scene in which she wins the argument on arational basis but Helen ultimately triumphs by using her seductive charms tomanipulate Menelaus

Cacoyannisrsquo Iphigenia followed and explored in more detail the causes of theTrojan War This film was released three years after the invasion of Cyprus Thedirector returned home when this news reached him in order to create a recordof these dark events His documentary Attila 74 explores the causes that precipi-tated the Turkish invasion as well as its tragic aftermath Cacoyannis visited therefugee camps and captured on film first-hand accounts of the experience of thedisplaced focusing in particular on the suffering of grieving mothers and the be-wilderment and pain of children Iphigenia portrays its heroine as an innocentgirl betrayed by her male relatives for the sake of their political and military am-bitions Cacoyannisrsquo second Clytaemestra is also a much more sympathetic char-acter whose hatred of Agamemnon is made comprehensible to the audience Inher grief at the loss of her daughter she becomes the Greek counterpart of theTrojan Hecuba and a symbol for all Cypriot mothers mourning their dead chil-dren (Bakogianni 2013a 216ndash 17)

Cacoyannisrsquo preoccupation with the importance of family life and domestic-ity reflects similar themes in the Odyssey Cacoyannis emphasized the impor-tance of home and family in his cinematic receptions by demonstrating the dis-ruptive effect that war has on them The Trojan Women accomplishes this bystressing the womenrsquos feelings of loss The men of Troy are already dead Domes-tic harmony has been destroyed and now lives on only in the memory of moth-ers wives and daughters In Iphigenia on the other hand Cacoyannis exploresthe gradual destruction of familial bonds The director provided a glimpse ofhappy domesticity in the scenes between mother and daughter at Mycenae men-tioned above and on their trip to Aulis only to show how the royal family breaksapart when Clytaemestra and Iphigenia learn the true purpose of Agamemnonrsquosrequest that his daughter joins him at Aulis The tragic results of the wedge thisdrives between husband and wife are demonstrated in Cacoyannisrsquo Electra whenClytaemestra murders Agamemnon in the prologue and thus irrevocably destroysthe last ties that bind the family together As the heir to his fatherrsquos throneOrestes is smuggled away to safety and the rift between mother and daughter wi-dens The audience has already witnessed the young Electra of the prologue


brush off her motherrsquos hand from her shoulder but her contempt becomes ha-tred after the murder of her father In another scene added by Cacoyannis theaudience sees Clytaemestra forcing her daughter now embodied by Papas tomarry the peasant against her wishes The relationship portrayed in this sceneis one of conflict Mother and daughter should be philoisup1⁵ but in Cacoyannisrsquo re-ception they are clearly echthroi This is demonstrated again in the agon whenthey verbalise their two diametrically opposite positions

A theme related to the exploration and validation of the importance of fam-ily life and domesticity is that of nostos Odysseusrsquo ten-year long quest to returnto his oikos is contrasted with Agamemnonrsquos fatal early return (HeubeckWestHainsworth 1998 16ndash 17) Cacoyannis explores Agamemnonrsquos nostos in thefirst and third film of his trilogy In the prologue of his Electra Cacoyannis dem-onstrated to his audience the unsuccessful culmination of Agamemnonrsquos nostosThe spectators act as witnesses to Agamemnonrsquos murder by Clytaemestra andAegisthus in the bath It is this crime that provides the springboard for the re-venge plot that follows and Cacoyannis accentuates this point by allowing hisfilm audience to view the murder In contrast the Agamemnon of Cacoyannisrsquothird film is not a returning hero murdered by an evil wife as in his ElectraAs embodied by Costas Kazakos Agamemnon is a weak man responsible for de-stroying his own family by his ambition to lead the Greek army against Troy Thelast scene of the film in which Clytaemestra gazes at the departing fleet with ha-tred in her eyes brings the audience full circle back to the first film in the trilogyand Cacoyannisrsquo portrayal of the murder of Agamemnon (McDonald 2001 100)Unlike Odysseus his nostos was unsuccessful as his ghost reveals to his old com-rade (Od 11405ndash34) In his third film Cacoyannis lays the blame for Clytaemes-trarsquos betrayal squarely at Agamemnonrsquos feet Despite trials and tribulationsOdysseus achieves his longed-for goal which is to restore domestic harmonyand order to his oikos In contrast Cacoyannis presented his audience with anAgamemnon who had irrevocably destroyed his family by sacrificing his daugh-ter at the altar of his ambitions and could therefore never really return to it

c Heroic values and characterization

Iliadic values underpin Cacoyannisrsquo characterization of many of his heroes and her-oines His three main female protagonists Electra Hecabe and Iphigenia display

For an exploration of the problematic nature of philia in Euripidesrsquo Electra see Konstan ndash


strong Homeric qualities such as their preoccupation with timē (honour) and kleos(gloryreputation) In his adaptation of a Euripidean play Cacoyannis created an ide-alized and sympathetic Electra who fights for justice and the restoration of the right-ful succession The royal oikos was brutally violated and its workings disrupted byAegisthusrsquo and Clytemnestrarsquos murder of Agamemnon Electra is determined to helpher brother Orestes restore order to their family and to the city but ultimately thesiblings fail and are obliged to go into exile Cacoyannis thus creates an lsquoepicrsquo ver-sion of Electra that contrasts sharply with Euripidesrsquo more prosaic tragic heroineworried about her status and inheritance (El 303ndash22)

The Trojan Women emphasizes the nobility of Hecabe in particular but alsothat of Andromache (Vanessa Redgrave) and the other Trojan survivors It por-trays them as heroic in their capacity to endure and to adapt to their tragicchange of fortune An illustrative example is Andromachersquos heroic but ultimatelydoomed attempt to protect Astyanax from the Greeksrsquo decree of death In the filmshe actively tries to resist by hugging her son to herself and trying to preventTalthybius (Brian Blessed) from seizing him and sending him to his death He-cabe and the Chorus surround her in a loose circle supporting her emotionallyIn the end however the tragic mother is forced to relinquish her son but shedoes so in a dignified manner that condemns the cruelty of the Greek perpetra-tors Cacoyannis drives this point home by allowing his audience to glimpse themurder of Astyanax He is shown at the walls of Troy accompanied by a Greeksoldier and a dizzying montage of the rocks below suggests his fall The abilityto survive thus becomes a heroic quality in Cacoyannis and an act of resistancein itself In contrast the Greeks are portrayed as weak unjust and downrightcruel which further enhances the heroic qualities of the Trojan women

In Iphigenia Cacoyannis explains the young heroinersquos change of heart as apatriotic sacrifice so that the Greek army can avenge the insult of Helenrsquos abduc-tion She realizes that she cannot save herself but she can choose the manner ofher death and how she is remembered Prompted by her love for her father andaware of the threat posed by the Greek army to her family she chooses a gloriousdeath that prefigures Achillesrsquo own choice The epic hero reconsiders his deci-sion after his quarrel with Agamemnon (Il 9308ndash429) but ultimately he recom-mits to it after the death in battle of Patroclus Cacoyannis thus created an Iphi-genia that was a fitting partner to this epic Achilles even though their marriagenever actually took place However Iphigeniarsquos decision indirectly leads to thedeath of Achilles and it destroys her own family as well as the city of Troy

Despite the good intentions of Cacoyannisrsquo heroines however their decisionshave terrible consequences Revenge comes at the cost of matricide in Electra andIphigeniarsquos heroic decision is shown to be manifestly misguided in Cacoyannisrsquo re-ception of the problematic text of the Iphigenia in Aulis Moreover the happiness of


domestic life briefly portrayed in the early scenes of the prologue of Electra andmore extensively in the depiction of the loving and nurturing relationship betweenClytaemestra and Iphigenia is utterly destroyed by the heroinersquos actions howevernoble in intent Iphigeniarsquos decision also leads directly to the destruction of He-cabersquos world Τhe tragic queen loses her last links to her past life over the courseof the film which ends with her and the Chorus walking away from the ruins ofTroy and heading towards the Greek ships that will bear them away to a life of slav-ery Cacoyannis portrays the traditional concept of heroism with its emphasis onhonour glory and a good reputation in a negative light He valorizes instead thecourage of the victim (McDonald 1983 132)

Many of Cacoyannisrsquo male characters retain a heroic presence reminiscent ofthat of the warriors of epic rather than of the ambiguous protagonists of Euripi-desrsquo dramas The director modifies the ancient concept of heroism based on mili-tary prowess by introducing modern concerns such as the responsibility of aleader to rule justly and romantic love The directorrsquos first conception of Aga-memnon as the audience sees him in the silent prologue of his Electra is asthe returning conqueror of Troy In the film his mantle is gradually assumedby his son Orestes (Yannis Fertis) His is a journey from ephebe to full heroic war-rior status similar to Telemachusrsquo trajectory in the Odyssey Nestor in fact holdsup Orestes as a role model for the prince of Ithaca (Od 3304ndash 10)sup1⁶ In Cacoyan-nisrsquo reception the audience watches Orestes grow in stature over the course ofthe film from an unsure youth to an active participant and shaper of the plotPylades Electra and the old retainer guide him but he takes the lead in the kill-ing of Aegisthus at the feast and afterwards His most heroic action by far how-ever is to go into voluntary exile at the end of the film because he has lost thesupport of the people after committing matricide (Bakogianni 2011 190ndash91) Inthe closing scenes of the film he even gives up on the companionship of Pyladessilently commanding him to follow Electra instead Cacoyannisrsquo Orestes can nowstand alone and stoically accept the consequences of his actions It is this newtype of heroism that is valorized by Cacoyannis

Achilles in Iphigenia (played by Panos Mihalopoulos) is also presented as aheroic if rather rash warrior This more closely resembles his portrayal in theepic than in Euripidesrsquo more ambiguous and questioning version of the Homerichero (McDonald 1983 156) Cacoyannis portrays the Achaeansrsquo greatest warrioras willing to defend Iphigenia even if that entails opposing the will of theGreek army Cacoyannis added a scene in which Achillesrsquo own troops throw

The epic marginalizes the matricide and instead stresses the rightful killing of AegisthusHeubeckWest Hainsworth


stones at him and refuse to help him defend Iphigenia He is thus a sympatheticfigure whose arrogance is tempered by his courage Cacoyannis also adds roman-tic love as a facet of his portrayal of the herosup1⁷ In the film as in the play hisagreement to defend Iphigenia after Clytaemestrarsquos supplication is motivatedby his sense that his honour has been impugned When however Iphigeniaand Achilles do meet later in the film Cacoyannis suggests that his young pro-tagonists fall in love at first sight (MacKinnon 1986 90 and Bakogianni 2013a229) This romantic love coupled with her love for her father and family formsthe bedrock of the motivation that leads Cacoyannisrsquo young heroine to decideto submit to the sacrifice demanded of her

Concluding remarks

In Michael Cacoyannisrsquo trilogy of films the close connection between the Homericepics and Greek tragedy is performed in the modern medium of cinema Cacoyannisinverts the traditional relationship between these two genres by re-heroizing Euripi-des (MacKinnon 1986 94) The directorrsquos purportedly lsquoEuripideanrsquo trilogy is in factinfused with lsquoepicrsquo elements in terms of its visual language as well as of narrativeand characterization However in contrast to other cinematic adaptations whoseclaim of being modelled on one of the Homeric epics can be more explicitlyconstructedsup1⁸ Cacoyannisrsquo relationship with the epics is a more indirect implicitone Moreover it is one that needs to be carefully disentangled like Penelopersquosun-weaving of the shroud of Laertes at night

Wolfgang Petersen in his Troy () also added romantic love as an essential element in hisportrayal of Achilles His love for Briseis is a powerful force that drives his heroism particularlyat the end of the film when he dies in order to save her For an exploration of this theme in thefilm see Chiasson ndash See also Allen ( ndash) and Blondell on the empha-sis the film places on the Achilles-Briseis romance ( ) For the reception of the Homeric epics in the cinema see Solomon ndash and Paul ndash In the new millenniumWolf Petersenrsquos film Troy () is one such reception thatinscribes its claim to have been lsquoinspiredrsquo by the Iliad in its opening credits


Hara Thliveri

lsquoTravelling to the Light Aiming at theInfinitersquo The Odyssey of Mikis Theodorakis

There are many elements in common between Mikis Theodorakissup1 and Homerfrom their birth on the same island Chios to their being claimed by many citiesThe most important is that Theodorakis the most famous modern Greek compos-er active during the last eighty years managed to elevate poetry to a continuingnarrative of national Greek myth The objective of the present study is to exploreTheodorakisrsquo refiguration of the idea of Homeric nostos in his most recent song-cycle entitled Odyssey with poetry by Kostas Kartelias The work was set to musicin 2006 and was recorded as a CD by Legend Recordings in 2007 with Maria Far-andouri as a soloist and orchestration by Irina Velentinovasup2 The official pressconference to launch the CD took place on 20 March 2007 at Pallas Theatre inAthens in the presence of the composersup3

I shall start by pointing out the significance of the photograph used on thecover of the CD in which the composer is depicted at the age of twelve at the

I am grateful to Mikis Theodorakis for his reading of my text and for his suggestions which ledI hope to a better overall structure Many thanks to Theodorakisrsquo assistant Rena Parmenidou tothe poet Kostas Kartelias for his invitation to attend the performance of Canto General at theHerodeion on July to the painter Nikolas Klironomos for his collaboration and hispermission to publish one of his paintings of Theodorakis to the company Legend Recordings forpermission to reproduce the cover of the Odyssey to Maria Hatzara for the information from thearchive of Maria Farandouri and to Alexandra Sgouropoulou from the Orchestra ldquoMikis Theo-dorakisrdquo I warmly thank Professor Gail Holst-Warhaft for her support and her permission to useextracts from her translation of the Odyssey of Kartelias and also the painter Yannis Psychopedisfor his permission to publish a photograph of his painting Lower Limbs ndash History Lesson (Figure) Finally I am obliged to Dr Ioanna Karamanou and Dr Thanasis Efstathiou for their invitation toparticipate in the Homeric Receptions Conference in Corfu (ndash November ) in a sessionentitled lsquoRefiguring Homer in Film and Musicrsquo The premiere of the Odyssey took place on June at Kyme Euboea at an event in hon-our of the poet Kostas Kartelias see httpwwwcumagrcontentblogcategoryIt was preceded by the live performance of two songs (ldquoBeautiful Helenrdquo and ldquoThe Song of theSirensrdquo) during a concert by Maria Farandouri in Munich on September at a timewhen the CD had not yet come out on January a substantial part of the work was pre-sented at the Megaron Mousikis (Concert Hall) in Athens with Maria Farandouri and the BerlinerInstrumentalisten as part of a tribute to Mikis Theodorakis For the entire press-conference see httpwwwyoutubecomwatchv= QYnEgJlzm (Part to Part b)

time when he lived in Patras with his family (Figure 1)⁴ In his autobiographyTheodorakis described his two-year stay in the Achaean capital (1937ndash38) aslsquocarefree yearsrsquo⁵ and states that the main event of that period which determinedhis later course was his enrolment in the Odeion of Patras and his decision toinvolve himself in music⁶ The publication of the childhood photograph becomesan important element adding to the autobiographical significance of the Odys-sey as a means of mythologizing the personal history of the composer Theodor-

The picture dates from and is part of a family photograph in which apart from theyoung Mikis appear his father Georgios Theodorakis his mother Aspasia and his youngerbrother Yannis see Theodorakis Theodorakis Theodorakis see also the painting Patras of Klironomos in Figure following

Figure 1 The cover of the Odyssey Legend Recordings 2007 Photograph of Mikis Theodorakis atthe age of twelve in 1937 Published by permission of Legend Recordings

418 Hara Thliveri

akis is here portrayed as the central figure of the myth as another Odysseus whowishes to return to his own Ithaca On this basis I shall attempt to show that thesetting of the Odyssey to music represents the completion of the composerrsquos per-sonal nostos Then

Odyssey could mean the long journey of Mikis Theodorakis in the Sea of Music which he start-ed when he wrote his first song in Patras in 1937 at the age of 12 continuing until the mostrecent stop in April 2006 at the age of 81 when he composed the 14 songs of this Odyssey⁷

At the same time Theodorakisrsquo Odyssey provides an incentive to explore the re-ception of the Odyssean nostos in popular discourse⁸ by posing the question ofhow ancient symbols feed collective memory (on the archetypal Odyssean nostosand its reworkings see also Jacob in this volume) Theodorakis himself at theage of 81 when he composed his Odyssey gave his own answer by realizingthe failure of social and cultural values to re-build a better world for the advo-cacy of which he has spent most of his life His Odyssey leads to a heterotopianenvironment a lonely performing toposwhich cannot exist anywhere else but atlsquothe depths of our beingrsquo As such Theodorakis highlights the end of a whole eramdashmainly of the 20th centurymdash which was characterized by the dramatic endeav-ours of the Greek people for territorial stability the establishment of democracyand political independence⁹ The new age is that of crushing people by isolationhard working conditions lack of free time cheap cultural prototypes for con-sumption and lack of spirituality

We are living the end of utopia which was as now our capacity to live together with theldquootherrdquo The awareness of such a great tragedy is that which desiccates us all the more Con-sequently salvation is found at least in the emotional return to the depths of our ldquobeingrdquo incase we find the water we lack and slake our thirstsup1⁰

Towards this direction I shall demonstrate that Theodorakisrsquo nostos is not staticit rather signifies the setting for a new orientation Self-knowing becomes thefirst step of an inner-outer process which reaches the linking of man primarily

From the leaflet included with the CD of the Odyssey Legend Recordings On the features of Homeric nostos and its reception see Taplin ndash Haubold ndash ndash Zajko On the persistence of this motif throughout an-cient as well as Modern Greek literature see Alexopoulou esp ch and Appendix Alex-opoulou ndash On the appropriation of classical models for socio-political purposes see the examples dis-cussed in Hardwick ndash van Steen esp ndash Hardwick ndash From the leaflet included with the CD of the Odyssey Legend Recordings


with himself and secondarilywith his external cosmic environment This type ofreturn already developed by the poet Angelos Sikelianos (1884ndash 1951) presents anew mythology of facing the world through the deliverance of poetry

Returning is at the core of Sikelianosrsquo poetry from the opening words of his first major poem(ldquoAlaphroiskiotosrdquo) to the great works of his maturity[hellip] Return is associated by Sikelianoswith rebirth and rejuvenation the poetic process is a form of resurrection and ancient mythand texts are given a new lease of life through their reworking in new poemssup1sup1

In the course of elucidating Theodorakisrsquo perception of nostos it will be worthcomparing it with the contemporary paintings of Yannis Psychopedis includedin his exhibition Nostos which was held in Athens in 2008 I shall argue thatPsychopedisrsquo view is totally different it rather seems to highlight the gap be-tween then and now in order to reveal the contradictory relationship of the an-cient past and the present His view bare critical but also nostalgic aspiresto portray social degradation and his nostos suggests that ldquothe idea-value-prin-ciple exists minus its ultimate receiverrdquosup1sup2 The symbols of antiquity statues andmyths typical elements of morality and humanistic development are lsquotrappedrsquoin a way that signals a non-return direction in the future

The Greece of today the wounded environment the neglected values the debasedmdashto a largeextentmdash cultural heritage of Greece the forgotten tradition sybaritism the imitation of un-worthy models In the end as well as at the very beginning it is Greece from which wehave turned away our gazesup1sup3

a The nostos of childhood

The depiction of the young Theodorakis on the cover of the CD (Figure 1) is note-worthy to the extent that it determines the external time of his life journey andthe features of his personal nostos The fourteen songs of the Odyssey are iden-tified as much emotionally as expressively with the deepest and purest facets ofthe composerrsquos soulsup1⁴ The Odyssey then concerns a return to the first starting-

Ekdawi Takis Mavrotas in Psychopedis opcit ndash The titles of the songs are lsquoBeside the Searsquo lsquoThe Song of the Companionsrsquo lsquoShip-wreckrsquo lsquoThe Song of the Sirensrsquo lsquoIn the Underworldrsquo lsquoOn Calypsorsquos Islersquo lsquoBeautifulHelenrsquo lsquoCircersquo lsquoLike a Beastrsquo lsquoThe Love Godrsquo lsquoSea Witchrsquo lsquoTo Nausicarsquo lsquoPe-

420 Hara Thliveri

point of life and to the settings to music of that period Theodorakis himself hasacknowledged that his artistic nature lsquowas the creationrsquosup1⁵ of his youthful periodand most importantly he has recognized the Odyssey songs as a recollection ofthe musical enquiries of his childhood (1937ndash43)sup1⁶ Morphologically the stylehere follows the composerrsquos turn in the 1980s towards utmost lyricism and mel-ody with harmony without populist elementssup1⁷ It is music with even greater spi-rituality The piano the violin the cello the percussion the mandolin the sax-ophone the guitar and the clarinet are the main instruments while the absenceof the bouzouki can be explained as a conscious return to childhood soundssup1⁸Theodorakis enthrals us with the density of the motifs and the overall strength ofthe composition so that the Odyssey comes to denote another stage in the evo-lution of the so-called popular art song which emerged in the 1960s with the Ep-itaphios of Yannis Ritsossup1⁹

In the case of Theodorakis the journey of life constitutes a crooked linethrough a large number of places in which the composer lived during his child-hood Chios (1925) Mytilene (1925ndash28) Syros and Athens (1929) Ioannina(1930ndash32) Argostoli (1933ndash36) Patras (1937ndash38) Pyrgos (1938ndash39) and Tripo-lis (1939ndash43)sup2⁰ The young Theodorakis followed his family moves because ofhis father who serving as a high civil servant had undertaken several unwel-come moves because of his pro-Venizelos viewssup2sup1 The year 1943 one year beforethe liberation of the country from the Germans constitutes a new page in Mikisrsquolife as he settles in Athens and begins his systematic involvement in music

nelopersquos Songrsquo lsquoWithout Identityrsquo For a wider approach to the song-cycle see Κoutoulas Theodorakis Theodorakis at the press conference on the Odyssey March Pallas Theatre Athens(Part ) see above n Theodorakisrsquo gradual move towards lyricism is initiated in with his setting to musicpoetry of Tasos Livaditis entitled The Lyrics followed more firmly with his setting to music po-etry of Dionysis Karatzas and more specifically The Faces of the Sun () Like an AncientWind () Beatrice in Zero Street (set to music in recorded in ) and The More Lyr-ical () For the significance of melody in the music of Theodorakis overall see Lazaridou-Elmaloglou Part ndash Theodorakis used the bouzouki and elements of rembetika for the first time in the Epitaphiosof Ritsos in see Mouyis ff On the Epitaphios see Mouyis ndash especially see also Beaton ndash Τheodorakis see also Giannaris ndash Τheodorakis


The constant displacements of Theodorakisrsquo family during the period 1925ndash43 made this period significant for moulding the composerrsquos personality As hasalready been noticed

Perhaps there might be sometime in the future seriously focused studies to show what hehimself (i eTheodorakis) implies that there is a relationship of his initial wanderings withother subsequent creative wanderings and pursuitssup2sup2

Going through Theodorakisrsquo autobiography of his first eighteen years one under-stands quite easily that in his case the geographical wandering leads to anotherversion of the persona of Odysseus Theodorakis bears the stigma of the ldquoself-imprisonedrdquosup2sup3 and self-exiled as the severance from his many homes carriesthe meaning of exclusion from the world of those who live without travellingWith the features of the outsider (ξένος) the young Mikis felt barely acceptedin each new city that he moved to

I was always the outsider In Ioannina an Athenian in Argostoli an Epirote in Patras aCephallonian and so onsup2⁴

Because in contrast to the child who lives permanently in the village or the town and has asteady reference point ndash even though low and inadequate - the child who is uprooted con-stantly does not manage to absorb anythingsup2⁵

Theodorakisrsquo diverse experiences in the Greek provinces constituted a source ofinspiration for the painter Nikolas Klironomos who created a series of ten im-pressive paintings naming them after the towns where the composer lived (seeFigure 2) The paintings of Klironomos were presented first in 2007 in an exhibi-tion of the painter in Athens entitled His childhood years hellip a journeysup2⁶ In 2008the works were exhibited at the lsquoMikis Theodorakis Museumrsquo in Zatouna Arca-dia as part of the celebrations of the 40th anniversary of Theodorakisrsquo exile inZatouna and in December 2010 they were lent to the Evgenidou Foundation dur-ing the celebration of the 85th birthday of the composer Klironomosrsquo work a kindof lsquowall newspaperrsquo of photographs sketches newspaper clippings manuscriptsand musical notes exploits elements of the composerrsquos autobiography by defin-

Kouyoumoutzakis Theodorakis Theodorakis All extracts from Theodorakis are translated by the author op cit The exhibition took place in the Gallery lsquoEkfrasi-Yianna Grammatopouloursquo see Klironomos (Catalogue) Hermann ndash

422 Hara Thliveri

ing his private space the bedrooms of his childhood which acting as a colourfulfantasy lsquoshellrsquo protected him from the lsquohostilersquo outside world

The prerequisite for the perpetuation of the figure of Odysseus though isnot the journey but his capacity to return In its core nostos is schismatic asthe breakup of the primordial image of the cosmos mdashthrough alternations of pla-ces traits and peoplemdash causes fateful divisions as much with the external envi-ronment as with the self The basic question about the Odyssey of Mikis Theodor-akis is then under which presuppositions does his nostos become possible

b The reconstruction of the lost prototype

In setting the Odyssey to music Theodorakis claims his spiritual locality in Patrasat the age of twelve years old The reconnection with childhood sixty-nine yearslater (1937ndash2006) attains the significance of the highest challenge as long as thesigns of familiarity which unite him with the starting-point and erase the lossesof the journey must be recognizedsup2⁷ Overcoming the inertia of nostalgia the at-tainment of nostos in the Odyssey manages to bridge the distance between thepresent and the pastsup2⁸ The transparency of feelings and the deferential congru-ence of music with the poetic word are two distinct elements which fascinate usso that we can say that the lsquotruersquo Ithaca is reached by the person who has builthimself on the mythology of childhood and who never lost faith in the aestheticworld throughout his life In Theodorakisrsquo Odyssey I would say that what occursis what Elytis writes in Εν λευκώ (Carte Blanche)

The way to speak about the past without becoming suspected of nostalgia has not yet beenfound Nevertheless it is one thing to load time and to carry it together with your wrinkles andanother to circulate within it backwards-forwards with the easiness that only poetry allowsyousup2⁹

The poetry of Kartelias with its expressive austerity and emotional innocencebecomes the vehicle for Theodorakisrsquo reconnection with his youthful inspirationIn other words poetry creates the premises for the performing of nostos Besides

For his arduous process of composition especially after the age of seventy see the press-con-ference on the Odyssey (Part ) see above n An opposite example could be the lsquoReturn of the Emigrantrsquo by Giorgos Seferis (Deck Diary A) who upon returning to his homeland feels the greatest loss of the past because he can-not harmonize the signs of the present in his memory Elytis

ndash


Theodorakis started as a songwriter with the members of his own family as hisaudience

It is not well-known that I started as a songwriter Besides this was the only thing that wecould do in the provinces We did not have a piano we did not have school orchestras weonly sang So at the age of twelve (this is the reason for this photograph it is exactly in Patraswhen I was twelve) I compose my first songsup3⁰

The composerrsquos first song is entitled lsquoThe Boatrsquo and was written in 1937sup3sup1 Theconnection to the Odyssey is an emotional stylistic and semiological associa-tion as in this most recent song-cycle the return to the harbour and the deliver-ance from the early memories are achieved It is worth referring to Klironomosrsquopainting entitled Patras (Figure 2) in which the young Mikisrsquo room is depicted

with his first violin on the left side of his desk and his first handwritten scoreof the aforementioned song hanging on the wall above the lampsup3sup2

Theodorakis press-conference on the Odyssey (Part see above n ) Theodorakis Theodorakis Klironomos

Figure 2 Nikolas Klironomos Patras work VII mixed techniques on canvas paper and card-board 100 x 180 cm 2005ndash2006 Published by permission of Nikolas Klironomos

424 Hara Thliveri

Setting Odyssey to music evokes the preparatory phase of the composer be-tween 1937 and 1943sup3sup3 when he started to set to music poems of the leadingGreek poets found in school text-books Dimitris Karvounis who conductedthe choral teaching of forty youthful songs of Theodorakis points out that inthese songs lsquothere is a finished compositional proposal with a morphologicalbalance an aesthetic and perfectly artistic resultrsquosup3⁴

The exceptional value of the first songs is that they constitute the lsquocore of themusical self rsquosup3⁵ of Theodorakis representing also his psychological need to ex-press himself during the lonely years of family travels In sum the Odyssey en-capsulates an analogous need of Theodorakis to recognize his childhood dreamfor reasons which as we shall see are not far distant from those of his youth Inthis manner the ring-composition of the Homeric journey is displayed in thatthe start becomes the end and the end forms a new beginning

c The anti-journey of utopia

The poet Kostas Kartelias is another version of the wandering Odysseus wholeaves his birthplace in Athens during his childhood and establishes himselfwith his father in Euboea

I would say that loneliness characterizes my childhood The loneliness of few words My sib-lings and cousins whom I loved and used to talk to had left for Athens to study Conversa-tions and life in the village were very poor Imagination was insufficient and dangerous indaily life I wanted to leave hellipsup3⁶

And here the return to Ithaca is reconstructed on an inner field which reveals theharmony of the individual with himself after a struggle and the liberation from ex-ternal circumstances The writing of Kartelias breathes warmth and unpretentiousfamiliarity and manages to approach man as a suffering sensuous being

In the poem lsquoBeside the Searsquosup3⁷ Ithaca becomes synonymous with the very centreof existence lsquothe depths of my soulrsquo which takes on perspective and lsquohorizonrsquothrough the fulfillment of feelings The Cavafy-like didacticism does not apply

Cf Theodorakis httpintmikis-theodorakisnetindexphparticlearchive Koutoulas ndash Karvounis cf Theodorakis Τheodorakis Cf Theodorakis First Songs Intuition (CD) httpwwwcumagrcontentview see also Kartelias Cf translation by Holst-Warhaft


Laistrygonians Cyclopsangry Poseidonmdashdonrsquot be afraid of themsup3⁸

Odysseus speaking in the first person admits that the only way to find solaceescaping lsquothe fury of Poseidonrsquo and lsquothe anger of the windsrsquo is through loveThe lsquofire in my breastrsquo as he writes is lsquoa sign of return to an Ithaca that Imust return to on my lifersquos long journeyrsquo

In lsquoThe Song of the Companionsrsquo the intrinsic human powers engender atype of poetic nostos towards an Ithaca perceived as lsquothe open searsquo challengingus to lsquojourney into dangerrsquo lsquoGreetings sacred dangerrsquo Sikelianos writes similarlyin lsquoThe Song of the Argonautsrsquo while subsequently

Silent virgin peace in which journey you will immerse usnow where our effort blossomed wingssup3⁹

In these circumstances eros is a powerful impetus of a route which leads againstany prevailing restraint and manipulation As a result of this process the poeticnostos manages to raise life to a more genuine non-materialistic level in whichimagination and perceptible understanding play a primary role The followingexcerpt is from the lsquoThe Song of the Companionsrsquo

The world alwaysfinds new rulersand we lonely poetswill remain

Being consistent with this outlook Theodorakis records how solitude (as a resultof the constant childhood moves) set him on the road to music as a kind of de-fence against external circumstances

My pathological absorption in and pursuit of music which happened [hellip] in 1938ndash39 at Pyr-gos in Elis had as its basis a psychological motivation a personal answer of my ownmdash a kindof escape but also of liberation from the imaginary walls which I had raised around me re-fusing even to stroll in the community of people⁴⁰

The progress towards the poetic nostos is the anti-journey within the journey andthe self-conscious placing against all conventionalism of life It concerns also the

Keeley Sherrard (lsquoIthacarsquo by C Cavafy) Sikelianos

extract translated by Hara Thliveri Theodorakis ndash

426 Hara Thliveri

dynamics towards utopia the search for the ideal the metaphysical passage tofreedom which surpasses adversities Theodorakis writes

I was pleased when in 1947 and 1948 they lsquotravelledrsquo us on their say-so so as to send us intoexile On the beach my parents were wailing and even though I was bound with handcuffs Iwas trying with difficulty to hide the wave of joy flaring up within me because soon we wouldset sail aiming at piercing the horizon ndash the journey⁴sup1

This liberating vision was the fundamental ideological motivation for Theodor-akis all his life during his youth as well as later through his personal stancein political and social struggles He himself admits that

Facing problems ndashsocial and nationalndash became at least on my part in one way dream-likeideological and not at all realistic⁴sup2

d Return to the first self

In 1943 in a period of spiritual searching during his stay in Tripolis Theodorakismoulds his theory of Universal Harmony⁴sup3 which conveys his existential strivingfor the detection of the bonds of man with the cosmos and the lsquopursuit of the Idealrsquo

that is of the significant centre which is found very deep within us and at the same time faraway because it is the law of the Cosmos of the Beginning and the End⁴⁴

Theodorakisrsquo conception of Universal Harmony which is extended to the abilityof art to reproduce the notional links within the cosmic environment⁴⁵ reflectsin my opinion a mental kinship with the views of Angelos Sikelianos who al-ready in lsquoThe Visionaryrsquo (lsquoAlafroiskiotosrsquo 1909) bases the theory of the returnto the first self

Theodorakis cf Theodorakis ndash lsquoa journey to the light aiming at theinfinitersquo which inspired the title of this article Τheodorakis For an overview of Universal Harmony see Theodorakis ff Theodorakis ndash Lazaridou-Elmaloglou (Part I) ff Mouyis ndash Theodorakis Theodorakis cf Mouyis lsquoArt was the only power that could create with-in us a microcosm in perfect parallel with the Cosmos It could transfer the Laws that define Uni-versal Harmony inside usrsquo


At this outset my entire Being is situated from the beginning biologically unbreakable as theprincipal core of a clear experience of the cosmic consciousness of life⁴⁶

Sikelianos and Theodorakis reinforce the nostalgia for the attainment of the oneintrinsic centre which constitutes the sole umbilical bond of man with the uni-verse They both regard the youthful years as enabling the individual to become areceiver of cosmic pulse through poetics and senses In the lsquoHymn of the GreatNostosrsquo of Sikelianos the first self is the biological unity revealing the indisput-able bond of man with the universe

And as the armed Eros descends before methe depths of heavenwithout my seeking it I leap and dance in turnwith my mindrsquos armοur⁴⁷

For the young Theodorakis the linking of man with the cosmos occurs throughmusic as music transfers to man the Law of the Universe which happens alsoto be the Law of Total Creation⁴⁸ The composer highlights the influence of Pal-amaswho lsquobelieved that rhythm in poetry mdashthe rhythmic stridemdash symbolizes therhythm that governs the Universersquo⁴⁹ In another more metaphysical manner Si-kelianos considers that

Τhe oral Poetic World [hellip] represents [hellip] the fundamental tone of the deep biological and psy-chological Unity of the Universe and of man with the Universe and man⁵⁰

Here I argue that the aforementioned views of Sikelianos and Theodorakis dem-onstrate the greatest capacity of the poetic nostos to attain hyper-realistic percep-tion within the bounds of human life They both consider the period of youth tobring out the strongest spiritual powers of man As Theodorakis says

Perhaps the composer at that time between the ages of 12 and 16 is more genuine He speaksmore with himself with the Universe with his inspiration⁵sup1

Sikelianos

Sikelianos extract translated by Hara Thliveri

Theodorakis ndash see also Theodorakis Theodorakis ndash Sikelianos See Koutoulas

428 Hara Thliveri

Consequently the return of Theodorakis through his Odyssey to his first self asfulfilment of his poetic nostos renders the power of man to capture the catholicessence of life the essence that is which joins the spiritual experience with theapparent world In The Visionary of Sikelianos the young Odysseus is met sleep-ing on some seashore of his homeland after his return⁵sup2 In this way through thehypnosis of the mind and the awakening of the senses the poet lays the groundfor the opening of his poetic inspiration⁵sup3

The metaphysics of the senses likewise play a role in the poetry of KarteliasIn lsquoThe Song of the Sirensrsquo⁵⁴ lsquothe wind blows a song that seems endlessrsquo and thesound of the sea is fragmented into lsquoa thousand voicesrsquo Within a boundless seasetting there is lsquono mast to be tied to and no ropersquo The ties with the materialworld are halted and the dilemma of Odysseus is not how to avoid lsquoso muchmusicrsquo but which of all to choose The Sirens in contrast to the fearsome Homer-ic monsters we know represent the enchanting call of the art leading beyond theborders of the world of experience

When the ocean starts singingtherersquos so much music to beara thousand voices so you donrsquot knowhow to choose and therersquos no mast to be tied toand no ropeIrsquoll soar on my wingsthat Irsquoll spreadover the strange islands of paradise

The conception of this moving boat refers to a kind of ritual mystery-process inwhich the artist (as a mediator himself between the earth and the universe) lib-erates his inspiration by soaring on his wings The repetition at the end lsquountieyour hair so I can see yoursquo shows that this transforming mdashmore or less eroticmdash power of art towards freedom is the only path to the salvation of man offeringpeople an escape from lsquothe endless desertrsquo

Sikelianos (lsquoReturnrsquo) translated in ΚeeleySherrard Anagnostopoulos

ndash Ekdawi ndash esp The return of Odysseus to Lefkada implies a sense οf autochthony in view of the origin ofSikelianos cf Ricks Holst-Warhaft


Untie your hair so I can see you know youin the blind alleys of the worldin the endless desert of the worldUntie your hair so I can come and speak to youElsewhere Theodorakis refers to a lsquomysterious calling an erotic expectationrsquo

For me this heartrsquos longing this leap of the heart which I felt each time I crossed the seaby boat is exactly the same that I feel each time I decide to write a piece A mysterious callingan erotic expectation of the elusive⁵⁵

e The parameter of national awareness

According to Theodorakis the poem lsquoIn the Underworldrsquo has lsquohistorical social andultimately autobiographical contentrsquo and for this reason he chose to sing ithimself⁵⁶ The beloved dead the dead fellow-combatants themselves also spectresof an invisible world are the shades which Odysseus meets in Hades To keep nostosalive one must endure remembering In this waywith the feelings brightly burninghe can maintain his lyrical humidity so as not to be alienated by lsquosocietyrsquos filthrsquoOblivion kills the living the dead and makes nations disappear

Born in 1925 of Cretan descent⁵⁷ Mikis Theodorakis belongs to a generationwhich was scarred by the experiences of the Second World War the Occupationthe National Resistance against the Germans (1941ndash44) and the Civil War (1946ndash49) Maintaining throughout his life the patriotic ideals of the National LiberationFront (EAM)⁵⁸ Theodorakis reaches manhood in a period in which Greece claimsassociation with the achievements of 1821 and distances itself from the national de-feat of the Asia Minor Catastrophe (1922) Theodorakis then brings back the topog-raphy of the Odyssey from the shores of Asia Minor⁵⁹ and his birthplace in Chios tothe Eptanisa and the so-called lsquoOld Greecersquo From his first hearing lsquothe practisedchoirs or the bandsrsquo⁶⁰ in Argostoli and his first setting to music of poems of Solo-mosValaoritis Palamas and Drosinis in Patras Pyrgos and Tripolis (see also Figure2) Theodorakis reunites the scattered elements of Hellenism and lays the founda-

Lazaridou-Elmaloglou Addendum ΙΙ Theodorakis press-conference on the Odyssey (Part see above n ) For a recent overview of the biography of Theodorakis see Mouyis ndash Hamilakis ndash The composerrsquos parents and motherrsquos family were victims of the Asia Minor Catastrophe of Cf the antiheroic prototype of Odysseus in Seferis Ricks ndash Theodorakis ldquoFrom Argostoli when I heard the practised choirs or the bands thatis melody with harmony which in the end produced the Greek Art Song I felt an inexplicableattractionhelliprdquo

430 Hara Thliveri

tion for the reunification of the national body in other words he lays the founda-tion for the completeness and recollection of national nostos

But what are the popular connotations of nostos today in the second decadeof the 21st century Is there a common topos of return and how does nostos nur-ture national imagination⁶sup1 The received cultural acquisitions show but a muse-um character unless they inspire fruitfully the present As befits the circumstan-ces of personal awakening on a collective level a nation owes it to itself to resistthe declining memory of its past and to recognize its own familiar traces throughthe course of time In this way the emancipation of the literary prototypesmdashsuchas the Homeric onesmdash aligns the present with the past and brings out the con-temporary mythical heroes⁶sup2

A first answer to the above questions is provided by the composer In 2008 ayear after the premiere of the Odyssey of Theodorakis a dynamic contributionwas made by the exhibition of the painter Yannis Psychopedis entitled Nostosat the Cycladic Museum of Art in Athens In the exhibition a critical approachto modern Greek physiognomy was imprinted by contemplating the interrelationof the present with the recent historic past

Nostos the homeward journey of Odysseus from Troy exhibits Psychopedisrsquo intellectual brav-ado and obsession with constantly balancing on a tightrope with his eyes turning to the time-less forms of the art of the ancient Greek civilization or immersing himself in the contempla-tion of contemporary reality⁶sup3

In their conception the Odyssey of Theodorakis and the Nostos of Psychopedisrepresent two different receptions the reception of the first as said looks for-ward to utopia while that of the latter is dominated by a realistic criticalmood insisting on the memories of a mutilated past which seeks confirmationIn the Fragmented Memory⁶⁴ the cutting of the ancient statue stresses the weak-ness of our epoch to reformulate archetypal forms being also suggestive of themisleading effect of memory within time Additionally in the Lower LimbsndashHis-tory Lesson (Figure 3)⁶⁵ one understands that the greater the distance in time thegreater the alienation the harder the dialogue of the extremes and the familiarityof the allusions among themselves To conclude the nostos of Psychopedis is un-

For national imagination as the lsquonostalgia for the wholersquo see Hamilakis ndash Theodorakis Takis Mavrotas in Psychopedis Psychopedis Psychopedis (Plate)


Figure 3 Yannis Psychopedis Lower LimbsndashHistory Lesson 40 x 52 x 50 cm 1996 Reproducedby permission of Yannis Psychopedis

432 Hara Thliveri

fulfilled it involves a nightmarish dialectical discourse with the present whichunfortunately does not ensure a further promising co-existence

The last song of the Odyssey entitled lsquoWithout Identityrsquo adds new elementswhich are brought together in the realism of Psychopedis and in the fluid atmos-phere of the time In contrast with the previous thirteen poems Odysseus is hereportrayed as a wanderer within a faceless urban environment Nothing recalls theexcitement of travelling and the natural setting of lsquoΤhe Song of the Companionsrsquoor lsquoThe Song of the Sirensrsquo Odysseus introduces himself as lsquoNobodyrsquo an unknownperson who exists lsquoin the crowd in a city I do not knowrsquo In Theodorakisrsquo eyes themodern era marks an equivalent period of isolation Alienation is a new circum-stance of globalization and the devaluation of national ideals Thirty-seven yearsafter he set to music the lsquoSpiritual Marchrsquo (lsquoPneumatiko Emvatiriorsquo) of Sikelianos dur-ing his exile in Zatouna the lsquoaccomplishedrsquo Greece seems to have lost its heirs It isa period of degradation which becomes apparent as the composer observes in thedivision between the popular and art elements recurring in these days after the greatadvances of the decades after 1960⁶⁶ He also confesses

I stopped feeling the presence of others around me Sometimes I have the impression that Iam alone banished in a waste land [hellip] So whom do I write about About those whodonrsquot see and about those who donrsquot listen to me⁶⁷

f A personal performing topos

The Odyssey of Mikis Theodorakis prescribes the nostos to a personal performingtopos As lsquoa journey into dangerrsquo the Homeric return must end with the target ofself-realization ie the state of affirmation which leads to the bonds with child-hood For this attainment forgetfulness must be overcome however difficult thecircumstances Odysseus cannot exist as Nobody lsquowithout identity and nameamong peoplersquo The meeting-point of Kartelias and Theodorakis is poetrywhere poetry is regarded as the disposition of elevating life to a more self-know-ing level Theodorakis asserts

The lsquopersonrsquo that is ourselves must ultimately live the idea that Ithaca does not exist and thathe must be grasped by his own pathos and his own sentiments in order to stay on the surfaceof the rough sea which is life⁶⁸

Cf Theodorakisrsquo views on the predominant music scene Theodorakis ndash ndash Theodorakis From the leaflet included with the CD of the Odyssey Legend Recordings


At the end of this journey Ithaca is not lsquopoorrsquo it makes up for the empirical losses ofmemory Music comes to socialize the person and the poet-composer seeks lsquoto comeand speak to yoursquo The hieratic fervent voice of Maria Farandouri anchors the lyri-cism which never wavers The melody albeit nostalgic does not expose us to mel-ancholy There is a progressive climax towards an emotional profusion and a cycli-cal retrieval of feelings Ultimately the music of the Odyssey is liberating It is notthe memory-trauma but the memory-idea through the art-music The latter unitesthe perceptive dimension with the ostensible world Theodorakisrsquo Odyssey is trans-formed into a musical iconotopiaThe composer performs what he sees when he sitson a lsquofantastic hammockrsquo⁶⁹ at the edge of the universe There are no Homeric mon-sters but only the immersion in the world of music and the senses Τhe search oflsquothe depths of my soulrsquo becomes the prospect of man rejoining with his outward en-vironment in a dramatic attempt to amplify human limits And in this way thehuman course is tamed within the bounds of cosmos

Overcoming fortune is the destiny of heroes Each one who manages to keepthe measure of oneself and not to fall into the over- or under-estimation of timeis also an Odysseus Τhe journey of Theodorakis-lsquoOdysseusrsquo is the placement ofman in the universe For this journey there is an axiom to learn that the child-hood home is not just a place but lsquothose who love usrsquo⁷⁰

Theodorakis Theodorakis lsquoMy homeland was my house My parents Those who loved usrsquo

434 Hara Thliveri

Bibliography

Accorinti D Chuvin P (eds) (2003) Des Geacuteants agrave Dionysos AlessandriaAcosta-Hughes B Kosmetatou E Baumbach M (eds) (2004) Labored in Papyrus Leaves

Perspectives on an Epigram Collection Attributed to Posidippus (PMilVoglVIII 309)Washington Cambridge (Mass)

Adams JN (1982) The Latin Sexual Vocabulary BaltimoreAdkins AWH (1960) Merit and Responsibility A Study in Greek Values Oxfordmdash (1971) ldquoHomeric Values and Homeric Societyrdquo JHS 91 1ndash14mdash (1972a) Moral Values and Political Behaviour in Ancient Greece Londonmdash (1972b) ldquoTruth ΚΟΣΜΟΣ and APETH in the Homeric Poemsrdquo CQ 22 5ndash18Aeacutelion R (1983) Euripide heacuteritier drsquo Eschyle Vols I-II ParisAgosti G (2003) Nonno di Panopoli Parafrasi del Vangelo di San Giovanni Canto Quinto

Florencemdash (2005) ldquoInterpretazione Omerica e creazione poetica nella tarda Antichitagraverdquo in A Kolde

A Lukinovich AL Rey (eds) 19ndash32Ahl F (1986) Trojan Women by Lucius Annaeus Seneca IthacaAlbeacuteregraves RM (1957) Estheacutetique et morale chez Jean Giraudoux NizetAlexandrou M (2016) ldquoMythological Narratives in Hipponaxrdquo in C Carey L Swift (eds)

forthcomingAlexandrou M Carey C Drsquo Alessio G (eds) (forthcoming) Song Regained Working with

Greek Poetic Fragments BerlinAlexopoulou M (2006) ldquoNostos and the Impossibility of a lsquoReturn to the Samersquo From Homer

to Seferisrdquo New Voices in Classical Reception Studies Issue 1 1ndash9mdash (2009) The Theme of Returning Home in Ancient Greek LiteratureThe Nostos of the Epic

Hero LewistonAllan W (2000) The Andromache and Euripidean Tragedy OxfordAllen A (2007) ldquoBriseis in Homer Ovid and Troyrdquo in MM Winkler (ed) 148ndash62Allen R E (1998) The Dialogues of Plato Vol III New HavenAllen T (1899) ldquoLudwichrsquos Homervulgatardquo CR 13 39ndash41mdash (1912) Homeri Opera Vol V OxfordAlvares J (2002) ldquoLove Loss and Learning in Chaereas and Callirhoerdquo CW 95 107ndash15Anagnostopoulos J (1995) ldquoAn Introduction to the Poetry and the Poetics of Angelos

Sikelianosrdquo Kotinos to Angelos Sikelianos (Κότινος στον άγγελο Σικελιανό) TetradiaEuthinis 11 118ndash36

Annas J (1981) An Introduction to Platorsquos Republic Oxfordmdash (1982) ldquoPlato on the Triviality of Literaturerdquo in JME Moravcsik P Temko (eds)

1ndash28Anton J (ed) (2002) 70 Years since the First Delphic Festivals Ancient Drama in Delphi from

Angelos Sikelianos till Today (70 Χρόνια από τις πρώτες Δελφικές Εορτές Το αρχαίοδράμα στους Δελφούς από τον άγγελο Σικελιανό ως τις μέρες μας) European CulturalCentre of Delphi Conference Proceedings (Delphi 16ndash20 July 1997) Delphi

Anton JP Preus A (eds) (1989) Essays in Ancient Greek Philosophy III Plato New YorkArafat KW (1996) Pausaniasrsquo Greece Ancient Artists and Roman Rulers Cambridge

Archimandritis G (2011) Μikis Theodorakis My Life (Μίκης Θεοδωράκης Η ζωή μου)Athens

Armstrong R (2006) ldquoThe Aeneid Inheritance and Empirerdquo in MJ Clarke BGF CurrieROAM Lyne (eds) 131ndash57

Arnold B (1994ndash95) ldquoThe Literary Experience of Vergilrsquos Fourth Ecloguerdquo CJ 902 143ndash60Arthur Katz MB (1981) ldquoThe Divided World of Iliad VIrdquo in HP Foley (ed) 19ndash44Ashmole B Yalouris N (1967) Olympia The Sculpture of the Temple of Zeus LondonAssael J (2004) ldquoLa resurrection drsquoAlcesterdquo REG 117 37ndash58Athanassaki LNikolaides ASpatharas D (eds) (2014) Private Life and Public Speech in

Greek Antiquity and Enlightenment Studies in Honour of Ioanna Yatromanolaki(Ιδιωτικός βίος και Δημόσιος Λόγος στην Ελληνική Αρχαιότητα και στον ΔιαφωτισμόΜελέτες αφιερωμένες στην Ιωάννα Γιατρομανωλάκη) Herakleion

Atwood M (2007) The Penelopiad The Play LondonAustin C Bastianini G (2002) Posidippi Pellaei quae supersunt omnia MilanAustin N (1994) Helen of Troy and her Shameless Phantom Ithacamdash (2007) ldquoThe Helen of the Iliadrdquo in H Bloom (ed) (2007a) 33ndash54Austin RG (ed) (1977) P Vergili Maronis Aeneidos liber sextus OxfordAyres L (ed) (1995) The Passionate Intellect Essays on the Transformation of Classical

Traditions Presented to Professor I G Kidd New BrunswickBailey C (ed) (1936) Greek Poetry and Life Essays Presented to G Murray OxfordBaker RJ (1968) ldquoMiles annosus The Military Motif in Propertiusrdquo Latomus 27 322ndash49Baker RJ (2000) Propertius I WarminsterBakogianni A (2008) ldquoAll is Well that Ends Tragically Filming Greek Tragedy in Modern

Greecerdquo BICS 51 119ndash67mdash (2009) ldquoVoices of Resistance Michael Cacoyannisrsquo The Trojan Women (1971)rdquo BICS 52

45ndash68mdash (2011) Electra Ancient and Modern Aspects of the Tragic Heroinersquos Reception Londonmdash (2013a) ldquoAnnihilating Clytemnestra The Severing of the Mother-Daughter Bond in

Michael Cacoyannisrsquo Iphigenia (1977)rdquo in KP Nikoloutsos (ed) 207ndash33mdash (2013b) ldquoWho Rules this Nation (Ποιός κυβερνά αυτόν τον τόπο) Political Intrigue and

the Struggle for Power in Michael Cacoyannisrsquo Iphigenia (1977)rdquo in A Bakogianni (ed)I 225ndash49

mdash (2013c) ldquoIntroduction In Dialogue with the Pastrdquo in A Bakogianni (ed) I 1ndash9mdash (ed) (2013) Dialogues with the Past Classical Reception Theory and Practice Vols I-II

(BICS Suppl 126) LondonBakola Ε Prauscello L Telograve M (eds) (2013) Greek Comedy and the Discourse of Genres

CambridgeBalaban O (2011) ldquoThe Moral Intellectualism of Platorsquos Socrates The Case of Hippias

Minorrdquo Bochumer Philosophiches Jahrbuch fuumlr Antike und Mittelalter 131 1ndash14Balensiefen L (2005) ldquoPolyphem-Grotten und Skylla-Gewaumlsser Schauplaumltze der Odyssee in

roumlmischen Villenrdquo in A Luther (ed) 9ndash31Ballif M (2001) Seduction Sophistry and the Woman with the Rhetorical Figure IllinoisBalot R (2004) ldquoCourage in the Democratic Polisrdquo CQ 54 406ndash23Banaševic N (1964) ldquoRanija I novija nauka I Vukovi pogledi na narodnu epikurdquo Prilozi

303ndash4Baragwanath E (2008) Motivation and Narrative in Herodotus Oxford

436 Bibliography

Barchiesi A (2001) Speaking Volumes Narrative and Intertext in Ovid and Other Latin Poets(ed and trans M Fox and S Marchesi) London

mdash (1984a) La traccia del modello effetti omerici nella narrazione virgiliana Pisamdash (1984b) ldquoCiclopirdquo in Enciclopedia Virgiliana I Rome 778ndash79mdash (1999) ldquoRepresentations of Suffering and Interpretation in the Aeneidrdquo in P Hardie

(ed) 324ndash44Bardel R (2005) ldquoSpectral Traces Ghosts in Tragic Fragmentsrdquo in F McHardy J Robson

D Harvey (eds) 83ndash112Barfield R (2011) The Ancient Quarrel Between Philosophy and Poetry CambridgeBarlow SA (1971) The Imagery of Euripides Londonmdash (1986) Euripides Trojan Women WarminsterBarnes J (1982) The Presocratic Philosophers The Arguments of the Philosophers London

Boston Melbourne HenleyBarrett WS (1964) Euripides Hippolytos OxfordBarsby J (19792) Ovid Amores I OxfordBartels A (2004) Vergleichende Studien zur Erzaumlhlkunst des roumlmischen Epyllion GoumlttingenBartol K (1993) Greek Elegy and Iambus Studies in Ancient Literary Sources PoznańBassi K (2003) ldquoThe Semantics of Manliness in Ancient Greecerdquo in RM Rosen I Sluiter

(eds) 25ndash58Basta Donzelli G (1986) ldquoLa Colpa di Elena Gorgia ed Euripide a confrontordquo in L

Montoneri F Romano (eds) 389ndash409Baumbach M Petrovic A Petrovic I (eds) (2010) Archaic and Classical Greek Epigram

CambridgeBeaton R (1999) An Introduction to Modern Greek Literature OxfordBeisinger M Tylus J Wofford S (eds) (1999) Epic Traditions in the Contemporary World

The Poetics of Community Berkeley Los AngelesBelfiore E (1985) ldquoLies Unlike the Truth Plato on Hesiod Theogony 27rdquo TAPhA 115 47ndash57mdash (2006) ldquoA Theory of Imitation in Platorsquos Republicrdquo in A Laird (ed) 87ndash114Bellido JA (1989) ldquoEl motivo literario de la militia amoris y su influencia en Ovidiordquo EClaacutes

31 21ndash32Benakis L (2012) Ἰαμβλίχου Προτρεπτικὸς ἐπὶ φιλοσοφίαν AthensBenardete S (1963) ldquoSome Misquotations of Homer in Platordquo Phronesis 8 173ndash78Bennett S (1990) Theatre Audiences A Theory of Production and Reception LondonBenson HH (ed) (2006) A Companion to Plato ChichesterBen-Zersquoev A (2003) ldquoAristotle on Emotions towards the Fortune of Othersrdquo in D Konstan

NK Rutter (eds) 99ndash121Berg W (1974) Early Virgil LondonBergren A (1983) ldquoLanguage and the Female in Early Greek Thoughtrdquo Arethusa 16 69ndash95Berman KE (1972) ldquoSome Propertian imitations in Ovidrsquos Amoresrdquo CPh 67 170ndash77mdash (1975) ldquoOvid Propertius and the Elegiac Genre Some Imitations in the Amoresrdquo RSC

23 14ndash22Bernabeacute A (19962) Poetarum Epicorum Graecorum Testimonia et Fragmenta Pars I

Stuttgart LeipzigBerthelot A (1992) Andromaque de Racine ParisBerthet JF (1980) ldquoProperce et Homegravererdquo in A Thill (ed)141ndash53Betts G (1965) ldquoThe Silence of Alcestisrdquo Mnem 18 66ndash67

Bibliography 437

Betts JH Hooker JT Green JR (eds) (1986) Studies in Honour of TBL Webster VolsI-II Bristol

Bieler L (19351936) Theios Anēr Das Bild des lsquolsquogoumlttlichen Menschenrsquorsquo in Spaumltantike undFruumlhchristentum Darmstadt

Billault A (1996) ldquoCharacterization in the Ancient Novelrdquo in G Schmeling (ed) 115ndash29Bing P (20022003) ldquoPosidippus and the Admiral Kallikrates of Samos in the Epigrams of

the Milan Papyrus (PMilVoglVIII309)rdquo GRBS 43 243ndash66mdash (2009) The Scroll and the Marble Studies in Reading and Reception in Hellenistic

Poetry Ann ArborBing P Bruss JS (eds) (2007) Brillrsquos Companion to Hellenistic Epigram Leiden BostonBinns JW (ed) (1973) Ovid London BostonBishop P (ed) (2004) Nietzsche and Antiquity His Reaction and Response to the Classical

Tradition New YorkBittlestone R Diggle J Underhill J (2005) Odysseus Unbound The Search for Homerrsquos

Ithaca CambridgeBizer M (2011) Homer and the Politics of Authority in Renaissance France OxfordBlondell R (2002) The Play of Character in Platorsquos Dialogues Cambridgemdash (2009) ldquoThird Cheerleader from the Leftrsquo from Homerrsquos Helen to Helen of Troyrdquo CRJ 11

4ndash22Bloom H (ed) (2007a) Homerrsquos The Iliad (updated edition) New Yorkmdash (ed) (2007b) Homer (updated edition) New YorkBlundell MW (1992) ldquoCharacter and Meaning in Platorsquos Hippias Minorrdquo in JC Klagge

ND Smith (eds) 131ndash72Boardman J (1985) Greek Sculpture The Classical Period LondonBobas C (ed) (2009) Drsquoune frontiegravere agrave lrsquoautre Mouvements de fuites mouvements

discontinus dans le monde Neacuteo ndash Helleacutenique AthensBody J (1986) Jean Giraudoux la leacutegende et le secret ParisBoedeker D (2003) ldquoPedestrian Fatalities The Prosaics of Deathrdquo in P Derow R Parker

(eds) 17ndash36Bogner H (1934) ldquoDie Religion des Nonnos von Panopolisrdquo Phil 89 320ndash33Bonazza S (1988) ldquoVuk Stefanović Karadžić und der Austroslavismusrdquo Europa Orientalis 7

361ndash71Booth J (1991) Ovid Amores II WarminsterBooth J Maltby R (eds) (2006) Whatrsquos in a Name The Significance of Proper Names in

Classical Latin Literature WalesBorg B (2010) ldquoEpigrams in Archaic Art the lsquoChest of Kypselosrsquordquo in M Baumbach A

Petrovic I Petrovic (eds) 81ndash99Bossi F (1986) Studi sul Margite FerraraBosworth A B (2000) ldquoThe Historical Context of Thucydidesrsquo Funeral Orationrdquo JHS 120

1ndash16Bouzakis M Papavasiliou E (eds) (2005) Μikis Theodorakis The Man the Artist the

Musician the Politician the Cretan and the Ecumenical (Mίκης Θεοδωράκης Oάνθρωπος ο δημιουργός ο μουσικός ο πολιτικός ο Κρητικός και ο οικουμενικός)Conference Proceedings (Chania 29ndash31 July 2005) Chania

Bowie AM (1993) Aristophanes Myth Ritual and Comedy Cambridgemdash (2007) Herodotus Histories Book VIII Cambridge

438 Bibliography

Bowie EL (1986) ldquoEarly Greek Elegy Symposium and Public Festivalrdquo JHS 106 13ndash35mdash (2001) ldquoEarly Greek Iambic Poetry The Importance of Narrativerdquo in A Cavarzere A

Aloni A Barchiesi (eds) 1ndash27mdash (2002) ldquoIonian ἴαμβος and Attic κωμῳδία Father and Daughter or Just Cousinsrdquo in A

Willi (ed) 33ndash50mdash (2010) ldquoEpigram as Narrationrdquo in M Baumbach A Petrovic I Petrovic (eds) 313ndash77Bowra CM (1961) Greek Lyric Poetry From Alcman to Simonides OxfordBoyanceacute P (1937) Le culte des Muses chez les philosophes grecques eacutetudes drsquo histoire et

de psychologie religieuse ParisBoyd BW (1995) ldquoNon enarrabile textum Ecphrastic Trespass and Narrative Ambiguity in

the Aeneidrdquo Vergilius 41 71ndash90mdash (1997) Ovidrsquos Literary Loves Influence and Innovation in the Amores Ann ArborBoys-Stones G Haubold J (eds) (2010) Plato and Hesiod OxfordBradley K Cartledge P (eds) (2011) The Cambridge World History of Slavery Vol I The

Ancient Near East and Mediterranean World to AD 500 CambridgeBrandt P (1911) POvidi Nasonis Amorum Libri Tres LeipzigBrandwood L (1976) A Word Index to Plato LeedsBraswell BK (1988) A Commentary on the Fourth Pythian Ode of Pindar Berlin New YorkBreitenberger B (2007) Aphrodite and Eros Τhe Development of Erotic Mythology in Early

Greek Poetry and Cult New York LondonBremer JM Radt SL Ruigh CJ (eds) (1976) Miscellanea Tragica in Honorem JC

Kamerbeek AmsterdamBremer JM Van den Hout ThPJ Peters R (eds) (1994) Hidden Futures Death and

Immortality in Ancient Egypt Anatolia the Classical Biblical and Arabic-Islamic WorldAmsterdam

Bremmer JN (1983) The Early Greek Concept of the Soul Princetonmdash (1994) ldquoThe Soul Death and the Afterlife in Early and Classical Greecerdquo in J M

Bremer ThPJ van den Hout R Peters (eds) 91ndash106Broadie S (1991) Ethics with Aristotle New YorkBrockett O (1995) History of the Τheatre BostonBrockliss W Chaudhuri P Haimson Lushkov A Wasdin K (2012) (eds) Reception and

the Classics An Interdisciplinary Approach to the Classical Tradition CambridgeBrockliss W Chaudhuri P Haimson Lushkov A Wasdin K (2012) ldquoIntroductionrdquo in W

Brockliss P Chaudhuri A Haimson Lushkov K Wasdin (eds) 1ndash16Brook T (1986) ldquoReview of Jonathan D Spence The Memory Palace of Matteo Ricci (1984)rdquo

The Journal of Asian Studies 454 831ndash33Brosius M (2000) The Persian Empire from Cyrus II to Artaxerxes II LACTOR 16 LondonBrown CG (1988) ldquoHipponax and Iamberdquo Hermes 116 478ndash81mdash (1997) ldquoIambosrdquo in DE Gerber (ed) 11ndash88Bryant JM (1996) Moral Codes and Social Structure in Ancient Greece New YorkBuchheit V (1962) Studien zum Corpus Priapeorum MunichBudelmann F Michelakis P (eds) (2001) Homer Tragedy and Beyond Essays in Honour of

PE Easterling LondonBudelmann F (ed) (2009) The Cambridge Companion to Greek Lyric CambridgeBuffiegravere F (1952) Les mythes drsquo Homegravere et la penseacutee grecque ParisBulman P (1992) Phthonos in Pindar Berkeley Los Angeles

Bibliography 439

Bundy EL (1962) Studia Pindarica BerkeleyBurgess J (2001) The Tradition of the Trojan War in Homer and the Epic Cycle Baltimore

LondonBurgoyne R (2011a) ldquoIntroductionrdquo in R Burgoyne (ed) 1ndash16mdash (2011b) ldquoBare Life and Sovereignty in Gladiatorrdquo in R Burgoyne (ed) 82ndash97mdash (ed) (2011) The Epic Film in World Culture New YorkBurkert W (1962) ldquoΓόης zum griechischen lsquoSchamanismusrsquordquo RhM 105 36ndash55mdash (1972) ldquoDie Leistung eines Kreophylos Kreophyleer Homeriden und die archaische

Heraklesepikrdquo MH 29 74ndash85mdash (1985) Greek Religion (trans J Raffan) OxfordBurn AR (19842) Persia and the Greeks The Defense of the West 548ndash478 BC LondonBurnet J (1900) The Ethics of Aristotle LondonBurnett AP (1971) Catastrophe Survived Euripidesrsquo Plays of Mixed Reversal Oxfordmdash (2008) Pindar BristolBurnyeat MF (1971) ldquoVirtues in Actionrdquo in G Vlastos (ed) 209ndash34Cadell H (1998) ldquoAgrave quelle date Arsinoeacute II Phildelphe est-elle deacuteceacutedeacuteersquo in H Malaerts

(ed) 1ndash3Cahoon L (1988) ldquoThe Bed as Battlefield Erotic Conquest and Military Metaphor in Ovidrsquos

Amoresrdquo TAPhA 118 293ndash307Cairns D L (1993) Aidōs The Psychology and Ethics of Honour and Shame in Ancient Greek

Literature OxfordCairns F (1984) ldquoThe Etymology of Militia in Roman Elegyrdquo in L GilRM Aguilar (eds)

211ndash21mdash (2006a) Sextus Propertius The Augustan elegist Cambridgemdash (2006b) ldquoPropertius and the Origins of Latin Love-elegyrdquo in H-C Guumlnther (ed)

69ndash95Caizzi F (1966) Antisthenis Fragmenta MilanCalame Cl (2004) ldquoDeictic Ambiguity and Auto-Referentiality Some Examplesrdquo in N Felson

(ed) 415ndash43Calboli G (ed) (1969) Cornifici rhetorica ad C Herennium BolognaCalder W (1970) Originality in Senecarsquos Troades ChicagoCallebat L (2012) Priapeacutees ParisCallen King K (1987) Achilles Paradigms of the War Hero from Homer to the Middle Ages

Berkeley Los AngelesCampbell D A (2001) Greek Lyric III Stesichorus Ibycus Simonides and Others

Cambridge (Mass) Londonmdash (2002) Greek Lyric I Sappho and Alcaeus Cambridge (Mass) LondonCampbell M (1981) A Commentary on Quintus Smyrnaeusrsquo Posthomerica XII LeidenCanavero D (2004) ldquoRipresa ed evoluzione Andromaca ed Ecuba nelle Troiane di Euripiderdquo

in G Zanetto D Canavero A Capra A Sgobbi (eds) 171ndash85Caplan H (1954) Rhetorica ad Herennium LondonCaprara M (1999) ldquoNonno e gli Ebrei Note a Par IV 88ndash121rdquo SIFC 17 195ndash215Carey C (1991) ldquoThe Victory Ode in Performance The Case for the Chorusrdquo CPh 86

192ndash200mdash (1995) ldquoPindar and the Victory Oderdquo in L Ayres (ed) 85ndash103mdash (2000) Aeschines Austin

440 Bibliography

mdash (2005) ldquoPropaganda and Competition in Athenian Oratoryrdquo in KAE Enenkel ILPfeijffer (eds) 65ndash100

mdash (2007a) ldquoEpideictic Oratoryrdquo in I Worthington (ed) 236ndash52mdash (2007b) Lysiae Orationes cum Fragmentis Oxfordmdash (2008) ldquoHipponax Narratorrdquo Acta Antiqua Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 48

89ndash102mdash (2009) ldquoIambosrdquo in F Budelmann (ed) 149ndash67mdash (forthcoming) ldquoEmbedded Fragmentsrdquo in M Alexandrou C Carey G Drsquo Alessio (eds)Carey C Swift L (eds) (2016) Iambus and Elegy OxfordCarney E (2006) Olympias Mother of Alexander the Great LondonCarruthers M (1990) The Book of Memory CambridgeCarruthers M Ziolkowski J (2002) The Medieval Craft of Memory An Anthology of Texts

and Pictures PhiladelphiaCarter L B (1986) The Quiet Athenian OxfordCartledge P Harvey F (eds) (1990) Crux Essays presented to GEM de Ste Croix on his

75th Birthday ExeterCavarzere A Aloni A Barchiesi A(eds) (2001) Iambic Ideas Essays on a Poetic Tradition

from Archaic Greece to the Late Roman Empire LanhamChantler A Dente C (eds) (2009) Translation Practices through Language to Culture

Amsterdam New YorkChantraine P (1942) Grammaire Homeacuterique Vol I Parismdash (1968ndash1980) Dictionnaire eacutetymologique de la langue grecque ParisCharalabopoulos NG (2012) Platonic Drama and its Ancient Reception CambridgeCharalambidis G (1971) ldquoPress Reviewrdquo Vradyni 9 Oct 1971Charalambidis G (1972) Penelopersquos 300 AthensChasapi-Christodoulou E (2002) Greek Mythology in Modern Greek Drama From Cretan

Theatre to the End of the 20th Century (Η ελληνική μυθολογία στο νεοελληνικό δράμαΑπό την εποχή του Κρητικού Θεάτρου έως το τέλος του 20ού αιώνα) Vols I-IIThessaloniki

Chatzipantazis Th (1984) Karaghiozisrsquo Invasion in Athens in 1890 (H εισβολή τουΚαραγκιόζη στην Αθήνα του 1890) Athens

mdash (2003) Greek Comedy and its Models in the 19th century (Η ελληνική κωμωδία και ταπρότυπά της στον 19ο αιώνα) Herakleion

Chiasson CC (2009) ldquoRedefining Homeric Heroism in Wolfgang Petersenrsquos Troyrdquo in KMyrsiades (ed) 186ndash207

Christiansen B Thaler U (eds) (2013) Ansehenssache Formen von Prestige in Kulturendes Altertums Munich

Christodoulou D (1966) Hotel Circe AthensClarke M (2004) ldquoManhood and Heroismrdquo in RL Fowler (ed) 74ndash90Clarke MJ Currie BGF Lyne ROAM (eds) (2006) Epic Interactions Perspectives on

Homer Virgil and the Epic Tradition Presented to Jasper Griffin by Former Pupils OxfordClarke W (1978) ldquoAchilles and Patroclus in Loverdquo Hermes 106 381ndash96Clausen W (1994) Virgil Eclogues OxfordClauss JJ Cuypers M (eds) (2010) A Companion to Hellenistic Literature OxfordClay D (1988) ldquoThe Archaeology of the Temple to Juno in Carthagerdquo CPh 83 195ndash205

Bibliography 441

mdash (2000) Platonic Questions Dialogues with the Silent Philosopher University ParkPennsylvania

mdash (2004) Archilochos Heros The Cult of Poets in the Greek Polis Cambridge (Mass)Coleman R (1977) Vergil Eclogues CambridgeCollard C Cropp M J Gibert J (2004) Euripides Selected Fragmentary Plays Vol II

OxfordCollard C Cropp MJ (2008) Euripides Fragments Vols I-II Cambridge (Mass) LondonCombellack F M (1965) ldquoSome Formulaic Illogicalities in Homerrdquo TAPhA 96 41ndash56Conacher DJ (1967) Euripidean Drama Myth Theme and Structure Torontomdash (1998) Euripides and the Sophists LondonConnors C (1991) ldquoSimultaneous Hunting and Herding at Ciris 297ndash300rdquo CQ 41 556ndash59Consigny S (2001) Gorgias Sophist and Artist South CarolinaCook E (2001) Achilles LondonCooper J M (ed) (1997) Plato Complete Works IndianapolisCormack M (2006) Platorsquos Stepping Stones Degrees of Moral Virtue LondonCornford FM (1941) Plato Republic OxfordCouprie A (1996) Racine Andromaque reacutesumeacute personnages thegravemes ParisCousin C (2005) ldquoLa Neacutekuia homeacuterique et les fragments des Evocateurs drsquoacircmes drsquoEschylerdquo

Gaia 9 137ndash52Cousland JRC Hume JR (eds) (2009) The Play of Texts and Fragments Essays in Honour

of Martin Cropp LeidenCova PV (1984) ldquoAchemeniderdquo in Enciclopedia Virgiliana I Rome 22ndash23Coventry L (1989) ldquoPhilosophy and Rhetoric in the Menexenusrdquo JHS 109 4ndash10Crawley R Wick TE (1982) Thucydides The Peloponnesian War New YorkCreed LJ (1973) ldquoMoral Values in the Age of Thucydidesrdquo CQ 23 213ndash31Croally NT (1994) Euripidean Polemic The Trojan Women and the Function of Tragedy

CambridgeCropp MJ Lee KH Sansone D (eds) (1999ndash2000) Euripides and Tragic Theatre in the

Late Fifth Century UrbanaCucchiarelli A (2012) Le Bucoliche RomaDal Zotto A (1903) La Ciris e le sue fonti greche FeltreDalby A (1995) ldquoThe Iliad the Odyssey and their Audiencesrdquo CQ 452 269ndash79Danek G (1998) Epos und Zitat Studien zu den Quellen der Odyssee ViennaDaskalopoulos D (2009) ldquoAllusions to the Fortune of Odysseus in Modern Greek Poetryrdquo in

Th Pylarinos (ed) 71ndash77Davidson J (1999ndash2000) ldquoEuripides Homer and Sophoclesrdquo in MJ Cropp KH Lee D

Sansone (eds) 117ndash28mdash (2001) ldquoHomer and Euripidesrsquo Troadesrdquo BICS 45 65ndash79mdash (2012) ldquoThe Homer of Tragedy Epic Sources and Models in Sophoclesrdquo in A

Markantonatos (ed) 245ndash62Davies M (1991) Sophocles Trachiniae OxfordDavis G (2008) ldquoReframing the Homeric Images of the Odyssey in the Art of Derek Walcott

and Romare Beardenrdquo in L Hardwick C Stray (eds) 401ndash14Davreux J (1942) La leacutegende de la propheacutetesse Cassandre LiegravegeDay JW (1989) ldquoRituals in Stone Early Greek Grave Epigrams and Monumentsrdquo JHS 109

16ndash28

442 Bibliography

Day LK (2008) lsquoBitch that I amrsquo An Examination of Womenrsquos Self-Deprecation in Homer andVirgil Diss Arkansas

De Gianni D (2010) ldquoLa nutrice di Scilla e la nutrice di Fedra ispirazioni euripidee nellaCirisrdquo Vichiana 12 36ndash45

De Jong IJF (1997) ldquoHomer and Narratologyrdquo in I Morris B Powell (eds) 305ndash25De Jong IJF Bowie A Nuumlnlist R (eds) (2004) Narrators Narratees and Narratives in

Ancient Greek Literature LeidenDe Romilly J (1976) ldquoLrsquoexcuse de lrsquoinvincible amour dans la trageacutedie grecquerdquo in JM

Bremer SL Radt CJ Ruigh (eds) 309ndash21mdash (1986) La moderniteacute drsquoEuripide Parismdash (1995) Trageacutedies grecques au fil des ans ParisDe Stefani C (2002) Nonno di Panopoli Parafrasi del Vangelo di s Giovanni canto I

BolognaDe Vet T (1996) ldquoThe Joint Role of Orality and Literacy in the Composition Transmission

and Performance of the Homeric Texts A Comparative Viewrdquo TAPhA 126 43ndash76mdash (2005) ldquoParry in Paris Structuralism Historical Linguistics and the Oral Theoryrdquo

ClAnt 242 257ndash84mdash (2008) ldquoContext and the Emerging Story Improvised Performance in Oral and Literate

Societiesrdquo Oral Tradition 231 159ndash79Deacuteceacuteleacute M (2005) Le mythe grec et sa mythopoΐegravese dans Andromaque et Iphigeacutenie de

Racine Diss AthensDefaux G (1977) ldquoCulpabiliteacute et expiation dans lrsquoAndromaque de Racinerdquo Romanic Review

Janvier 1977 22ndash31Deforge B (1986) Eschyle poegravete cosmique ParisDegani E (1984) Studi su Ipponatte Barimdash (1991) Testimonia et fragmenta StuttgartDegani E Burzacchini G Nicolosi A (2007) Ipponatte Frammenti BolognaDelatte A (1915) Eacutetudes sur la litteacuterature pythagoricienne ParisDelebecque E (1951) Euripide et la guerre du Peacuteloponnegravese ParisDeleuze G (1968) Diffeacuterence et Reacutepeacutetition Parismdash (1986) Cinema 1 The Movement Image LondonDenniston JD (19542) The Greek Particles OxfordDentith S (2000) Parody The New Critical Idiom LondonDeremetz A (1999) ldquoVisages des genres dans lrsquoeacuteleacutegie ovidienne Amores 11 et 31rdquo in J

Fabre-Serris A Deremetz (eds) 71ndash84Derow P Parker R (eds) (2003) Herodotus and his World Essays for a Conference in

Memory of George Forrest OxfordDesch W (1985) ldquoDie Hauptgestalten in Euripideslsquo Troerinnenrdquo GB 12 65ndash100Deslauriers M (2003) ldquoAristotle on andreia Divine and Sub-Human Virtuesrdquo in R M

Rosen I Sluiter (eds) 187ndash211Destreacutee P Herrmann FG (eds) (2011) Plato and the Poets Leiden BostonDetienne M (1962) Homegravere Hesiode et Pythagore Collectio Latomus 57 BrusselsDewald C Marincola J (eds) (2006) The Cambridge Companion to Herodotus CambridgeDi Giuseppe L (2012) Euripide Alessandro LecceDi Luzio A (1969) ldquoI papyri omerici drsquo epoca tolemaica e la constituzione del testo dellrsquo

epica arcaicardquo RCCM 11 3ndash152

Bibliography 443

Dickey E (2007) Ancient Greek Scholarship A Guide to Finding Reading andUnderstanding Scholia Commentaries Lexica and Grammatical Treatises Oxford NewYork

Dillon J (2010) ldquoIamblichus of Chalcis and his Schoolrdquo in LP Gerson (ed) I 359ndash74Dimock WC (2008) ldquoAfter Troy Homer Euripides Total Warrdquo in R Felski (ed) 66ndash81Dimou A (2006) Dramatic Works Vols I-II Athens (άπαντα Τα Θεατρικά Aθήνα)Dingel J (1967) Das Requisit in der griechischen Tragoumldie Diss TuumlbingenDinter M (2005) ldquoEpic and Epigram ndash Minor Heroes in Virgilrsquos Aeneidrdquo CQ 55 153ndash69Dios J M L de (2008) Esquilo Fragmentos Testimonios MadridDodds ER (1951) The Greeks and the Irrational Berkeley Los AngelesDodson DS (2009) Reading Dreams An Audience-Critical Approach to the Dreams in the

Gospel of Matthew LondonDolccedil M (1984) Elegies a Mecenas lrsquoAgroacute Minuacutecies lrsquoAlmadroc uacuteltims poemes BarcelonaDolfi E (1984) ldquoSu I Cretesi di Euripide Passione e Responsabilitagraverdquo Prometheus 10

121ndash38Dornseiff F (1921) Pindar LeipzigDover KJ (1968) Aristophanes Clouds Oxfordmdash (1972) Aristophanic Comedy Berkeley Los Angelesmdash (1974) Greek Popular Morality in the Time of Plato and Aristotle Berkeley Los Angelesmdash (1978) Greek Homosexuality Londonmdash (1988) ldquoGreek Homosexuality and Initiationrdquo in KJ Dover (ed) II 115ndash34mdash (ed) (1987ndash88) The Greeks and their Legacy Vols I-II Oxfordmdash (1993) Aristophanes Frogs OxfordDoxas Α ldquoPenelopersquos 300rdquo Eleftheros Kosmos 14 Oct 1971Drachmann AB (1903ndash27) Scholia Vetera in Pindari Carmina Vols I-III LeipzigDu Quesnay I M Le M (1973) ldquoThe Amoresrdquo in JW Binns (ed) 1ndash48Dubischar M (2001) Die Agonszenen bei Euripides StuttgartDueacute C (2001) ldquoAchillesrsquo Golden Amphora in Aeschinesrsquo Against Timarchus and the Afterlife

of Oral Traditionrdquo CPh 96 33ndash47mdash (2006) The Captive Womanrsquos Lament in Greek Tragedy AustinDueacute C Ebbott M (2010) Iliad 10 and the Poetics of Ambush A Multitext Edition with Essays

and Commentary Washington DCDunbar N (1995) Aristophanes Birds OxfordDunn F (1996) Tragedyrsquos End Closure and Innovation in Euripidean Drama New York

OxfordDurand G (1987) Le mythe et le mythique ParisDyson M (1988) ldquoPoetic Imitation in Platorsquos Republic 3rdquo Antichthon 22 42ndash53Easterling PE (ed) (1997) The Cambridge Companion to Greek Tragedy Cambridgemdash (1997a) ldquoConstructing the Heroicrdquo in C Pelling (ed) 21ndash37mdash (1997b) ldquoForm and Performancerdquo in PE Easterling (ed) 151ndash77mdash (1999) ldquoActors and Voices Reading between the Lines in Aeschines and Demosthenesrdquo

in S Goldhill R Osborne (eds) 154ndash66Easterling PE Hall E (eds) (2002) Greek and Roman Actors Aspects of an Ancient

Profession CambridgeEdmondson J Keith A (eds) (2008) Roman Dress and the Fabrics of Roman Culture

Toronto

444 Bibliography

Edmundson M (1995) Literature Against Philosophy Plato to Derrida A Defence of PoetryCambridge

Edwards AT (1993) ldquoHomerrsquos Ethical Geography Country and City in the Odysseyrdquo TAPhA123 27ndash78

Edwards M (1991) The Iliad A Commentary (General Editor GS Kirk) Vol V Books 17ndash20Cambridge

Efstathiou A (2014) ldquoΤο ιδιωτικό και το δημόσιο στη δοκιμασία ρητόρων στην Αθήνα τωνκλασικών χρόνωνrdquo in L Athanassaki A Nikolaides D Spatharas (eds) 231ndash54

Egan RB (1996) ldquoCorydonrsquos Winning Words in Ecl 7rdquo Phoenix 50 233ndash39Egli F (2003) Euripides im Kontext zeitgenoumlssischer intellektueller Stroumlmungen Munich

LeipzigEisenstein SM (1991) Selected Works Vol II Towards a Theory of Montage (ed M Glenny

and R Taylor trans M Glenny) LondonEitrem S (1922) ldquoKyklopenrdquo in RE XI 2 Stuttgart 2328ndash47Ekdawi S (2002) ldquoThe Myth of Eternal Returnrdquo in J Anton (ed) 115ndash24Elderkin GW (1941) ldquoThe Akanthos Column at Delphirdquo Hesperia 104 373ndash80Elliger W (1975) Die Darstellung der Landschaft in der griechischen Dichtung Berlin New

YorkElliot R (1969) Mythe et leacutegende dans le theacuteacirctre de Racine ParisElmer DF (2009) ldquoPresentation Formulas in South Slavic Epic Songrdquo Oral Tradition 241

41ndash59Elsner J (1995) Art and the Roman Viewer The Transformation of Art from the Pagan World

to Christianity CambridgeElytis O (20066) Carte Blanche (Εν λευκώ) AthensEmlyn-Jones C (2008) ldquoPoets on Socratesrsquo Stage Platorsquos Reception of Dramatic Artrdquo in L

Hardwick C Stray (eds) 38ndash49Emlyn-Jones C Hardwick L Purkis J (eds) (1992) Homer Readings and Images LondonEnenkel KAE Pfeijffer IL (eds) (2005) The Manipulative Mode Political Propaganda in

Antiquity LeidenErler M Kramer B Hagedorn D Huumlbner R (eds) (1980) Koumllner Papyri (PKoumlln) 3

OpladenEvangelidis D (1935) ldquoἨπειρωτικαὶ ἔρευναι Ι Ἡ ἀνασκαφὴ τῆς Δωδώνης ΙΙ Aνασκαφὴ παρὰ

τὸ Ραδοτόβιrdquo Ἠπειρωτικὰ Χρονικά 10 193ndash264Faber R (2008) ldquoThe Woven Garment as Literary Metaphor The Peplos in Ciris 9ndash41rdquo in J

Edmondson A Keith (eds) 205ndash16Fabre-Serris J Deremetz A (eds) (1999) Eacuteleacutegie et eacutepopeacutee dans la poeacutesie Ovidienne

(Heacuteroiumldes et Amours) En hommage Simone Viarre LilleFairclough HR Goold GP (1999) Virgil Vol I Eclogues Georgics Aeneid 1ndash6 (1st ed by

HR Fairclough London 1916 revised by GP Goold) Cambridge (Mass) LondonFairclough HR Goold GP (2000) Virgil Vol II Aeneid VII-XII Appendix Vergiliana (1st ed

by HR Fairclough London 1918 revised by GP Goold) Cambridge (Mass) LondonFalcetto R (2002) Il Palamede di Euripide AlessandriaFantham E (2011) Roman Readings Roman Response to Greek Literature from Plautus to

Statius and Quintilian Berlin New YorkFantuzzi M Hunter RL (2004) Tradition and Innovation in Hellenistic Poetry Cambridge

Bibliography 445

Fantuzzi M (2005) ldquoPosidippus at Court The Contribution of the Ἱππικά of P MilVogl VIII309 to the Ideology of Ptolemaic Kingshiprdquo in K Gutzwiller (ed) 249ndash68

Fantuzzi M Tsagalis C (eds) (2015) The Greek Epic Cycle and its Ancient Reception ACompanion Cambridge

Faraone CA (1991) ldquoBinding and Burying the Forces of Evil The Defensive Use of lsquoVoodooDollsrsquo in Ancient Greecerdquo ClAnt 10 165ndash205

mdash (2002) The Rise and Fall of the Afterlife London New YorkFarrell J (2004) ldquoRoman Homerrdquo in R L Fowler (ed) 254ndash71Fedeli P (1980) Properzio Il primo libro delle elegie Florencemdash (2005) Properzio Elegie Libro II CambridgeFelski R (ed) (2008) Rethinking Tragedy BaltimoreFelson N (ed) (2004) The Poetics of Deixis in Alcman Pindar and Other Lyric Arethusa

Special Edition 37 no 3Ferrari GRF (1989) ldquoPlato and Poetryrdquo in G A Kennedy (ed) 92ndash148mdash (ed) (2007) The Cambridge Companion to Platorsquos Republic CambridgeFerri R (ed) (2011) The Latin of Roman Lexicography Pisa RomeFinkelberg M (2007) ldquoHomer as a Foundation-Textrdquo in H Bloom (ed) (2007b) 169ndash88mdash (ed) (2011) The Homer Encyclopedia Malden OxfordFisher N (2001) Aeschines Against Timarchos OxfordFlores E (1988) ldquoPolifemordquo in Enciclopedia Virgiliana IV Rome 164ndash66Floridi L (2014) Lucillio Epigrammi Berlin BostonFoer J (2011) ldquoSecrets of a Mind Gamerrdquo The New York Times Sunday Magazine 2222011Foley HP (ed) (1981) Reflections of Women in Antiquity New York LondonFoley JM (2002) How to Read an Oral Poem Urbana Chicagomdash (ed) (2005) A Companion to Ancient Epic Malden OxfordFord A (1999) ldquoReading Homer from the Rostrum Poems and Laws in Aeschinesrsquo Against

Timarchusrdquo in S Goldhill R Osborne (eds) 231ndash56Foster DH (2010) Wagnerrsquos Ring Cycle and the Greeks CambridgeFouchard A (1997) Aristocratie et Deacutemocratie ParisFowler D (1992) ldquoNarrate and Describe The Problem of Ekphrasisrdquo JRS 82 24ndash34

(reprinted in D Fowler Roman Constructions Readings in Postmodern Latin Oxford2000 64ndash85)

mdash (2002) Lucretius on Atomic Motion A Commentary on De rerum natura 21332 OxfordFowler RL (1987) The Nature of Early Greek Lyric Three Preliminary Studies Torontomdash (1990) ldquoTwo More New Verses of Hipponax (and a Spurium of Philoxenus)rdquo ICS 15

1ndash22mdash (2004) ldquoThe Homeric Questionrdquo in RL Fowler (ed) 220ndash32mdash (ed) (2004) The Cambridge Companion to Homer Cambridgemdash (2006) ldquoHerodotus and his Prose Predecessorsrdquo in C Dewald J Marincola (eds)

29ndash45Foxhall L Gehrke H-J Luraghi N (eds) (2010) Intentionale Geschichte Spinning Time

StuttgartFraenkel E (1950) Aeschylus Agamemnon Vols I-III OxfordFraser PM (1972) Ptolemaic Alexandria Vols I-III OxfordFrazer JG (19132) Pausaniasrsquo Description of Greece Vols I-VI LondonFriedlaumlnder P (1964) Plato The Dialogues Vol II (trans H Meyerhoff) New York

446 Bibliography

Friedrich P (1978) The Meaning of Aphrodite Chicago LondonFriedrich WH (1953) Euripides und Diphilos MunichFrois Eacute Lesot A (1998) ldquoAnalyse critiquerdquo in J Giraudoux La guerre de Troie nrsquo aura pas

lieu Paris 11ndash65Furbank PN (1992) ldquoOn Reading Homer without knowing any Greekrdquo in

Emlyn-JonesHardwickPurkis (eds) 33ndash46Gadamer HG (1975) Truth and Method (trans G Barden and J Cumming) New YorkGagarin M (1987) ldquoMorality in Homerrdquo CPh 82 285ndash306Gaines R (1982) ldquoQualities of Rhetorical Expression in Philodemusrdquo TAPhA 112 71ndash81Gaisser J (2002) ldquoThe Reception of Classical Texts in the Renaissancerdquo in A J Grieco M

Rocke F Gioffredi Superbi (eds) 387ndash400Gall D (1999) Zur Technik von Anspielung und Zitat in der roumlmischen Dichtung Vergil

Gallus und die Ciris MunichGarin F (1909) ldquoSui romanzi grecirdquo SIFC 17 423ndash60Garner R (1990) From Homer to Tragedy The Art of Allusion in Greek Poetry LondonGarrison D H (1978) Mild Frenzy A Reading of the Hellenistic Love Epigram WiesbadenGartziou-Tatti A(1992) ldquoPacircris-Alexandre dans lrsquoIliaderdquo in A Moreau (ed) 73ndash92mdash (1997) ldquoΧορός και Τελετουργία στις Τρῳάδες του Ευριπίδηrdquo Dodone 26 313ndash34Gatti PL (2010) Pseudo Virgilio Ciris MilanoGellie G (1986) ldquoHelen in the Trojan Womenrdquo in JH Betts JT Hooker JR Green (eds) I

114ndash21Gelzer T (1981) ldquoNeue Koumllner Papyrirdquo MH 38 120ndash24mdash (1985) ldquoΜοῦσα αὐθιγενής Bemerkungen zu einem Typ pindarischer und

bacchylideischer Epinikienrdquo MH 42 95ndash120Genette G (1982) Palimpsestes La Litteacuterature au Second Degreacute ParisGeorgopoulou V (2006) ldquoWomenrsquos Chorus from Juliet to Andromache (Xορός Γυναικών Από

την Ιουλιέττα στην Ανδρομάχη)rdquo in Α Dimou Dramatic Works (άπαντα Τα Θεατρικά)Vol I Athens 362ndash66

mdash (2009) ldquoExcesses and Variations of Love in the Dramaturgy of Akis Dimou (Υπερβάσειςκαι παρεκκλίσεις του έρωτα στο θεατρικό έργο του άκη Δήμου)rdquo in C Bobas (ed)537ndash45

Georgousopoulos K (1984) (review of 1971) ldquoPenelopersquos 300rdquo in Keys and Codes ofTheatre (Κλειδιά και Κώδικες Θεάτρου) Athens II 13ndash17

Gerber D (1987) ldquoPindarrsquos Olympian Four A Commentaryrdquo QUCC ns 25 7ndash24Gerber DE (ed) (1984) Greek Poetry and Philosophy Studies in Honour of Leonard

Woodbury Chicomdash (ed) (1997) A Companion to the Greek Lyric Poets Leidenmdash (1999) Greek Iambic Poetry From the Seventh to the Fifth Centuries BC Cambridge

(Mass)Gerson LP (ed) (2010) The Cambridge History of Philosophy in Late Antiquity Vols I-II

CambridgeGeymonat M (1993) ldquoCallimachus at the End of Aeneasrsquo Narrationrdquo HSPC 95 323ndash31Giangrande G (1968) ldquoSympotic Literature and Epigramrdquo LrsquoEacutepigramme Grecque (Entr Fond

Hardt 14) 91ndash178Giannaris G (1972) Mikis Theodorakis Music and Social Change New York

Bibliography 447

Gibert J (2009) ldquoEuripidesrsquo Antiope and the Quiet Liferdquo in JRC Cousland J R Hume(eds) 23ndash34

Gibson RK (2007) Excess and Restraint Propertius Horace and Ovidrsquos Ars Amatoria (BICSSuppl 89) London

Gil L Aguilar RM (eds) (1984) Apophoreta Philologica Emmanueli Fernandez-Galiano aSodalibus Oblata Madrid

Gill C (1993) ldquoPlato on Falsehoodmdashnot Fictionrdquo in C Gill P Wiseman (eds) 38ndash87Gill C Wiseman P (eds) (1993) Lies and Fiction in the Ancient World ExeterGiraudoux J (1998) La guerre de Troie nrsquoaura pas lieu ParisGlenn J (1972) ldquoVirgilrsquos Polyphemusrdquo GampR 191 47ndash59Godley AD (1920ndash25) Herodotus The Persian Wars Vols I-IV LondonGoff B (2009) Euripides Trojan Women LondonGoldhill S (1991) The Poetrsquos Voice Essays on Poetics and Greek Literature Cambridgemdash (1997) ldquoThe Language of Tragedy Rhetoric and Communicationrdquo in PE Easterling

(ed) 127ndash50mdash (2001) (ed) Being Greek under Rome Cultural Identity the Second Sophistic and the

Development of Empire Cambridgemdash (2010) ldquoCultural History and Aesthetics Why Kant is no place to start Reception

Studiesrdquo in E Hall S Harrop (eds) 56ndash70Goldhill S Osborne R (eds) (1999) Performance Culture and Athenian Democracy

CambridgeGoldhill S von Reden S (1999) ldquoPlato and the Performance of Dialoguerdquo in S Goldhill R

Osborne (eds) 257ndash89Goodkin RE (1989) Autour de Racine Studies in Intertextuality YaleGoossens R (1962) Euripide et Athegravenes BrusselsGould J (1980) ldquoLaw Custom and Myth Aspects of the Social Position of Women in

Classical Athensrdquo JHS 100 38ndash59Gould T (1964) ldquoPlatorsquos Hostility to Artrdquo Arion 2 70ndash91mdash (1990) The Ancient Quarrel between Poetry and Philosophy PrincetonGow ASF (19522) Theocritus CambridgeGow ASF Scholfield AF (1953) Poems and Poetical Fragments Nicander of Colophon

CambridgeGow ASF Page D L (1965) The Greek Anthology Hellenistic Epigrams Vols I-II

CambridgeGrafton A (1981) ldquoProlegomena to Friedrich August Wolfrdquo Journal of the Warburg and

Courtauld Institutes 44 101ndash29Grammatas Th (1994) From Tragedy to Drama Essays of Comparative Theatrology (Από την

τραγωδία στο δράμα Μελέτες συγκριτικής θεατρολογίας) AthensGrant A (1885) The Ethics of Aristotle LondonGraziosi B (2002) Inventing Homer The Early Reception of Epic Cambridgemdash (2007) ldquoHomer in Albania Oral Epic and the Geography of Literaturerdquo in B Graziosi

E Greenwood (eds) 120ndash42mdash (2008a) ldquoThe Ancient Reception of Homerrdquo in L Hardwick C Stray (eds) 26ndash37mdash (2008b) ldquoReview of R Bittlestone J Diggle J Underhill Odysseus Unbound the

Search for Homerrsquos Ithacardquo JHS 128 178ndash80

448 Bibliography

mdash (2010) ldquoHesiod in Classical Athens Rhapsodes Orators and Platonic Discourserdquo in GBoys-Stones J Haubold (eds) 111ndash32

Graziosi B Greenwood E (eds) (2007) Homer in the Twentieth Century Between WorldLiterature and the Western Canon Oxford

Graziosi B Haubold J (2003) ldquoHomeric Masculinity ΗΝΟΡΕΗ and ΑΓΗΝΟΡΙΗrdquo JHS 12360ndash76

Graziosi B Haubold J (2009) ldquoGreek Lyric and Early Greek Literary Historyrdquo in FBudelmann (ed) 95ndash113

Graziosi B Haubold J (2010) Homer Iliad Book 6 CambridgeGreenwood E (2007) ldquoLoguersquos Tele-Vision Homer from a Distancerdquo in B Graziosi E

Greenwood (eds) 145ndash76Greenwood LHG (1961) Aspects of Euripidean Tragedy LondonGregory J (1991) Euripides and the Instruction of the Athenians Ann Arbormdash (ed) (2005) A Companion to Greek TragedyOxford Malden VictoriaGrenfell BP Hunt AS (1897) Greek Papyri Series II OxfordGrethlein J (2006) Das Geschichtsbild der Ilias Goumlttingenmdash (2008) ldquoMemory and Material Objects in the Iliad and the Odysseyrdquo JHS 128 27ndash51Grieco AJ Rocke M Gioffredi Superbi F (eds) (2002) The Italian Renaissance in the

Twentieth Century FlorenceGriffin J (1977) ldquoThe Epic Cycle and the Uniqueness of Homerrdquo JHS 97 39ndash53mdash (1992) ldquoTheocritus the Iliad and the Eastrdquo AJPh 113 189ndash211mdash (1998) ldquoThe Social Function of Attic Tragedyrdquo CQ 48 39ndash61Griffith M (1999) Sophocles Antigone CambridgeGriswold C L (2012) ldquoPlato on Rhetoric and Poetryrdquo in The Stanford Encyclopedia of

Philosophy (Spring 2012 Edition)Griswold Jr C L (1985) ldquoPlatorsquos Metaphilosophy Why Plato Wrote Dialoguesrdquo in D

OrsquoMeara (ed) 143ndash67Grube GMA (1992) Plato Republic (revised by CDC Reeve) Indianapolis CambridgeGrzybeck E (1990) Du calendrier maceacutedonien au calendrier ptoleacutemaique problegravemes de

chronologie helleacutenistique BaselGuettel-Cole S (2007) ldquoFinding Dionysusrdquo in D Ogden (ed) 327ndash41Guichard LA (2004) Asclepiacuteades de Samos Epigramas y fragmentos BernGuidorizzi G (2000) Igino Miti MilanGuumlnther HC (ed) (2006) Brillrsquos Companion to Propertius LeidenGuthrie WKC (1962ndash1981) A History of Greek Philosophy Vols I-VI Cambridgemdash (1971) The Sophists CambridgeGutzwiller KJ (1992) ldquoThe Nautilus the Halcyon and Selenaia Callimachusrsquos Epigram 5Pf

= 14G-Prdquo ClAnt 11 194ndash209mdash (1997) ldquoThe Poetics of Editing in Meleagerrsquos Garlandrdquo TAPhA 127 169ndash200mdash (1998) Poetic Garlands Hellenistic Epigrams in Context Berkeley Los Angeles Londonmdash (ed) (2005) The New Posidippus A Hellenistic Poetry Book Oxfordmdash (2010) ldquoHeroic Epitaphs of the Classical Age The Aristotelian Peplos and Beyondrdquo in

M Baumbach A Petrovic I Petrovic (eds) 219ndash49Habicht C (1985) Pausaniasrsquo Guide to Ancient Greece BerkeleyHainsworth B (1993) The Iliad A Commentary (General Editor GS Kirk) Vol III Books

9ndash12 Cambridge

Bibliography 449

Hall E (1995) ldquoLawcourt Dramas The Power of Performance in Greek Forensic OratoryrdquoBICS 40 39ndash58

mdash (2008) The Return of Ulysses A Cultural History of Homerrsquos Odyssey BaltimoreHall E Harrop S (2010) Theorising Performance Greek Drama Cultural History and

Critical Practice London New YorkHall E Macintosh F Wrigley A (eds) (2004) Dionysus since 69 Greek Tragedy at the

Dawn of the Third Millennium OxfordHall S Neale S (2010) Epics Spectacles and Blockbusters A Hollywood History DetroitHalleran M (1982) ldquoAlcestis Reduxrdquo HSCP 86 51ndash53mdash (1985) Stagecraft in Euripides Kent Sydneymdash (1988) ldquoText and Ceremony at the Close of Euripidesrsquo Alcestisrdquo Eranos 86 123ndash29Halliwell S (1996) ldquoPlatorsquos Repudiation of the Tragicrdquo in MS Silk (ed) 332ndash49mdash (1997) ldquoThe Republicrsquos two Critiques of Poetryrdquo in O Houmlffe (ed) 313ndash32mdash (2000) ldquoThe Subjection of Muthos to Logos Platorsquos Citations of thePoetsrdquo CQ 50 94ndash112mdash (2006) ldquoPlato and Aristotle on Denial of Tragedyrdquo in A Laird (ed) 115ndash41Hamilakis Y (2007) The Nation and its Ruins Antiquity Archaeology and National

Imagination in Greece OxfordHammer D (2007) ldquoToward a Political Ethicrdquo in H Bloom (ed) (2007a) 155ndash80Hanink J (2014) Lycurgan Athens and the Making of Classical Tragedy CambridgeHarder M A (2007) ldquoEpigram and the Heritage of Epicrdquo in P BingJS Bruss (eds)

409ndash28Harder MA Regtuit RF Wakker GC (eds) (1998) Genre in Hellenistic Poetry

GroningenHarder MA Regtuit RF Wakker GC (eds) (2006) Beyond the Canon LeuvenHarder MA Regtuit RF Wakker GC (eds) (2012) Gods and Religion in Hellenistic

Poetry LeuvenHardie A (2007) ldquoJuno Hercules and the Muses at Romerdquo AJPh 128 551ndash92Hardie C (1977) ldquoThe Crater of Avernus as a cult-siterdquo in RG Austin (ed) 279ndash86Hardie P (1985) ldquoImago Mundi Cosmological and Ideological Aspects of the Shield of

Achillesrdquo JHS 105 11ndash31mdash (1986) Virgilrsquos Aeneid Cosmos and Imperium Oxfordmdash (ed) (1999) Virgil Critical Assessments of Classical Authors Vol III The Aeneid (trans

R Lauglands) Londonmdash (2009a) Lucretian Receptions History The Sublime Knowledge Cambridgemdash (2009b) ldquoThe Self-Divisions of Scyllardquo Trends in Classics 1 118ndash47Hardwick L (1992) ldquoConvergence and Divergence in Reading Homerrdquo in

Emlyn-JonesHardwickPurkis (eds) 227ndash48mdash (1997) ldquoReception as Simile The Poetics of Reversal in Homer and Derek Walcottrdquo IJCT

33 326ndash38mdash (2002) ldquoClassical Texts in Post-Colonial Literatures Consolation Redress and New

Beginnings in the work of Derek Walcott and Seamus Heaneyrdquo IJCT 92 236ndash56mdash (2003) Reception Studies Oxfordmdash (2009) ldquoPlaying around Cultural Faultlines The Impact of Modern Translations for the

Stage on Perceptions of Ancient Greek Dramardquo in A Chantler C Dente (eds) 167ndash84

450 Bibliography

mdash (2011) ldquoFuzzy Connections Classical Texts and Modern Poetry in Englishrdquo in J ParkerT Matthews (eds) 39ndash60

mdash (2013) ldquoAgainst the lsquoDemocratic Turnrsquo Counter-texts Counter-contextsCounter-argumentsrdquo in L Hardwick S Harrison (eds) 15ndash32

Hardwick L Harrison S (eds) (2013) Classics in the Modern World A Democratic TurnOxford

Hardwick L Stray C (2008) ldquoIntroduction Making Connectionsrdquo in L Hardwick C Stray(eds) 1ndash9

Hardwick L Stray C (eds) (2008) A Companion to Classical Receptions Oxford MaldenHarrison EL (1986) ldquoAchaemenidesrsquo Unfinished Account Vergil Aeneid 3588ndash691rdquo CPh

812 146ndash47Harrison S (2007) Generic Enrichment in Vergil and Horace OxfordHarrison T (2000) Divinity and History The Religion of Herodotus OxfordHartmann A (1917) Untersuchungen uumlber die Sagen vom Tod des Odysseus MunichHarvey F (1990) ldquoDona Ferentes Some Aspects of Bribery in Greek Politicsrdquo in P

Cartledge F Harvey (eds) 76ndash117Haslam M (1997) ldquoHomeric Papyri and Transmission of the Textrdquo in I Morris B Powell

(eds) 55ndash100Haubold J (2000) Homerrsquos People Epic Poetry and Social Formation Cambridgemdash (2007) ldquoHomer after Parry Tradition Reception and the Timeless Textrdquo in B Graziosi

E Greenwood (eds) 27ndash46Haury A (1957) Ciris Edition critique BordeauxHaumlusle H (1979) Einfache und fruumlhe Formen des griechischen Epigramms InnsbruckHavelock E (1963) Preface to Plato OxfordHawkins S (2013) Studies in the Language of Hipponax BremenHeath J (2005) ldquoBlood for the Dead Homeric Ghosts Speak uprdquo Hermes 133 389ndash400Heinze R (1993) Virgilrsquos Epic Technique (trans H and D Harvey and F Robertson with a

preface by A Wlosok) StuttgartHelms J (1966) Character Portrayal in the Romance of Chariton The Hague ParisHenrichs A (1982) ldquoChanging Dionysiac Identitiesrdquo in BF Meyer EP Sanders (eds)

137ndash60mdash (1991) ldquoNamenlosigkeit und Euphemismus Zur Ambivalenz der chthonishen Maumlchte im

attischen Dramardquo in H Hofmann MA Harder (eds) 161ndash201Herrman J (2004) Athenian Funeral Orations Newburyportmdash (2009) Hyperides Funeral Oration OxfordHerrmann Η (2008) Mikis Theodorakis Der Rhythmus der Freiheit BerlinHershkowitz D (1991) ldquoThe Aeneid in Aeneid 3rdquo Vergilius 37 69ndash76Herter H (1934) ldquoTelchinenrdquo in RE V A1 Stuttgart 1979ndash22456Hesk J (1999) ldquoThe Rhetoric of Anti-rhetoric in Athenian Oratoryrdquo in S Goldhill R

Osborne (eds) 201ndash30mdash (2000) Deception and Democracy in Classical Athens CambridgeHeubeck Α (1981) ldquoZwei homerische πεῖραι (ω 205ff ndash B 53ff)rdquo ZAnt 31 73ndash83Heubeck A West S Hainsworth JB (1988) A Commentary on Homerrsquos Odyssey Vol I

OxfordHeubeck A Hoekstra A (1989) A Commentary on Homerrsquos Odyssey Vol II OxfordHeyworth SJ (2007) Cynthia A Companion to the Text of Propertius Oxford

Bibliography 451

mdash (2009) ldquoPropertius and Ovidrdquo in PE Knox (ed) 265ndash78Heyworth SJ Morwood JHW (2011) A Commentary on Propertius Book 3 OxfordHielkema H (1941) Ciris quod carmen traditur Vergilii Diss UtrechtHill J Church Gibson P (eds) (1998) The Oxford Guide to Film Studies Oxford New YorkHinds S (1998) Allusion and Intertext Dynamics of Appropriation in Roman Poetry

CambridgeHintzen-Bohlen B (1995) Die Kulturpolitik des Eubulos und des LykurgDie Denkmaumller-und

Bauprojekte in Athen zwischen 355 und 322 vChr BerlinHirschberger M (2001) ldquoEpos und Tragoumldie Ein Beitrag zur Intertextualitaumlt des griechischen

Romansrdquo WJA 25 157ndash86Hobbs A (2000) Plato and the Hero Courage Manliness and the Impersonal Good

CambridgeHoekstra A (1957) ldquoHeacutesiode et la tradition oralerdquo Mnem 10 193ndash225Hoerber RG (1962) ldquoPlatorsquos Lesser Hippiasrdquo Phronesis 7 121ndash31Houmlffe O (ed) (1997) Platon Politeia BerlinHofmann H Harder MA (eds) (1991) Fragmenta Dramatica GoumlttingenHollis AS (1992) ldquoHellenistic Colouring in Virgilrsquos Aeneidrdquo HSCP 94 269ndash85mdash (1994) ldquoNonnus and Hellenistic Poetryrdquo in N Hopkinson (ed) 43ndash62mdash (1998) ldquoNicander and Lucretiusrdquo PLILS 10 169ndash84mdash (2006) ldquoPropertius and Hellenistic Poetryrdquo in H-C Guumlnther (ed) 97ndash125Houmllscher U (1988) Die Odyssee Epos zwischen Maumlrchen und Roman MunichHolst-Warhaft G (1980) Theodorakis Myth and Politics in Modern Greek Music Londonmdash (2012) ldquoOdyssey by Kostas Kartelias translated by Gail Holst-Warhaftrdquo Per Contra An

International Journal of the Arts Literature and Ideas Spring issue 2httpwwwpercontranetissues23poetryodyssey

Holub RC (20032) Reception Theory A Critical Introduction LondonHope R (1960) Aristotle Metaphysics Ann ArborHopkins D (2010) Conversing With Antiquity OxfordHopkinson N (1984) Callimachus Hymn to Demeter Cambridgemdash (ed) (1994) Studies in the Dionysiaca of Nonnus CambridgeHopman MG (2012) Scylla Myth Metaphor Paradox CambridgeHornblower S (1983) The Greek World 479ndash323 BC Londonmdash (2004) Thucydides and Pindar Historical Narrative and the World of Epinician Poetry

OxfordHorsfall N (2006) Virgil Aeneid 3 A Commentary LeidenHose M (1995) Drama und Gesellschaft StuttgartHousman AE (1902) ldquoRemarks on the Culexrdquo CR 16 339ndash46Howes GE (1895) ldquoHomeric Quotations in Plato and Aristotlerdquo HSCP 6 153ndash237Hunt P (2011) ldquoSlaves in Greek Literary Culturerdquo in K Bradley P Cartledge (eds) 22ndash47Hunter RL (1999) Theocritus A Selection Cambridgemdash (2004) ldquoHomer and Greek Literaturerdquo in RL Fowler (ed) 235ndash53mdash (2010) ldquoLanguage and Interpretation in Greek Epigramrdquo in M Baumbach A Petrovic

I Petrovic (eds) 265ndash88Hurst A Kolde A (2008) Lycophron Alexandra ParisHutton W (2005) Describing Greece Landscape and Literature in the Periegesis of

Pausanias Cambridge

452 Bibliography

Huys M (1986) ldquoThe Plotting Scene in Euripidesrsquo Alexandrosrdquo ZPE 62 9ndash36Ingleheart J (2010) A Commentary on Ovid Tristia Book 2 OxfordIrwin TH (19992) Aristotle Nicomachean Ethics Indianapolismdash (2010) ldquoThe Sense and Reference of Kalon in Aristotlerdquo CPh 105 381ndash96Iser W (1978) The Act of Reading A Theory of Aesthetic Response Baltimore LondonJacob DJ (1993) ldquoDie Stellung des Margites in der Entwicklung der Komoumldierdquo Hell 43

275ndash79mdash (2009) ldquoDie Spiegel der Alkestisrdquo in E Karamalengou E Makrygianni (eds) 179ndash87mdash (2010a) ldquoEuripidesrsquo Alcestis as Closed Dramardquo RFIC 138 14ndash27mdash (2010b) ldquoMilk in the Gold Tablets from Pelinnardquo Trends in Classics 2 64ndash76Jacob M (1929) La vie priveacutee drsquoHeacutelegravene de Troie ParisJacoby F (1945) ldquoAthenian Epigrams from the Persian Warsrdquo Hesperia 14 185ndash211James SL (2003) Learned Girls and Male Persuasion Gender and Reading in Roman Love

Elegy Berkeley Los AngelesJanaway C (1995) Images of Excellence Platorsquos Critique of the Arts Oxfordmdash (2006) ldquoPlato and the Artsrdquo in HH Benson (ed) 388ndash400Janko R (1992) The Iliad A Commentary (General Editor GS Kirk) Vol IV Books 13ndash16

CambridgeJarkho V (1982) ldquoBesprechung von R Scodel The Trojan Trilogy of Euripidesrdquo Gnomon 54

241ndash45Jauss HR (1982) Toward an Aesthetic of Reception (trans T Bahti) MinneapolisJebb RC (19003) Sophocles The Antigone CambridgeJoachim H H (1951) Aristotle The Nicomachean Ethics A Commentary OxfordJocelyn HD (1967) The Tragedies of Ennius CambridgeJones C (2010) New Heroes in Antiquity From Achilles to Antinoos Cambridge (Mass)

LondonJouan F (1966) Euripide et les leacutegendes des Chants Cypriens ParisJouan F van Looy H (1998) Euripide Les fragments Vol I ParisJovanović VM (1954) ldquoO liku Filipa Višnjića I drugih guslara Vukova vremenardquo Zbornik

Matice Srpske za književnost I jezik Novi Sad 2 67ndash96Jowett B (19534) The Dialogues of Plato Vols I-V OxfordJoyce M (2002) ldquoNo One Tells You This Secondary Orality and Hypertextualityrdquo Oral

Tradition 172 325ndash45Kaes A (2009) Shell Shock Cinema Weimar Culture and the Wounds of War PrincetonKagan D (1981) The Peace of Nicias and the Sicilian Expedition IthacaKahane A (2005) Diachronic Dialogues Authority and Continuity in Homer and the Homeric

Tradition LanhamKahn CH (1963) ldquoPlatorsquos Funeral Oration The Motive of the Menexenusrdquo CPh 58 220ndash34mdash (1981) ldquoDid Plato Write Socratic Dialoguesrdquo CQ 31 305ndash20mdash (1998) Plato and the Socratic Dialogue The Philosophical Use of a Literary Form

CambridgeKallendorf C W (2006) ldquoAllusion as Reception Virgil Milton and the Modern Readerrdquo in

C Martindale RF Thomas (eds) 67ndash79mdash (2007) ldquoIntroductionrdquo in CW Kallendorf (ed) 1ndash4mdash (ed) (2007) A Companion to the Classical Tradition Oxford MaldenKambanellis I (1979) ldquoOdysseus Come Homerdquo in Theatre Vol II Athens 213ndash95

Bibliography 453

mdash (1990a) ldquoAuthorrsquos noterdquo in Programme of Odysseus Come Home National TheatreAthens

mdash (1990b) From the Stage and from the Auditorium (Από σκηνής και από πλατείας) Athensmdash (1998) ldquoThe Last Actrdquo in Theatre Vol VII Athens 167ndash241Kambylis A (1965) Die Dichterweihe und ihre Symbolik Untersuchungen zu Hesiodos

Kallimachos Properz und Ennius HeidelbergKamerbeek JC (1958) ldquoMythe et realiteacute dans lrsquooeuvre drsquoEuripiderdquo Entr Ant Clas 6 1ndash41Kannicht R (1988) The Ancient Quarrel Between Philosophy and Poetry Aspects of the

Greek Conception of Literature Canterburymdash (2004) Tragicorum Graecorum Fragmenta Vol V 1ndash2 Euripides GoumlttingenKantzios I (2005) The Trajectory of Archaic Greek Trimeter LeidenKaradžić VS (1842) ldquoPravi uzrok i početak skupljanja našijeh narodnijeh pjesamardquo

Peštansko-budimski skoroteča 2021 118ndash28 (reprinted in Vuk Karadžić Izabrani Spisio jeziku I književnosti priredio B Nikolić Belgrade 1969)

Karalis V (2012) A History of Greek Cinema New York LondonKaramalengou E Makrygianni E (eds) (2009) Aντιφίλησις Studies on Classical Byzantine

and Modern Greek Literature and Culture in Honour of J T A Papademetriou StuttgartKaramanou I (2011) ldquoThe Hektor-Deiphobos Agon in Euripidesrsquo Alexandros (frr 62a-b K

PStras 23422 and 2343)rdquo ZPE 178 35ndash47mdash (2012) ldquoAllocating fr 46a K within the Plot of Euripidesrsquo Alexandros A Reinspection

and Reassessment of PStras 23421rdquo in P Schubert (ed) 399ndash405mdash (2013) ldquoThe Attack Scene in Euripidesrsquo Alexandros and its Reception in Etruscan Artrdquo

in A Bakogianni (ed) Vol II 415ndash31mdash (2015) ldquoTorch Imagery in Euripidesrsquo Alexandros and Trojan Womenrdquo in Balkan Light

2015 Conference Proceedings (Acropolis Museum 16ndash19 September 2015) Athens392ndash97

Kartelias K (2007) Τhe Glass (Tο γυαλί σχέδιον γ) AthensKarvounis D (2005) ldquoMikis Theodorakisrsquo Childrenrsquos Songsrdquo in M Bouzakis E Papavasiliou

(eds) 122ndash29Kaster RA (1988) Guardians of the Language The Grammarian and Society in Late

Antiquity Berkeley Los AngelesKatsouris A (1982) ldquoAeschylusrsquo lsquoOdysseanrsquo Tetralogyrdquo Dioniso 53 47ndash60Kavanagh P (2005) Collected Poems (ed A Quinn) HarmondsworthKazazis JN Rengakos A (eds) (1999) Euphrosyne Studies in Ancient Epic and its Legacy

in Honour of Dimitris N Maronitis StuttgartΚeeley E Sherrard P (1980) Angelos Sikelianos Selected Poems Londonmdash (1995) A Bilingual Collection of Poems by CP Cavafy LondonKeith AM (1994) ldquoElegiac Poetics and Elegiac Puellae in Ovidrsquos Amoresrdquo CW 881 27ndash40Kelly M (ed) (1966) For Service to Classical Studies Essays in Honour of F Letters

Melbourne Canberra SydneyKennedy DF (1993) The Arts of Love Five Studies in the Discourse of Roman Love Elegy

CambridgeKennedy GA (ed) (1989) The Cambridge History of Literary Criticism Vol I Cambridgemdash (1994) A New History of Classical Rhetoric PrincetonKerferd GB (1981) The Sophistic Movement CambridgeKeulen AJ (2001) L Annaeus Seneca Troades Leiden

454 Bibliography

Kindstrand JF (1973) Homer in der zweiten Sophistik UppsalaKinsey TE (1979) ldquoThe Achaemenides Episode in Virgilrsquos Aeneid IIIrdquo Latomus 39 110ndash24Kirk G S (1985) The Iliad A Commentary Vol I Books 1ndash4 CambridgeKlagge JC Smith ND (eds) (1992) Methods of Interpreting Plato and his Dialogue

OxfordKlaras B (1961) ldquoThe Odyssey in a Satirical Trilogy by Skouloudisrdquo Vradyni 2 Nov 1961Klironomos N (2007) His Childhood YearshellipA Journey Paintings inspired by Mikis

Theodorakisrsquo Childhood A Painterrsquos Offer to the Great Composer (Tα παιδικά του χρόνιαhellipένα ταξίδι έργα εμπνευσμένα από τα παιδικά χρόνια του Μίκη Θεοδωράκη προσφοράτου ζωγράφου στο μεγάλο συνθέτη) Athens

Knauer GN (1964) Die Aeneis und Homer Goumlttingenmdash (1981) ldquoVergil and Homerrdquo in H Temporini et al (eds) ANRW XXXI 2 870ndash918Knecht D (1970) Ciris authenticiteacute histoire du texte eacutedition et commentaire critiques

BruggeKnight VH (1995) The Renewal of Epic Responses to Homer in the Argonautica of

Apollonius LeidenKnoche U (1936) ldquoZur Frage der Properzinterpolationrdquo RhM 85 8ndash63Knox PE (ed) (2009) A Companion to Ovid Malden OxfordKoch G (ed) (1986) Studien zur fruumlhchristlichen Kunst III Goumlttinger Orientforschungen 2

GoumlttingenKofidou A (2004) Confluences theacutematiques et techniques chez J Giraudoux et E Ionesco

Diss ThessalonikiKokkinakis G (1961) ldquoOdyssey A Satirical Comedy by Manolis Skouloudisrdquo Acropolis 5

Nov 1961Kolde A Lukinovich A Rey AL (eds) (2005) Κορυφαίῳ ἀνδρί Meacutelanges offerts agrave Andreacute

Hurst GenevaKolker R P (1998) ldquoThe Film Text and Film Formrdquo in J Hill P Church Gibson (eds) 11ndash29Koniaris GL (1973) ldquoAlexander Palamedes Troades SisyphusmdashA Connected Tetralogy A

Connected Trilogy ldquo HSCP 77 85ndash124Konstan D (1985) ldquoPhilia in Euripidesrsquo Electrardquo Phil 129 176ndash85mdash (2003) ldquoBefore Jealousyrdquo in D Konstan NK Rutter (eds) 7ndash28mdash (2006) The Emotions of the Ancient Greeks Toronto LondonKonstan D Rutter NK (eds) (2003) Envy Spite and Jealousy EdinburghKost K (1971) Musaios Hero und Leander BonnKotzia-Panteli P (2002) ldquoForschungsreisen Zu Iamblichusrsquo Protreptikos 40 1ndash11 Pistellirdquo

Phil146 111ndash32Koukoulas L (1961) ldquoOdysseyrdquo Athinaiki 4 Nov 1961Koutoulas A (1998) Theodorakis the Musician (O μουσικός Θεοδωράκης Κείμενα ndash

Εργογραφία ndash Κριτικές 1937ndash1996) AthensKouyoumoutzakis Y (ed) (2007) Universal Harmony Music and Science in Mikis

Theodorakis (Συμπαντική αρμονία μουσική και επιστήμη στον Μίκη Θεοδωράκη)Herakleion

mdash (2007) ldquoMikis Theodorakis The Journeyrdquo in Y Kouyoumoutzakis (ed) 43ndash72Kovacs D (1997) ldquoGods and Men in Euripidesrsquo Trojan Trilogyrdquo Colby Quarterly 33 162ndash76Kracauer S (20042) From Caligari to Hitler A Psychological History of the German Film

Princeton

Bibliography 455

Kramer B (1980) ldquoSchuumlleruumlbung Anapaumlste (Aischylos Psychagogoi)rdquo in M Erler BKramer D Hagedorn R Huumlbner (eds) 11ndash23

Krausse O (1905) De Euripide Aeschyli Instauratore JenaKrischer T (1991) ldquoRezension W Mader Die Psaumis-Oden Pindars (O 4 and O 5)

Innsbruck 1990rdquo AAHG 44 158ndash59mdash (1992) ldquoDie Bogenproberdquo Hermes 120 19ndash25Kronick JG (2006) ldquoThe Ancient Quarrel Revisited Literary Theory and the Return to

Ethicsrdquo Philosophy and Literature 302 436ndash49Kuhrt A (2007) The Persian Empire A Corpus of Sources from the Achaemenid Period Vol

I-II LondonKyriakidis S (2007) Catalogues of Proper Names in Latin Epic Poetry Newcastle upon TyneKyriakou P (2001) ldquoWarrior Vaunts in the Iliadrdquo RhM 144 250ndash76La Penna A (1951) ldquoNote sul linguaggio erotico dellrsquo elegia latinardquo Maia 4 187ndash209mdash (2000) ldquoLrsquoOrdine delle raffigurazioni della guerra Troiana nel tempio di Cartagine

(Aeneid I 469ndash493)rdquo Maia 52 1ndash8Labarbe J (1949) LrsquoHomegravere de Platon LiegravegeLada-Richards I (2002) ldquoThe Subjectivity of Greek Performancerdquo in PE Easterling E Hall

(eds) 395ndash418Laird A (ed) (2006) Oxford Readings in Classical Studies Ancient Literary Criticism OxfordLamberton R (1986) Homer the Theologian Neoplatonist Allegorical Reading and the

Growth of the Epic Tradition Berkeley Los AngelesLamberton R Keaney JJ (eds) (1992) Homerrsquos Ancient Readers The Hermeneutics of

Greek Epicrsquos Earliest Exegetes PrincetonLampert L (2002) ldquoSocratesrsquo Defence of Polytropic Odysseus Lying and Wrong-doing in

Platorsquos Lesser Hippiasrdquo The Review of Politics 642 231ndash60Lange K (2002) Euripides und Homer Untersuchungen zur Homernachwirkung im Elektra

Iphigenie im Taurerland Helena Orestes und Kyklops StuttgartLasserre F Sulliger J (eds) (1976) A Rivier Eacutetudes de litteacuterature grecque GenevaLatacz J Greub T Blome P Wieczorek A (eds) (2008) Homer Der Mythos von Troia in

Dichtung und Kunst MunichLatte K (1935) ldquoDer Thrax des Euphorionrdquo Phil 90 129ndash55Lattimore R (1951) The Iliad of Homer ChicagoLausberg H (1960) Handbuch der literarischen Rhetorik eine Grundlegung der

Literaturwissenschaft Vols I-II MunichLazaridou ndash Elmaloglou I (2004) Μikis Theodorakis His Works in the Period 1937ndash 1960

(Mίκης Θεοδωράκης τo συμφωνικό έργο της περιόδου 1937ndash 1960) Diss AthensLe Sage L (1958) Lrsquooeuvre de Jean Giraudoux University Park PennsylvaniaLeach EW (1966) ldquoNature and Art in Vergilrsquos Second Ecloguerdquo AJPh 87 427ndash45Lear GR (2004) Happy Lives and the Highest Good An Essay on Aristotlersquos Nicomachean

Ethics Princetonmdash (2011) ldquoMimesis and Psychological Change in Republic IIIrdquo in P Destreacutee FG

Herrmann (eds) 195ndash216Lee G (1980) Virgil The Eclogues Londonmdash (1994) Propertius The Poems OxfordLee KH (1976) Euripides Troades London

456 Bibliography

Leeuwen J van (1890) ldquoQuaestiones ad Historiam Scenicam pertinentesrdquo Mnem 1868ndash75

Lehnus L (1975) ldquoUna scena della Ciris (vv 220 ss) Carme e lrsquoEcale di Callimacordquo RIL 109353ndash61

Lenchantin de Gubernatis M (1930) P Vergili Maronis Ciris TorinoLesky A (1925) Alkestis Der Mythus und das Drama ViennaLevin SB (2001) The Ancient Quarrel Between Philosophy and Poetry Revisited Plato and

the Greek Literary Tradition OxfordLeacutevystone D (2005) ldquoLa figure drsquoUlysse chez les Socratiques Socrate polytroposrdquo

Phronesis 50 181ndash214Liddel P (2008) ldquoScholarship and Morality Plutarchrsquos Use of Inscriptionsrdquo Acta of the 7th

International Plutarch Society Congress Rethymno125ndash37Liddel P Low P (eds) (2013) Inscriptions and their Uses in Greek and Latin Literature

OxfordLieberg G (1962) Puella divina die Gestalt der goumlttlichen Geliebten bei Catull im

Zusammenhang der antiken Dichtung AmsterdamLier B (1978) Ad topica carminum amatoriorum symbolae New York LondonLipka M (2001) Language in Vergilrsquos Eclogues Berlin New YorkLivrea E (2000) Nonno di Panopoli Parafrasi del Vangelo di S Giovanni Canto B BolognaLloyd M (1984) ldquoThe Helen Scene in Euripidesrsquo Troadesrdquo CQ 34 303ndash13mdash (1992) The Agon in Euripides Oxfordmdash (1994) Euripides Andromache WarminsterLloyd-Jones H (1981) ldquoNotes on PKoumlln III 125 (Aeschylus Psychagogoi)rdquo ZPE 42 21ndash22mdash (19832) The Justice of Zeus Berkeley Los Angeles Londonmdash (1987) ldquoA Note on Homeric Moralityrdquo CPh 82 307ndash10Lobel E Roberts CH Wegener EP (1952) The Oxyrhynchus Papyri Vol XX LondonLombardo S (2000) Homer Odyssey (introduction by S Murnaghan) IndianapolisLong A A (1997) ldquoMorals and Values in Homerrdquo JHS 90 121ndash39Longley M (2006) Collected Poems LondonLoraux N (1986) The Invention of Athens The Funeral Oration in the Classical City (trans A

Sheridan) Cambridge (Mass) LondonLord AB (20002) The Singer of Tales (re-edited with an introduction by S Mitchell and G

Nagy 1st ed 1960) Cambridge (Mass)Lorenz K (2010) ldquoDialectics at a Standstillrdquo in M Baumbach A Petrovic I Petrovic

(eds) 131ndash48Lowenstam S (1993) ldquoThe Pictures of Junorsquos Temple in the Aeneidrdquo CW 87 37ndash49Lowry E (1991) Thersites A Study in Comic Shame Diss HarvardLuck G (1977) P Ovidius Naso Tristia Vol II Kommentar HeidelbergLudwich Κ (1898) Die Homervulgata als voralexandrinisch erwiesen LeipzigLumpp HM (1963) ldquoDie Arniadas-Inschrift aus Korkyra Homerisches im Epigramm ndash

Epigrammatisches im Homerrdquo Forschungen und Fortschritte 37 212ndash15Luraghi N Foxhall L (2010) ldquoIntroductionrdquo in L Foxhall H-J Gehrke N Luraghi (eds)

9ndash14Luther A (ed) (2005) OdysseendashRezeptionen FrankfurtLyne ROAM (1971) ldquoThe Dating of the Cirisrdquo CQ 21 233ndash53mdash (1978) Ciris A Poem Attributed to Vergil Cambridge

Bibliography 457

mdash (1980) The Latin Love Poets from Catullus to Horace OxfordMaass E (1895) Orpheus MunichMac Goacuteraacutein F (2012ndash13) ldquoApollo and Dionysus in Virgilrdquo Incontri di filologia classica 12

191ndash238Macan RW (1908) Herodotus The Seventh Eighth and Ninth Books LondonMacCoull LSB (2003) ldquoNonnus (and Dioscorus) at the Feast Late Antiquity and Afterrdquo in

D Accorinti P Chuvin (eds) 489ndash500Maciver CA (2012) Quintus Smyrnaeusrsquo Posthomerica Engaging Homer in Late Antiquity

Leiden BostonMackay EA (ed) (1999) Signs of Orality The Oral Tradition and Its Influence in the Greek

and Roman World LeidenMackie H (2003) Graceful Errors Pindar and the Performance of Praise Ann ArborMacKinnon K (1986) Greek Tragedy into Film LondonMader W (1988) Die Psaumis-Oden Pindars (O 4 und O 5) Ein Kommentar InnsbruckMaguire LE (2009) Helen of Troy From Homer to Hollywood Oxford MaldenMahon D (1979) Poems 1962ndash 1978 Oxfordmdash (1990) Selected Poems Londonmdash (2005) Harbour Lights Oldcastle Co MeathΜakris C (2001) Porphyryrsquos De Vita Pythagorica (Πορφύριου Πυθαγόρου βίος) ΑthensMalaerts H (ed) (1998) Le Culte du souverain dans lrsquo Eacutegypte ptoleacutemaϊque au IIIe siegravecle

avant notre egravere LeuvenMaltby R (2002) Tibullus Elegies Cambridgemdash (2006) ldquoMajor Themes and Motifs in Propertiusrsquo Love Poetryrdquo in H-C Guumlnther (ed)

147ndash81mdash (2011) ldquoServius on Stylistic Register in his Virgil Commentariesrdquo in R Ferri (ed)

63ndash74Manolea CP (2004) The Homeric Tradition in Syrianus ThessalonikiMarkantonatos A (ed) (2012) Brillrsquos Companion to Sophocles LeidenMarkantonatos A Tsagalis C (eds) (2008) Ancient Greek Tragedy Theory and Practice

(Αρχαία Ελληνική Τραγωδία Θεωρία και Πράξη) AthensMarkle MM (1976) ldquoSupport of Athenian Intellectuals for Philip A Study of Isocratesrsquo

Philippus and Speusippusrsquo Letter to Philiprdquo JHS 96 80ndash99Marotto A Pozzi D (2005) ldquoLa caduta di Troia e la sua rinascita La documentazione del

restauro dellrsquoedizione italiana del 1911rdquo Cinegrafie 18 103ndash30Marshall B (ed) (1980) Vindex Humanitatis Essays in Honour of JH Bishop ArmidaleMarshall CW (2012) ldquoHomer Helen and the Structure of Euripidesrsquo Trojan Womenrdquo in D

Rosenbloom J Davidson (eds) 31ndash46Martin RP (2005) ldquoEpic as Genrerdquo in JM Foley (ed) 9ndash19Martindale C (1993) Redeeming the Text Latin Poetry and the Hermeneutics of Reception

Cambridgemdash (2006) ldquoIntroduction Thinking through Receptionrdquo in C Martindale RF Thomas

(eds) 1ndash13mdash (2007) ldquoReceptionrdquo in C Kallendorf (ed) 297ndash311mdash (2010) ldquoPerformance Reception Aesthetics or why Reception Studies need Kantrdquo in E

Hall S Harrop (eds) 71ndash84

458 Bibliography

mdash (2013) ldquoReceptionmdasha New Humanism Receptivity Pedagogy the Transhistoricalrdquo CRJ52 169ndash83

Martindale C Thomas RF (eds) (2006) Classics and the Uses of Reception OxfordMalden Victoria

Martinez-Cuadrado J (1986) Ensayo Critico sobre Andromaque de Racine MurciaMarusic J (2011) ldquoPoets and Mimesis in the Republicrdquo in P Destreacutee FG Herrmann (eds)

217ndash40Mason PG (1959) ldquoKassandrardquo JHS 79 80ndash93Masson O (1962) Les fragments du poegravete Hipponax ParisMastronarde DJ (2010) The Art of Euripides Dramatic Technique and Social Context

CambridgeMazzoldi S (2001) Cassandra la vergine e lrsquo indovina Pisa RomeMcClure LK (1999) Spoken Like a Woman Speech and Gender in Athenian Drama

Princetonmdash (2003) Courtesans at Table Gender and Greek Literary Culture in Athenaeus New York

LondonMcDonald M (1983) Euripides in Cinema The Heart Made Visible Philadelphiamdash (2001) ldquoEye of the Camera Eye of the Victim Iphigenia by Euripides and Cacoyannisrdquo

in MM Winkler (ed) 90ndash117mdash (2008) ldquoA New Hope Film as a Teaching Tool for Classicsrdquo in L Hardwick C Stray

(eds) 327ndash41McDonald M Winkler MM (2001) ldquoMichael Cacoyannis and Irene Papas on Greek

Tragedyrdquo in MM Winkler (ed) 72ndash89McHardy F Robson J Harvey D (eds) (2005) Lost Dramas of Classical Athens ExeterMcKeown J C (1987) Ovid Amores Vol I Text and Prolegomena Liverpoolmdash (1989) Ovid Amores Vol II A Commentary on Book One Leedsmdash (1998) Ovid Amores Vol III A Commentary on Book Two LeedsMcLoughlin K (2011) Authoring War The Literary Representation of War from the Iliad to

Iraq CambridgeMelissinos S (1961) ldquoOdysseusrsquo Helmetrdquo in Aristophanic Comedies Strictly for Adults

Athens 1ndash52Melville AD (1990) Ovid The Love Poems OxfordMenegazzi B (1951) ldquoLrsquoAlessandro di Euripiderdquo Dioniso 14 172ndash97Mercier-Campiche M (1954) Le theacuteacirctre de Giraudoux et la condition humaine ParisMeridor R (2000) ldquoCreative Rhetoric in Euripidesrsquo Troadesrdquo CQ 501 16ndash29Mette H J (1963) Der verlorene Aischylos BerlinMeyer BF Sanders EP (eds) (1982) Jewish and Christian Self-Definition III Self Definition

in the Greco-Roman World LondonMeyer E A (1993) ldquoEpitaphs and Citizenship in Classical Athensrdquo JHS 113 99ndash121Michalopoulos AN (2003) ldquoThe Intertextual Fate of a Great Homeric Hero Diomedes in

Vergil (Aen 11252ndash93) and Ovid (Rem 151ndash67)rdquo Acta Ant Hung 43 77ndash86Michel C (2014) Homer und die Tragoumldie zu den Bezuumlgen zwischen Odyssee und

Orestie-Dramen (Aischylos Orestie Sophokles Elektra Euripides Elektra) TuumlbingenMichelakis P (2001) ldquoThe Past as a Foreign Country Greek Tragedy Cinema and the Politics

of Spacerdquo in F Budelmann P Michelakis (eds) 241ndash57mdash (2002) Achilles in Greek Tragedy Cambridge

Bibliography 459

mdash (2004) ldquoGreek Tragedy in Cinema Theatre Politics Historyrdquo in E Hall F MacintoshA Wrigley (eds) 199ndash217

mdash (2006) ldquoReception Performance and the Sacrifice of Iphigeniardquo in C Martindale R FThomas (eds) 219ndash26

mdash (2013) Greek Tragedy on Screen OxfordMichelakis P Wyke M (eds) (2013) The Ancient World in Silent Cinema CambridgeMikalson JD (2005) Ancient Greek Religion Oxford MaldenMiller FJ and Goold G (19842) Ovid Metamorphoses Vols I-II LondonMilobenski E (1964) Der Neid in der griechischen Philosophie LeidenMinchin E (1999) ldquoDescribing and Narrating in Homerrsquos Iliadrdquo in EA Mackay (ed)

49ndash64mdash (2001) Homer and the Resources of Memory Some Applications of Cognitive Theory to

the Iliad and the Odyssey Oxfordmdash (2007) Homeric Voices OxfordMiralles C (1981) ldquoLrsquoiscrizione di Mnesiepes (Arch test 4 Tarditi)rdquo QUCC 38 29ndash46mdash (1988) The Poetry of Hipponax RomeMiralles C Pogravertulas J (1983) Archilochus and the Iambic Poetry RomeMitchell S Nagy G (20002) ldquoIntroduction to the Second Editionrdquo in A B Lord (ed) viindash

xxixMitscherling J (1982) ldquoXenophon and Platordquo CQ 32 468ndash69mdash (2005) ldquoPlatorsquos Misquotation of the Poetsrdquo CQ 55 295ndash98Monoson SS (1998) ldquoRemembering Pericles The Political and Theoretical Import of Platorsquos

Menexenusrdquo Political Theory 26 489ndash513Montiglio S (2011) From Villain to Hero Odysseus in Ancient Thought Ann ArborMontoneri L Romano F (eds) (1986) Gorgia e la sofistica CataniaMoraud Y (1936) ldquoNoticerdquo in Jean Giraudoux La guerre de Troie nrsquoaura pas lieu

Sorbonne 13ndash29Moravcsik JME (1986) ldquoOn Correcting the Poetsrdquo OSAP 4 35ndash47Moravcsik JME Temko P (eds) (1982) Plato on Beauty Wisdom and the Arts TotowaMoreau A (ed) (1992) Lrsquo Initiation Actes du Colloque International de Montpellier 11ndash14

Avril 1991 MontpellierMorgan K (1977) Ovidrsquos Art of Imitation Propertius in the Amores LeidenMorris I Powell B (eds) (1997) A New Companion to Homer LeidenMorrison AD (2007) The Narrator in Archaic Greek and Hellenistic Poetry CambridgeMoss J (2007) ldquoWhat Is Imitative Poetry and Why is It Badrdquo in GRF Ferrari (ed) 415ndash44Mossman J (1995) Wild Justice A Study of Euripidesrsquo Hecuba Oxfordmdash (2005) ldquoWomenrsquos Voicesrdquo in J Gregory (ed) 352ndash65Most GW (2006) Hesiod Theogony Works and Days Testimonia Cambridge (Mass)

Londonmdash (2011) ldquoWhat Ancient Quarrel between Philosophy and Poetryrdquo in P Destreacutee FG

Herrmann (eds) 1ndash20Most GW Norman LF Rabau S (eds) (2009) Reacutevolutions homeacuteriques PisaMouyis A (2010) Mikis Theodorakis Finding Greece in his Music AthensMulhern JJ (1968) ldquoΤρόπος and πολυτροπία in Platorsquos Hippias Minorrdquo Phoenix 22 283ndash88Murdoch I (1977) The Fire and the Sun Why Plato Banished the Artists OxfordMurgatroyd P (1975) ldquoMilitia amoris and the Roman Elegistsrdquo Latomus 34 59ndash75

460 Bibliography

mdash (1980) Tibullus I PietermaritzburgMurray AT Dimock GE (1995) Homer The Odyssey Vols I-II (1st ed by AT Murray

London 1919 revised by GE Dimock) Cambridge (Mass) LondonMurray AT Wyatt WF (1999) Homer Iliad Vols I-II (1st ed by AT Murray London

1924ndash25 revised by WF Wyatt) Cambridge (Mass) LondonMurray G (1932) ldquoThe Trojan Trilogy of Euripides (415 BC)rdquo Meacutelanges Gustave Glotz Paris

II 645ndash56mdash (1946) ldquoEuripidesrsquo Tragedies of 415 BC The Deceitfulness of Liferdquo Greek Studies

Oxford 127ndash48Murray P (1986) Plato On Poetry (Ion Republic 376e-398b9 Republic 595ndash608b10)

Cambridgemdash (2011) ldquoTragedy Women and the Family in Platorsquos Republicrdquo in P Destreacutee FG

Herrmann (eds) 175ndash94Muth S Petrovic I (2013) ldquoMedientheorie als Chance ndash Uumlberlegungen zur historischen

Interpretation von Texten und Bildernrdquo in B Christiansen U Thaler (eds) 281ndash318Mylonopoulos J (ed) (2010) Divine Images and Human Imaginations in Ancient Greece and

Rome LeidenMyrsiades K (ed) (2009) Reading Homer Film and Text MadisonNagy G (1983) ldquoSema and Noesis Some Illustrationsrdquo Arethusa 16 35ndash55mdash (1990) Pindarrsquos Homer The Lyric Possession of an Epic Past Baltimore Londonmdash (1996) Homeric Questions Austinmdash (2009) Homer the Classic Cambridge (Mass) Washington DCNaiden FS (1998) ldquoAlcestis the Ghostrdquo Lexis 16 77ndash85Natsina Ch (2012) ldquoThe Debt towards Aphrodite Female Dedicators and their Interrelations

with the Goddess in Votive Epigrams of the Greek Anthologyrdquo in M A Harder R FRegtuit G C Wakker (eds) 249ndash79

Nauerth C (1986) ldquoSzenen eines verlorenen euripideischen Dramas auf einem koptischenStoffrdquo in G Koch (ed) 39ndash47

Nehamas A (1982) ldquoPlato on Imitation and Poetry in Republic 10rdquo in JME Moravcsik PTemko (eds) 47ndash78

Neitzel H (1975) Homer-Rezeption bei Hesiod BonnNeacutemethy G (1909) Ciris epyllion pseudovergilianum BudapestNicolosi A (2007) Ipponatte lsquoEpodi di Strasburgorsquo Archiloco lsquoEpodi di Coloniarsquo (con unrsquo

appendice su P Oxy 69 4708) BolognaNiditch S (1983) ldquoOral Tradition and Biblical Scholarshiprdquo Oral Tradition 181 43ndash44Niehoff MR (ed) (2012) Homer and the Bible in the Eyes of Ancient Interpreters LeidenNietzsche F ([1874] 1980) On the Advantage and Disadvantage of History for Life (trans P

Preuss) IndianapolisNightingale AW (1995) Genres in Dialogue Plato and the Construct of Philosophy

CambridgeNikoloutsos KP (ed) (2013) Ancient Greek Women in Film OxfordNilsson ΜP (19673) Geschichte der griechischen Religion MunichNisbet RGM Hubbard M (1978) A Commentary on Horace Odes Book II OxfordNisetich F (1989) Pindar and Homer BaltimoreNisters T (2000) Aristotle on Courage Frankfurt am Main

Bibliography 461

OrsquoConnor D (2007) ldquoRewriting the Poets in Platorsquos Charactersrdquo in GRF Ferrari (ed)55ndash89

OrsquoHara JJ (1996) True Names Vergil and the Alexandrian Tradition of EtymologicalWordplay Ann Arbor

OrsquoMeara DJ (ed) (1981) Studies in Aristotle Washington DCmdash (ed) (1985) Platonic Investigations Washington DCOrsquoNeill KN (1999) ldquoOvid and Propertius Reflexive Annotation in Amores 18rdquo Mnem 52

286ndash307Ober J (1989) Mass and Elite in Democratic Athens Rhetoric Ideology and the Power of the

People PrincetonOber J Strauss B (1990) ldquoDrama Political Rhetoric and the Discourse of Athenian

Democracyrdquo in J Winkler F Zeitlin (eds) 237ndash70Ogden D (1996) Greek Bastardy Oxfordmdash (2001a) Greek and Roman Necromancy Princeton Oxfordmdash (2001b) ldquoThe Ancient Greek Oracles of the Deadrdquo Acta Classica 44 167ndash95mdash (ed) (2007) A Companion to Greek Religion Oxford Malden VictoriaOikonomidis K (1961) ldquoOdyssey by M Skouloudisrdquo Ethnos 2 Nov 1961Olson SD (1988) ldquoThe lsquolove duetrsquo in Aristophanesrsquo Ecclesiazusaerdquo CQ 38 328ndash30Ong WJ (1982) Orality and Literacy The Technologizing of the Word LondonOphuijsen JM Stork P (1999) Linguistics into Interpretation Speeches of War in

Herodotus VII 5 amp 8ndash18I LeidenOswald A (2011) Memorial LondonOtis B (1964) Virgil a Study in Civilized Poetry OxfordOtto A (1880) De fabulis Propertianis Part I Diss BratislavaOvink BJH (1931) Philosophische Erklaumlrung der Platonischen Dialoge Meno und Hippias

Minor AmsterdamOwens J (1981) ldquoThe Καλόν in the Aristotelian Ethicsrdquo in DJ OrsquoMeara (ed) 261ndash77Padel R (1992) In and Out of the Mind Greek Images of the Tragic Self PrincetonPage D L (1936) ldquoThe Elegiacs in Euripidesrsquo Andromacherdquo in C Bailey (ed) 206ndash30mdash (1979) Sappho and Alcaeus An Introduction to the Study of Ancient Lesbian Poetry

OxfordPapaioannou S (2005) Epic Succession and Dissension Ovid Metamorphoses

13623ndash 14582 and the Reinvention of the Aeneid Berlin New YorkPapanghelis Th D (1987) Propertius A Hellenistic Poet on Love and Death Cambridgemdash (1995) From Bucolic Eutopia to Political Utopia (Από τη βουκολική ευτοπία στην πολιτική

ουτοπία) Αthensmdash (1999) ldquorelegens errata litora Virgilrsquos Reflexive lsquoOdysseyrsquordquo in JNKazazis A Rengakos

(eds) 275ndash90Papanghelis Th Harrison S Frangoulidis S (eds) (2013) Generic Interfaces in Latin

Literature Encounters Interactions and Tranformations Berlin New YorkPappas N (1989) ldquoSocratesrsquo Charitable Treatment of Poetryrdquo Philosophy and Literature 13

248ndash61Parker J Matthews T (eds) (2011) Tradition Translation Trauma The Classic and the

Modern OxfordParker L (2007) Euripides Alcestis Oxford

462 Bibliography

Parmentier L (1925) ldquoLes Troyennesrdquo in H Greacutegoire L Parmentier (eds) Euripide Vol IVParis

Parry M (1971) The Making of Homeric Verse The Collected Papers of Milman Parry (ed byAdam Parry) Oxford

Partee MH (1981) Platorsquos Poetics The Authority of Beauty UtahPaschalis M (1997) Virgilrsquos Aeneid Semantic Relations and Proper Names OxfordPaton W R (1916ndash1918) The Greek Anthology with an English Translation Vols I-V

Cambridge (Mass) LondonPaul J (2008) ldquoWorking with Film Theories and Methodologiesrdquo in L Hardwick C Stray

(eds) 303ndash14mdash (2013) Film and the Epic Classical Tradition OxfordPavis P (2003) Analyzing Performance Theater Dance and Film (trans D Williams) Ann

ArborPearson L (1962) Popular Ethics in Ancient Greece StanfordPeirano I (2009) ldquoMutati artus Scylla Philomela and the End of Silenusrsquo Song in Virgil

Eclogue 6rdquo CQ 59 187ndash95Pelling C (2006) ldquoHomer and Herodotusrdquo in MJ Clarke BGF Currie ROAM Lyne

(eds) 75ndash104Pelling C (ed) (1990) Characterisation and Individuality in Greek Literature Oxfordmdash (ed) (1997) Greek Tragedy and the Historian OxfordPenzel J (2006) Variation und Imitation ein literarischer Kommentar zu den Epigrammen

des Antipater von Sidon und des Archias von Antiocheia TrierPeraki-Kyriakidou H (2006) ldquoAntonomasia and Metonymy in the Proem to Virgilrsquos Georgicsrdquo

in J Booth R Maltby (eds) 83ndash99mdash (2010) ldquoDionysus in the Service of Virgilrsquos Bucolic Poetry (O Διόνυσος στην υπηρεσία

της βουκολικής ποιητικής του Βιργιλίου)rdquo in S Tsitsiridis (ed) 555ndash82mdash (2013) ldquoVirgilrsquos Eclogue 460ndash63 A Space of Generic Enrichmentrdquo in Th Papanghelis

S Harrison S Frangoulidis S (eds) 217ndash230mdash (forthcoming) ldquoThe Smile of Acanthus as an Indicator of Poetics The Case of Virgil (Το

γέλιο του ακάνθου ως δείκτης ποιητικής Η περίπτωση του Βιργιλίου)rdquo in Proceedingsof the IXth Panhellenic Symposium of Latin Literature Athens

Perlman S (1964) ldquoQuotations from Poetry in Attic Orators of the Fourth Century BCrdquo AJPh85155ndash172

Perris S (2011) ldquoProems Codas and Formalism in Homeric Receptionrdquo CRJ 32 189ndash212Pertusi A (1952) ldquoIl significato della trilogia troiana di Euripiderdquo Dioniso 15 251ndash73Perysinakis ΙΝ (2004) ldquoHomerrsquos Iliad I A Reading in the Poetrsquos Language (Ομήρου Ιλιάδα Ι

Μια ανάγνωση με τη γλώσσα του ποιητή)rdquo Seminario 30 157ndash74mdash (2006) ldquoArchaic Moral Values and Political Behaviour in the Early and Middle Dialogues

of Plato and in the Laws (Αρχαϊκές ηθικές αξίες και πολιτική συμπεριφορά στουςπρώιμους και μέσους διαλόγους του Πλάτωνα και τους Νόμους)rdquo Αriadne 12 69ndash92

mdash (2009) ldquoThe Reception of Ancient in Modern Greek Literature An Itineraryrdquo in ThPylarinos (ed) 195ndash216

Petrain D (2006) ldquoMoschusrsquo Europa and the Narratology of Ecphrasisrdquo in MA Harder RFRegtuit GC Wakker (eds) 249ndash70

Petrakou K (1999) The Theatrical Contests 1870ndash1925 (Οι Θεατρικοί Διαγωνισμοί1870ndash1925) Athens

Bibliography 463

mdash (2007) Theatrical Turning Points and Courses (Θεατρικές (σ)τάσεις και πορείες) AthensPetrovic A (2007) Kommentar zu den Simonideischen Versinschriften Leiden Bostonmdash (2013) ldquoInscribed Epigrams in Orators and Epigrammatic Collectionsrdquo in P Liddel P

Low (eds) 197ndash213Petrovic I (2006) ldquoDelusions of Grandeur Homer Zeus and the Telchines in Callimachusrsquo

Reply (Aitia Fr 1) and Iambus 6rdquo AampA 52 16ndash41Pfeiffer E (1933) Virgilrsquos Bukolika Untersuchungen zum Form-problem StuttgartPfeiffer R (1949) Callimachus Vol I OxfordPfeijffer IL (2004) ldquoPindar and Bacchylides ldquo in IJF De Jong A Bowie R Nuumlnlist (eds)

213ndash32Phillips E D (1953) ldquoOdysseus in Italyrdquo JHS 73 53ndash67Phillips J (1987) ldquoPlatorsquos Use of Homer in the Hippias Minorrdquo Favonius 1 21ndash30mdash (1989) ldquoXenophonrsquos Memorabilia 42rdquo Hermes 117 365ndash70Pickard-Cambridge A (19882) The Dramatic Festivals of Athens (revised with a new

supplement by J Goold and DM Lewis) OxfordPigeaud J (1983) ldquoLa Meacutetamorphose de Scylla (Ciris 490ndash507)rdquo LEC 51 125ndash31Pirenne-Delforge V (1996) ldquoLes Charites agrave Athegravenes et dans lrsquo icircle de Cosrdquo Kernos 9

195ndash214mdash (2010) ldquoGreek Priests and lsquoCult Statuesrsquo in how far are they Unnecessaryrdquo in J

Mylonopoulos (ed) 121ndash41Pistrick E Scaldaferri N Schwoumlrer G (eds) (2011) Audiovisual Media and Identity Issues

in Southeastern Europe Newcastle upon TynePlanck H (1840) De Euripidis Didascalia Troica GoumlttingenPlaninc V (2003) Plato through Homer Poetry and Philosophy in the Cosmological

Dialogues MissouriPoole A (1976) ldquoTotal Disaster Euripidesrsquo The Trojan Womenrdquo Arion 3 257ndash87Poole W (1990) ldquoMale Homosexuality in Euripidesrdquo in A Powell (ed) 108ndash50Porter JI (2004a) ldquoNietzsche Homer and the Classical Traditionrdquo in P Bishop (ed) 7ndash26mdash (2004b) ldquoHomer The History of an Ideardquo in RL Fowler (ed) 324ndash43Powell A (ed) (1990) Euripides Women and Sexuality LondonPozzi D Wickersham J (eds) (1991) Myth and the Polis IthacaPratt LH (1993) Lying and Poetry from Homer to Pindar Falsehood and Deception in

Archaic Greek Poetics Ann ArborPrince C Kerr (2008) ldquoPoeta sovrano Horizons of Homer in Twentieth-Century Englishndash

Language Poetryrdquo in The Homerizon Conceptual Interrogations in Homeric StudiesWashington Center for Hellenic Studieshttpchsharvardedupublicationssecclassicsssp

Psychopedis Y (2008) Nostos (NP Goulandris Foundation-Museum of Cycladic Art) AthensPucci P (1987) Odysseus Polutropos Intertextual Readings in the Odyssey and the Iliad

IthacaPuchner W (2005) Courses and Turning-points Ten Theatrological Essays (Πορείες και

Σταθμοί Δέκα Θεατρολογικά Μελετήματα) Athensmdash (2010) Landscapes of the Soul and Myths of the City Iakovos Kambanellisrsquo Theatrical

Universe (Tοπία ψυχής και μύθοι πολιτείας το θεατρικό σύμπαν του ΙάκωβουΚαμπανέλλη) Athens

Purkis J (1992) ldquoReading Homer Todayrdquo in Emlyn-JonesHardwickPurkis (eds) 1ndash18

464 Bibliography

Putnam M (1998) Virgilrsquos Epic Designs New HavenPylarinos Th (ed) (2009) Greek Antiquity and Modern Greek Literature (Ελληνική αρχαιότητα

και νεοελληνική λογοτεχνία) Ιonian University Department of History ConferenceProceedings (Corfu 30 Οctober-1 Νovember 2008) Corfu

Quinn K (1968) Vergilrsquos Aeneid A Critical Description LondonRace W H (1990) Style and Rhetoric in Pindarrsquos Odes Atlantamdash (2009) Apollonius Rhodius Argonautica Cambridge (Mass) LondonRacevskis R (2008) Tragic Passages Jean Racinersquos Art of the Threshold New JerseyRacine J (1994) Andromache (trans into Greek by S Paschalis) AthensRadt S (20092) Tragicorum Graecorum Fragmenta (TrGF) Vol III Aeschylus GoumlttingenRamminger J (1991) ldquoImitation and Allusion in the Achaemenides Scene (Vergil Aeneid

3588ndash691)rdquo AJPh 1121 53ndash71Ramphos S (1978) The Exile of Poets A Platonic Paradox (H εξορία των ποιητών ένα

πλατωνικό παράδοξο) AthensRaubitschek AE (1968) ldquoDas Denkmal-Epigramrdquo LrsquoEacutepigramme Grecque (Entr Fond Hardt

14) 1ndash27Rayor DJ (2004) The Homeric Hymns Berkeley Los Angeles LondonReardon B (1996) ldquoCharitonrdquo in G Schmeling (ed) 309ndash35Reckford KJ (1974) ldquoPhaedra and Pasiphae The Pull Backwardrdquo TAPhA 104 307ndash28Redfield JM (19942) Nature and Culture in the Iliad North CarolinaRehm R (1994) Marriage to Death The Conflation of Marriage and Death Rituals in Greek

Tragedy Princetonmdash (2002) The Play of Space Spatial Transformation in Greek Tragedy PrincetonReilly JH (1978) Jean Giraudoux BostonReinhardt T (2006) ldquoPropertius and Rhetoricrdquo in H-C Guumlnther (ed) 199ndash216Rengakos A (1993) Der Homertext und die hellenistischen Dichter Stuttgartmdash (1994) Apollonios Rhodios und die antike Homererklaumlrung MunichRessel M (2000) ldquoLe metamorfosi del mito di Scillardquo Myrtia 15 5ndash26Revermann M (2013) ldquoParaepic Comedy Points and Practicesrdquo in E Bakola L Prauscello

M Telograve (eds) 101ndash28Reynolds M (2011) The Poetry of Translation From Chaucer and Petrarch to Homer and

Logue OxfordRhodes PJ (1981) A Commentary on the Aristotelian Athenaion Politeia Oxfordmdash (20112) A History of the Classical Greek World 478ndash323 BC Oxford MaldenRichardson L jr (1977) Propertius Elegies I-IV NormanRichardson N J (1974) The Homeric Hymn to Demeter Oxfordmdash (1993) The Iliad A Commentary (General Editor GS Kirk) Vol VI Books 21ndash24

CambridgeRicks D (1989) The Shade of Homer A Study in Modern Greek Poetry CambridgeRiemer P (1989) Die Alkestis des Euripides Untersuchungen zur tragischen Form FrankfurtRieu EV (1950) The Iliad HarmondsworthRitooacutek Z (1993) ldquoZur Trojanischen Trilogie des Euripidesrdquo Gymnasium 100 109ndash25Rivier A (1975) ldquoEuripide et Pasiphaerdquo in F Lasserre J Sulliger (eds) 43ndash60Robert C (1881) Bild und Lied BerlinRobert L (1966) ldquoSur un decret et sur un papyrus concernant des cultes royauxrdquo in AE

Samuel (ed) 175ndash211

Bibliography 465

Roberts M (1985) Biblical Epic and Rhetorical Paraphrase in Late Antiquity WiltshireRobertson N (1999) ldquoThe Stoa of the Hermesrdquo ZPE 127 167ndash72Robichez J (1976) Le theacuteacirctre de Giraudoux ParisRocha-Pereira MH (1989ndash902) Pausaniae Graeciae Descriptio Vols I-III LeipzigRogers K (1993) ldquoAristotlersquos Conception of Τὸ Καλόνrdquo Ancient Philosophy 13 355ndash71mdash (1994) ldquoAristotle on the Motive of Couragerdquo Southern Journal of Philosophy 32

303ndash13Roisman HM (2006) ldquoHelen in the Iliad Causa Belli and Victim of Warrdquo AJPh 127 1ndash36Rolley C (1994) La Sculpture Grecque 1 Des origines au milieu de Vegraveme siegravecle ParisRoochnik D (1990) ldquoThe Quarrel Between Philosophy and Poetry Studies in Ancient

Thoughtrdquo Ancient Philosophy 10 301ndash04Rose MA (1979) Parody Metafiction An Analysis of Parody as a Critical Mirror to the

Writing and Reception of Fiction Londonmdash (1993) Parody Ancient Modern and Post-modern CambridgeRose PW (2012) Class in Archaic Greece CambridgeRosen RM (1987) ldquoA Poetic Inspiration Scene in Hipponaxrdquo AJPh 1092 174ndash79mdash (1988) ldquoHipponax Boupalos and the Conventions of the Psogosrdquo TAPhA 118 29ndash41mdash (1990) ldquoHipponax and the Homeric Odysseusrdquo Eikasmos 1 11ndash25mdash (2007) Making Mockery The Poetics of Ancient Satire OxfordRosen RM Sluiter I (eds) (2003) Andreia Studies in Manliness and Courage in Classical

Antiquity LeidenRosen RM Sluiter I (eds) (2008) Kakos Badness and Anti-value in Classical Antiquity

LeidenRosen S (1988) The Quarrel Between Philosophy and Poetry Studies in Ancient Greek

Thought New YorkRosenbloom D Davidson J (eds) (2012) Greek Drama IV Texts Contexts Performance

OxfordRotstein A (2010) The Idea of Iambos OxfordRubin DC (1995) Memory in Oral Traditions The Cognitive Psychology of Epic Ballads and

Counting-out Rhymes New YorkRudolph KC (2010) ldquoHomeric Criticism in the Hippias Minorrdquo

httpscamwsorgmeeting2010programabstracts06B1RudolphpdfRuhl M (2000) Die Darstellung von Gefuumlhlsentwicklungen in den Elegien des Properz

GoumlttingenRuiz-Montero C (1996) ldquoThe Rise of the Ancient Novelrdquo in G Schmeling (ed) 29ndash85Rundin J (1996) ldquoA Politics of Eating Feasting in Early Greek Societyrdquo AJPh 117 179ndash215Russell D (1990) ldquoEthos in Oratory and Rhetoricrdquo in C Pelling (ed) 197ndash212Russo J Fernaacutendez-Galiano M Heubeck A (1992) A Commentary on Homerrsquos Odyssey

Vol III OxfordRusten JS (1982) ldquoThe Aeschylean Avernus Notes on P Koumlln 3125rdquo ZPE 45 33ndash38Rutherford RB (1996) Homer CambridgeSabot AF (1976) Ovide poegravete de lrsquoamour dans ses œuvres de jeunesse ParisSakellariou Ch (1990) The Sleep of the Lotus-Eaters AthensSalkever SC (1993) ldquoSocratesrsquo Aspasian Oration The Play of Philosophy and Politics in

Platorsquos Menexenusrdquo American Political Science Review 87 133ndash43

466 Bibliography

Salvatore A (1955) Studi sulla tradizione manoscritta e sul testo della Ciris II Commentarioe testo critico Napoli

mdash (1984) ldquoEchi degli Aratea nella Cirisrdquo Ciceroniana 5 237ndash41Samuel AE (ed) (1966) Essays in Honor of CBradford Welles New HavenSansone D (2009) ldquoEuripidesrsquo New Song The First Stasimon of Trojan Womenrdquo in JRC

Cousland JR Hume (eds) 193ndash203Saunders T (2008) Bucolic Ecology Virgilrsquos Eclogues and the Environmental Literary

Tradition LondonScaldaferri N (2011) ldquoA Tool for Research a Source for Identity Construction Considerations

and Controversies on the Use of Audiovisual Mediardquo in E Pistrick N Scaldaferri GSchwoumlrer (eds) 14ndash36

Scarcella AM (1959) ldquoLetture Euripidee Le Troaderdquo Dioniso 22 60ndash70Scarth EA (2008) Mnemotechnics and Virgil The Art of Memory and Remembering

SaarbruumlckenSchein SL (1984) The Mortal Hero Berkeley Los Angelesmdash (ed) (1995) Reading the Odyssey Selected Interpretive Essays PrincetonSchiesaro A (2003) The Passions in Play Thyestes and the Dynamics of Senecan Drama

CambridgeSchmeling G (ed) (1996) The Novel in the Ancient World Leiden New York CologneSchmid W Staumlhlin O (1940) Geschichte der griechischen Literatur Vol I 3 MunichSchmitz Th (1992) ldquoDatierung und Anlaszlig der vierten Olympischen Ode Pindarsrdquo Hermes

120 142ndash47mdash (1994) ldquoNoch einmal zum Mythos in Pindars vierter olympischer Oderdquo RhM 137

209ndash17Schoumlll A (1839) Beitraumlge zur Geschichte der griechischen Poesie BerlinSchubert P (ed) (2012) Proceedings of the 26th International Congress of Papyrology

GenevaScodel R (1980) The Trojan Trilogy of Euripides Goumlttingenmdash (1992) ldquoInscriptions Absence and Memory Epic and Early Epitaphrdquo SIFC 10 57ndash76mdash (2002) Listening to Homer Tradition Narrative and Audience Ann ArborScourfield JHD (ed) (2007) Texts and Culture in Late Antiquity WalesSeeck GA (2008) Euripides Alkestis Berlin New YorkSegal C (1971) ldquoAndromachersquos anagnorisis Formulaic Artistry in Iliad 22437ndash476rdquo HSCP

75 33ndash57mdash (1978) ldquoThe Myth was Saved Reflections on Homer and the Mythology of Platorsquos

Republicrdquo Hermes 106 315ndash36mdash (19972) Dionysiac Poetics and Euripidesrsquo Bacchae New JerseySeidensticker B (1982) Palintonos Harmonia Studien zu komischen Elementen in der

griechischen Tragoumldie GoumlttingenSeleškovic MT (1968) ldquoKopitareva prepiska sa Fridrihom Volfomrdquo Kovčežiċ 8 109ndash13Sens A (2011) Asclepiades of Samos Epigrams and Fragments OxfordSeveryns A (1928) Le Cycle eacutepique dans lrsquoEacutecole drsquoAristarque Liegravege ParisShapiro A Burian P (2009) Trojan Women by Euripides OxfordSharrock A Morales H (2000) Intratextuality Greek and Roman Textual Traditions OxfordSickle J van (1975) ldquoThe new erotic fragment of Archilochusrdquo QUCC 20 125ndash56Sikelianos A (1980) Prose (Πεζός λόγος) Vol II Athens

Bibliography 467

mdash (1981) Prose (Πεζός λόγος) Vol III Athensmdash (19995) Lyric Life (Λυρικός βίος) Vol I Athensmdash (20034) Lyric Life (Λυρικός βίος) Vol II AthensSilk MS (ed) (1996) Tragedy and the Tragic Oxfordmdash (20042) Homer The Iliad CambridgeSkiadas A (1965) Homer im griechischen Epigramm AthensSkouloudis M (1961) Odyssey AthensSkouteropoulos ΝΜ (1995) Plato Hippias Minor (Πλάτωνος Ιππίας Ελάττων) ΑthensSkutsch F (1901) Aus Vergils Fruumlhzeit LeipzigSkutsch O (1968) Studia Enniana Londonmdash (1985) The Annals of Quintus Ennius OxfordSlings S R (1991) ldquoThe Quiet Life in Euripidesrsquo Antioperdquo in H Hofmann MA Harder

(eds) 137ndash52Small JP (1995) ldquoArtificial Memory and the Writing Habits of the Literaterdquo Helios 222

159ndash66mdash (1997) Wax Tablets of the Mind Cognitive Studies of Memory and Literature in Classical

Antiquity London New YorkSmith A (2010) ldquoPorphyry and his schoolrdquo in LP Gerson (ed) I 325ndash57Smith RA (1997) Poetic Allusion and Poetic Embrace in Ovid and Virgil Ann ArborSnell B (1937) Euripides Alexandros und andere Strassburger Papyri mit Fragmenten

griechischer Dichter Hermes Einzelschr 5 BerlinSobchack V (1990) ldquoSurge and Splendor a Phenomenology of the Historical Epicrdquo

Representations 29 24ndash49Sokratous K (1984) Penelope and her Suitors NicosiaSolmsen F (1984) ldquoPhren kardia psyche in Greek Tragedyrdquo in D E Gerber (ed) 265ndash74Solomon J (2001) The Ancient World in Cinema New Haven Londonmdash (2007) ldquoThe Vacillations of the Trojan Myth Popularization and Classicization Variation

and Codificationrdquo IJCT 143ndash4 482ndash534Sommerstein A H (2007) Aristophanes Ecclesiazusae Warminstermdash (2008) Aeschylus Fragments London Cambridge (Mass)mdash (2015) ldquoTragedy and the Epic Cyclerdquo in M Fantuzzi C Tsagalis (eds) 461ndash86Sopina NR (1986) ldquoNew Light on the Alexander of Euripides and its Place in Euripidean

Dramardquo Vestnik Drevnej Istorii 176 117ndash30Sotiriou M (1998) Pindarus Homericus GoumltttingenSourvinou-Inwood C (1995) lsquoReadingrsquo Greek Death OxfordSpanoudakis K (2004) ldquoAdesp Pap Eleg SH 964 Partheniusrdquo APF 50 37ndash41Spence JD (1984) The Memory Palace of Matteo Ricci New YorkSpies A (1930) Militat omnis amans Diss TuumlbingenSprague R K (1962) Platorsquos Use of Fallacy New YorkStahl H-P (1985) Propertius ldquoLoverdquo and ldquoWarrdquo Individual and State under Augustus

BerkeleyStanford WB (1954) The Ulysses Theme Oxfordmdash (1959) Homer Odyssey Books I-XII BristolStansbury- Orsquo Donnell M (1989) ldquoPolygnotosrsquos Iliupersis A NewReconstructionrdquo AJA 93 203ndash15mdash (1990) ldquoPolygnotosrsquos Nekyia A Reconstruction and Analysisrdquo AJA 94 213ndash35

468 Bibliography

Stegemann V (1930) Astrologie und Universalgeschichte Studien und Interpretationen zuden Dionysiaka des Nonnos von Panopolis Leipzig

Steidle W (1968) Studien zum antiken Drama unter besonderer Beruumlcksichtigung desBuumlhnenspiels Munich

Stein H (1889) Herodotos vierter Band Buch VII BerlinSteiner DT (2008) ldquoBeetle Tracks Entomology Scatology and the Discourse of Abuserdquo in

RM Rosen I Sluiter (eds) 59ndash117mdash (2010) Odyssey Books XVII-XVIII CambridgeStephens S (2004) ldquoFor you Arsinoehelliprdquo in B Acosta-Hughes E Kosmetatou M

Baumbach (eds) 161ndash76Stevens PT (1971) Euripides Andromache OxfordStewart A (1990) Greek Sculpture An Exploration London YaleStewart J A (1892) Notes on the Nicomachean Ethics of Aristotle OxfordStinton TCW (1965) Euripides and the Judgement of Paris LondonStoumlssl F (1968) Euripides Die Tragoumldien und Fragmente Vol II ZurichStrauss Clay J (forthcoming) ldquoHomerrsquos Epigraph Iliad 7 87ndash91rdquo Phil 159Stroh W (1971) Die roumlmische Liebeselegie als werbende Dichtung AmsterdamStrohm H (1957) Euripides Interpretationen zur dramatischen Form MunichStruck PT (2004) Birth of the Symbol Ancient Readers at the Limits of Their Texts

PrincetonSullivan SD (1989) ldquoThe Extended Use of Psyche in the Greek Lyric Poetsrdquo La parola del

passato 44 241ndash62Swanger D (1997) ldquoThe Metaphysics of Poetry Subverting the lsquoAncient Quarrelrsquo and

Recasting the Problemrdquo Journal of Aesthetic Education 313 55ndash64Syndikus HP (2006) ldquoThe Second Bookrdquo in H-C Guumlnther (ed) 245ndash318mdash (2010) Die Elegien des Properz DarmstadtSzaacutedeczky-Kardoss S (1959) Testimonia de Mimnermi Vita et Carminibus (Acta Universitatis

Szegedinensis Sectio Antiqua 1959 Minora Opera ad studium antiquitatis pertinentia 2)Szeged

Tanner S (2010) In Praise of Platorsquos Poetic Imagination LanhamTaplin O (1977) The Stagecraft of Aeschylus The Dramatic Use of Exits and Entrances in

Greek Tragedy Oxfordmdash (1980) ldquoThe Shield of Achilles within the Iliadrdquo GampR 27 1ndash21mdash (1992) Homeric Soundings Oxfordmdash (2007) ldquoSome Assimilations of the Homeric Simile in Late Twentieth- Century Poetryrdquo

in B Graziosi E Greenwood (eds) 177ndash90Tar I Mayer P (eds) (2005) Studia Catulliana In memoriam Stephani Caroli Horvath

(1931ndash 1966) SzegedTarrant D (1951) ldquoPlatorsquos Use of Quotation and Other Illustrative Materialrdquo CQ 45 59ndash67Taylor AE (1926) Plato The Man and his Work LondonTaylor CCW (2006) Nicomachean Ethics Books II-IV OxfordTelograve M (2002) ldquoPer una grammatica dei gesti nella tragedia greca Irdquo MD 48 9ndash75Terzakis A (1961) ldquoOdyssey by M Skouloudisrdquo To Vima 5 Nov 1961Theodorakis M (1986) The Ways of the Archangel (Οι δρόμοι του Aρχαγγέλου) Vol I

Athensmdash (1993) 40 Songs for Children (40 τραγούδια για παιδάκια και παιδιά) Athens

Bibliography 469

mdash (1997) Poetry Set to Music Songs (Mελοποιημένη ποίηση Τραγούδια) Vol I Athensmdash (2002) Where can I find my Soul (Πού να βρω την ψυχή μου) Athensmdash (2007) ldquoUniversal Harmony (Συμπαντική αρμονία)rdquo in Y Kouyoumoutzakis (ed)

75ndash102Thill A (ed) (1980) Lrsquoeacuteleacutegie romaine Enracinement Thegravemes Diffusion MulhouseThomas E (1964) ldquoVariations on a Military Theme in Ovidrsquos Amoresrdquo GampR 11 151ndash65Thomas R (2000) Herodotus in Context Ethnography Science and the Art of Persuasion

CambridgeThomas RF (1983) ldquoVirgilrsquos Ecphrastic Centrepiecesrdquo HSCP 87 175ndash84mdash (1988) Virgil Georgics Vol I Books I-II Cambridgemdash (1998) ldquoMelodious Tears Sepulchral Epigram and Generic Mobilityrdquo in MA Harder

RF Regtuit GC Wakker (eds) 205ndash23Thrylos A (1980) (review of 1961) ldquoM Skouloudis Odyssey a Satirical Comedy in Three

Partsrdquo Greek Theatre (Ελληνικό Θέατρο) Vol IX (1962ndash63) Athens 13ndash14mdash (1981) (review of 1966) ldquoD Christodoulou Hotel Circe a Play in Two Parts and Five

Picturesrdquo in Greek Theatre (Ελληνικό Θέατρο) Vol X (1964ndash66) Athens 387ndash89Tilg S (2010) Chariton of Aphrodisias and the Invention of the Greek Love Novel OxfordTimpanaro S (1996) ldquoDallrsquoAlexandros di Euripide allrsquoAlexander di Enniordquo RFIC 124 5ndash70Todd S C (2000) Lysias Austinmdash (2007) A Commentary on Lysias Speeches 1ndash11 OxfordTrammel Ε (194142) ldquoThe Mute Alcestisrdquo CJ 37 144ndash50Truumlmpy C (2010) ldquoObservations on the Dedicatory and Sepulchral Epigrams and their Early

Historyrdquo in M Baumbach A Petrovic I Petrovic (eds) 167ndash80Trzaskoma S (2010) ldquoChariton and Tragedy Reconsiderations and New Evidencerdquo AJPh 131

219ndash31Tsagalis C (2008a) Inscribing Sorrow Fourth-century Attic Funerary Epigrams Berlin New

Yorkmdash (2008b) The Oral Palimpsest Cambridge (Mass)mdash (2008c) ldquoTransformations of Myth The Trojan Cycle in the Three Great Tragic Poets

(Μεταμορφώσεις του Μύθου Ο Τρωικός Κύκλος στους Τρεις Μεγάλους Τραγικούς)rdquo inA Markantonatos C Tsagalis (eds) 33ndash115

Tsitsiridis S (ed) (2010) Parachoregema Studies on Ancient Theatre in Honour of ProfessorGregory M Sifakis Herakleion

Uhl A (1998) Servius als Sprachlehrer zur Sprachrichtigkeit in der exegetischen Praxis desspaumltantiken Grammatikerunterrichts Goumlttingen

Urmson JO (1982) ldquoPlato and the Poetsrdquo in JME Moravcsik P Temko (eds) 125ndash36Usher S (1990) Isocratesrsquo Panegyrius and To Nicocles Warminstermdash (1999) Greek Oratory Tradition and Originality Oxfordmdash (2007) ldquoSymbouleutic Oratoryrdquo in I Worthington (ed) 220ndash35Usher S Najock D (1982) ldquoA Statistical Study of Authorship in the Corpus Lysiacumrdquo

Computers and the Humanities 16 85ndash105Ussher RG (1973) Aristophanes Ecclesiazusae OxfordValakas K (1987) Homeric Mimesis and the Ajax of Sophocles Diss CambridgeVan der Valk M (1963ndash64) Researches on the Text and Scholia of the Iliad Vols I-II

LeidenVan Lieshout RGA (1980) Greeks on Dreams Utrecht

470 Bibliography

Van Steen G (2001) ldquoPlaying by the Censorsrsquo Rules Classical Drama revived under theGreek Junta (1967ndash74)rdquo Journal of the Hellenic Diaspora 271ndash2 133ndash94

mdash (2011) Theatre of the Condemned Classical Tragedy on Greek Prison Islands OxfordVandiver E (2010) Stand in the Trench Achilles Classical Receptions in British Poetry of the

Great War OxfordVarikas V (1961) ldquoThe Odyssey on stagerdquo Ta Nea 15 Nov 1961mdash (1966) ldquoHotel Circerdquo Ta Nea 3 May 1966Vasaly A (1993) Representations Images of the World in Ciceronian Oratory BerkeleyVellacott P (1975) Ironic Drama A Study of Euripidesrsquo Method and Meaning CambridgeVenuti L (2011) ldquoThe Poetrsquos Version or An Ethics of Translationrdquo Translation Studies 42

230ndash247Vermeule E (1979) Aspects of Death in Early Greek Art and Poetry BerkeleyVernant JP Vidal-Naquet P (1986) Mythe et trageacutedie en Gregravece ancienne ParisVerrall AW (1895) Euripides the Rationalist A Study in Art and Religion CambridgeVian F (1990) Nonnos de Panopolis Les Dionysiaques Vol IX Chants XXV-XXIX ParisVlastos G (ed) (1971) Philosophy of Socrates New Yorkmdash (1991) Socrates Ironist and Moral Philosopher IthacaVollgraff G (1921) ldquoΕκ μύρτου κλαδίrdquo Mnem 49 246ndash50Vox O (1975) ldquoEpigrammi in Omerordquo Belfagor 30 67ndash70Wade-Gery HT (1933) ldquoClassical Epigrams and Epitaphs A Study of the Kimonian Agerdquo JHS

53 71ndash104Walcot P (1973) ldquoThe Funeral Speech A Study of Valuesrdquo GampR 20 111ndash21mdash (1978) Envy and the Greeks A Study of Human Behaviour Warminstermdash (1996) ldquoContinuity and Tradition The Persistence of Greek Valuesrdquo GampR 43 169ndash77Walcott D (1990) Omeros Londonmdash (1993) The Odyssey A Stage Version LondonWallace MB (1984) ldquoThe Metres of Early Greek Epigramsrdquo in DE Gerber (ed) 303ndash15Walters KR (1980) ldquoRhetoric as Ritual The Semiotics of the Attic Funeral Orationsrdquo

Florilegium 2 1ndash27Webb R (2009) Ekphrasis Imagination and Persuasion in Ancient Rhetorical Theory and

Practice Farnham BurlingtonWebster TBL (1966) ldquoEuripidesrsquo Trojan Trilogyrdquo in M Kelly (ed) 207ndash13Weil R (1955) ldquoEacuteschine lecteur de Platonrdquo REG 68 xiiWeiss R (1981) ldquoὉ Αγαθός as Δυνατός in the Hippias Minorrdquo CQ 31 287ndash304Wells JB (2009) Pindarrsquos Verbal Art An Ethnographic Study of Epinician Style Cambridge

(Mass) LondonWendel C (19582) Scholia in Apollonium Rhodium vetera BerlinWest D (1990) Virgil The Aeneid Londonmdash (2002) Horace Odes III OxfordWest M L (1966) Hesiod Theogony Oxfordmdash (1974) Studies in Greek Elegy and Iambus Berlinmdash (1982) Greek Metre Oxfordmdash (1989ndash19922) Iambi et Elegi Graeci Vols I-II Oxfordmdash (1998ndash2000) Homerus Ilias Vols I-II Stuttgart Leipzigmdash (2013) The Epic Cycle A Commentary on the Lost Troy Epics OxfordWest S (1967) The Ptolemaic Papyri of the Iliad Cologne Opladen

Bibliography 471

mdash (1987) ldquoAnd it came to pass that Pharaoh dreamed Notes on Herodotus 2139 141rdquo CQ37 262ndash71

mdash (1988) A Commentary on Homerrsquos Odyssey Vol I Introduction and Books I-VIII OxfordWheeler AL Goold GP (19882) Ovid Tristia Epistulae ex Ponto Cambridge (Mass)Whitaker R (1983) Myth and Personal Experience in Roman Love-elegy GoumlttingenWhitby M (2007) ldquoThe Bible Hellenized Nonnusrsquo Paraphrase of St Johnrsquos Gospel and

Eudociarsquos Homeric Centosrdquo in JHD Scourfield (ed) 195ndash231White H (1985) New Essays in Hellenistic Poetry Amsterdammdash (2006) ldquoStudies in the Text of Latin Poets of the Golden Agerdquo Minerva 19 175ndash92Whitman CH (1958) Homer and the Heroic Tradition CambridgeWhitmarsh T (2010) ldquoProse Fictionrdquo in JJ Clauss M Cuypers (eds) 395ndash412Wiener MH (2011) ldquoMycenaerdquo in M Finkelberg (ed) 535ndash38Wigodsky M (1972) Vergil and Early Latin Poetry WiesbadenWikeacuten E (1937) Die Kunde der Hellenen von dem Land und den Voumllkern der

Apenninenhalbinsel bis 300 vChr LundWilamowitz-Moellendorf U von (19062) Griechische Tragoumldien Vol III Berlinmdash (1914) Aischylos Interpretationen BerlinWillcock M (1997) ldquoNeoanalysisrdquo in I Morris B Powell (eds) 174ndash89Willi A (ed) (2002) The Language of Greek Comedy OxfordWilliams B (1993) Shame and Necessity BerkeleyWilliams F (1978) Callimachus Hymn to Apollo A Commentary OxfordWilliams G (1983) Technique and Ideas in the Aeneid New Haven LondonWilliams RD (1962) P Vergili Maronis Aeneidos Liber Tertius Oxfordmdash (1980a) ldquo Review on Lyne 1978rdquo JRS 70 247mdash (1980b) ldquoVirgil and Homerrdquo in B Marshall (ed) 170ndash76Wills J (1996) Repetition in Latin Poetry Figures of Allusion OxfordWilson D (1970) The Life and Times of Vuk Stefanović Karadžić 1787ndash1864 Literacy

Literature and National Independence in Serbia OxfordWilson DF (2002) Ransom Revenge and Heroic Identity in the Iliad CambridgeWilson JR (1967) ldquoAn Interpolation in the Prologue of Euripidesrsquo Troadesrdquo GRBS 8

205ndash23Winkler J Zeitlin F (eds) (1990) Nothing to do with Dionysos Athenian Drama in its

Social Context PrincetonWinkler MM (ed) (2001) Classical Myth and Culture in the Cinema New Yorkmdash (ed) (2007) Troy From Homerrsquos Iliad to Hollywood Epic MaldenOxfordmdash (2007) ldquoThe Trojan War on the Screen An Annotated Filmographyrdquoin MM Winkler

(ed) 202ndash15mdash (2009) Cinema and Classical Texts Apollorsquos New Light CambridgeWoumlhrle G (1999) Telemachs Reise Vaumlter und Soumlhne in Ilias und Odyssee oder ein Beitrag

zur Erforschung der Maumlnnlichkeitsideologie in der homerischen Welt GoumlttingenWolf FA (1985) Prolegomena to Homer 1795 (trans and ed by A Grafton GW Most

JEG Zetzel) PrincetonWoodruff P (1982) ldquoWhat Could Go Wrong with Inspiration Why Platorsquos Poets Failrdquo in

JME Moravcsik P Temko (eds) 137ndash50Wooten C (1987) Hermogenesrsquo On Types of Style Chapel HillWorman N (1997) ldquoThe Body as Argument Helen in Four Greek Textsrdquo ClAnt 16 151ndash203

472 Bibliography

mdash (2002) The Cast of Character Style in Greek Literature Austinmdash (2007) ldquoThe Voice which is not One Helenrsquos Verbal Guises in Homeric Epicrdquo in H

Bloom (ed) (2007b) 149ndash68Worthington I (2003) ldquoThe Authorship of the Demosthenic Epitaphiosrdquo MH 60 152ndash57mdash (ed) (2007) A Companion to Greek Rhetoric MaldenWoytek E (2005) ldquoAnmerkungen zur Catull-Rezeption in der Cirisrdquo in I Tar P Mayer (eds)

77ndash89Wyke M (1997) Projecting the Past Ancient Rome Cinema and History New Yorkmdash (2002) The Roman Mistress Ancient and Modern Representations OxfordWypustek A (2013) Images of Eternal Beauty in Funerary Verse Inscriptions of the

Hellenistic and Greco-Roman Periods Leiden BostonXanthakis-Karamanos G (1998) ldquoHomer and Euripides The Cyclops and the Troadesrdquo

Platon 50 28ndash38Yates FA (1966) The Art of Memory LondonYoung DC (1983) ldquoPindar Pythians 2 and 3 Inscriptional ποτέ and the Poetic Epistlerdquo

HSCP 87 31ndash48Zajko V (2004) ldquoHomer and Ulyssesrdquo in RL Fowler (ed) 311ndash23Zanetto G Canavero D Capra A Sgobbi A (2004) (eds) Momenti della ricezione

omerica Poesia arcaica e teatro MilanZanker P Ewald BC (2013) Living with Myths The Imagery of Roman Sarcophagi (trans J

Slater) OxfordΖanos P (1884) ldquoPenelopersquos Suitors and Odysseusrsquo Homecomingrdquo in Greek Theatre

(Ελληνικό Θέατρο) Vol I Athens 1ndash140Zeitlin F (2001) ldquoVisions and Revisions of Homerrdquo in S Goldhill (ed) 195ndash266Zembaty JM (1989) ldquoSocratesrsquo Perplexity in Platorsquos Hippias Minorrdquo in JP Anton A Preus

(eds) 51ndash70Ziolkowski J (1981) Thucydides and the Tradition of Funeral Speeches at Athens New YorkZissos A (2008) Valerius Flaccusrsquo Argonautica Book 1 Oxford

Bibliography 473

Notes on Contributors

Margarita Alexandrou (UCL) is completing her doctoral thesis a commentary onthe fragments of the iambic poet Hipponax Her research interests lie primarilyin Archaic Greek poetry and its reception across the spectrum of Greek andRoman literature She has a growing interest in Greek literary papyrology andis currently co-editing a volume on the methodology of working with literaryfragments

Karim Arafat is Emeritus Reader in Classical Archaeology at Kingrsquos College Lon-don where he taught for many years before moving to Athens He now teaches atDeree the American College of Greece He has published extensively on Classicalart particularly vase-painting the relations between art and literature and Pau-sanias His books include Pausaniasrsquo Greece Ancient Artists and Roman Rulers(Cambridge 1996) Classical Zeus A Study in Ancient Art and Literature (Oxford1990)

Anastasia Bakogiannirsquos research and publications focus on the reception ofGreek Literature in the modern world especially in the performance culture ofmodern Greece She is the author of Electra Ancient and Modern Aspects ofthe Tragic Heroinersquos Reception (Institute of Classical Studies 2011) editor of Dia-logues with the Past Classical Reception Theory and Practice (ICS 2013) and co-editor of War as Spectacle Ancient and Modern Perspectives on the Display ofArmed Conflict (Bloomsbury 2015)

Chris Carey taught at the University of St Andrews the University of MinnesotaCarleton College and Royal Holloway the University of London before becomingProfessor of Greek at University College London He has published on Greeklyric Homer tragedy and comedy Greek law and politics and the Attic oratorsHe is currently writing a commentary on Book VII of Herodotus for CambridgeUniversity Press a book on Thermopylae for Oxford University Press and abook of essays on Pindarrsquos Olympian Odes

Athanasios Efstathiou is Associate Professor of Ancient Greek Language and Lit-erature at the Department of History of the Ionian University He obtained hisfirst degree in Classics and his MA in Classics and Byzantine Studies from theDepartment of Philology (Aristotle University of Thessaloniki) Subsequentlyhe attended as a non-award student the MA course on Late Antiquity and Byzan-tium at Kingrsquos College London while he acquired his PhD in Classical Oratory at

Royal Holloway College (University of London) His research interests cover thesubjects of rhetoric and oratory of the Classical and Byzantine period historiog-raphy attic law Athenian democracy papyrology palaeography history of Greeklanguage

Varvara Georgopoulou is Assistant Professor of Modern Greek Theatre at the De-partment of Theatre Studies of the University of the Peloponnese Her researchinterests include theatre criticism the revival of ancient Greek drama as wellas gender issues in drama She has taken part in many conferences in bothGreece and abroad She is the author of Theatre Criticism in Mid War Athens (2Vols Athens 2008ndash09) The Theatre in Cephalonia 1900ndash 1953 (Athens 2010)Female Routes Galateia Kazantzaki and the Theatre (Athens 2012) and The Mir-rors of Dionysus History and Ideology in Modern Greek Theatre 1920ndash 1950 (Ath-ens 2016)

Lorna Hardwick is Professor Emerita in Classical Studies at the Open UniversityUK and director of the Reception of Classical Texts research projectWith Profes-sor James Porter she is Series Editor of Classical Presences (Oxford UniversityPress) and she was the founding editor of the Classical Receptions Journal Shehas published books and articles on Homer Athenian Cultural History and onmodern translations and adaptations of classical material especially poetryand drama

daggerDaniel Jacob (1947ndash2014) was Professor of Greek at the Department of Classicsof the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki since 1992 His main research interestsfocused on Pindar Greek tragedy especially Euripides Aristotlersquos Poetics andthe reception of ancient Greek literature He was the author of seven books in-cluding Pindarrsquos Pythian Odes (Herakleion 1994) The Poetics of Greek Tragedy(Athens 1998) for which he received an honourary award by the Academy of Ath-ens Issues of Literary Theory in Aristotlersquos Poetics (Athens 2004) and a two-vol-ume commentary on Euripidesrsquo Alcestis (Athens 2012) for which he received asecond honourary award by the Academy of Athens He published extensivelyin Greek and international scholarly journals and collective volumes

Maria Kanellou is a Teaching and Honorary Research Fellow at UCL and an As-sociate Lecturer at the University of Kent She is currently revising for publica-tion her PhD thesis entitled Erotic Epigram A Study of Motifs The thesis studiesthe development and generic features of the literary epigram especially of itserotic subtype from the Hellenistic to the early Byzantine period through theclose analysis of the life-cycle of recurrent themes She is also preparing the pub-


lication of two collective volumes on ancient Greek epigram arising out of twointernational conferences held at UCL

Ioanna Karamanou (MPhil Cambridge PhD University College London) is Assis-tant Professor of Greek Drama at the Department of Theatre Studies of the Uni-versity of the Peloponnese Her research interests focus on Greek tragedy and itsreception tragic fragments papyrology and ancient literary criticism She is theauthor of Euripides Danae and Dictys (BzA 228 MunichLeipzig 2006 KG SaurDe Gruyter) and has published a number of articles in international peer-re-viewed journals and chapters in international collective volumes She is current-ly completing an edition and commentary on Euripidesrsquo Alexandros

Boris Kayachev has recently obtained a doctorate from the Universityof Leeds with a thesis on the pseudo-Virgilian Ciris His currentinterests include Apolloniusrsquo Argonautica and its use of non-Homericepic Latin elegy and its engagement with Hellenistic models as wellas a number of texts outside the classical canon

Robert Maltby is Emeritus Professor of Latin Philology at the University of LeedsHis research interests include Latin Language Roman Comedy and Roman ElegyApart from numerous periodical articles in these areas his publications includeA Selection of Latin Love Elegy (Bristol 1980) A Lexicon of Latin Etymologies(Leeds 1991) Tibullus Elegies (Cambridge 2002) Terence Phormio (Oxford2012) and with K Belcher Wileyrsquos Real Latin (Malden MA 2014)

Christina-Panagiota Manolea (BA in Classics University of Athens 1992 PhD inClassics University College London 2002) is lecturing on Greek Civilization (Hel-lenic Open University) She has worked on the reception of ancient Greek literarytradition in Neoplatonism and the reception of ancient Greek rhetoric in Byzan-tine and Modern Greek writers She is currently editing Brillrsquos Companion to theReception of Homer from the Hellenistic Age to Late Antiquity

Kleanthis Mantzouranis is a Teaching Fellow in Classics at the University of StAndrews He has previously taught at UCL and Birkbeck College He receivedhis PhD from UCL in 2012 and is currently working on turning his thesis intoa monograph His specialist interests lie in Aristotle and the history of Greek eth-ical and political thought

Andreas N Michalopoulos is Associate Professor of Latin at the University ofAthens He is the author of Ancient Etymologies in Ovidrsquos Metamorphoses A Com-


mented Lexicon (Leeds 2001) Ovid Heroides 16 and 17 Introduction Text andCommentary (Cambridge 2006) and Ovid Heroides 20 and 21 IntroductionText Translation and Commentary (Athens 2014) His research interests includeAugustan poetry ancient etymology Roman drama Roman novel and the mod-ern reception of Classical literature

Charilaos N Michalopoulos is Assistant Professor of Latin at the Department ofGreek Philology of the Democritus University of Thrace His research interests in-clude Augustan poetry gender studies and classics and the modern reception ofLatin literature He has published on Ovid Seneca and Martial and is the authorof Myth Language and Gender in the Corpus Priapeorum (Athens 2014)

Pantelis Michelakis is Reader in Classics at the University of Bristol He is theauthor of Greek Tragedy on Screen (OUP 2013) Euripidesrsquo Iphigenia at Aulis(Duckworth 2006) and Achilles in Greek Tragedy (CUP 2002) He has also co-edit-ed The Ancient World in Silent Cinema (CUP 2013) Agamemnon in Performance458 BC to AD 2004 (OUP 2005) and Homer Tragedy and Beyond Essays in Hon-our of PE Easterling (SPHS 2001)

Katerina Mikellidou (BA Athens MA Oxford) completed her PhD (2014) on theencounters between the living and the dead in fifth-century drama under the su-pervision of Professor Chris Carey (UCL) She has taught Intermediate Latin inUCL and Modern and Ancient Greek in the University of Cyprus She is currentlyteaching lsquoPhilosophical Textsrsquo (University of Cyprus) and the postgraduatecourse lsquoTheoretical Approaches to Ancient Greek Literaturersquo (Open Universityof Cyprus) She is mainly interested in Greek Drama eschatology ritual and Ar-chaic poetry

Sophia Papaioannou is Associate Professor of Latin literature at theNational and Kapodistrian University of Athens Her principal areas ofresearch include ancient epic the literature and culture of the Age ofAugustus and Roman Comedy Her main publications include books on OvidrsquosMetamorphoses Plautus Terence and New Comedy Part of her currentresearch is a book on the influence of Homeric orality in the structureand poetics of Virgilrsquos Aeneid

Helen Peraki-Kyriakidou is a retired Assistant Professor of LatinLiterature at the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki Her main areas ofinterest are Virgilrsquos Eclogues and Georgics Roman epic andhistoriography She has also published a number of articles on ancient


etymology and etymologizing Together with Stelios Phiorakis she haswritten a book on The Law Code of Gortyn (Herakleion 1973)

Ioannis n Perysinakis is Professor Emeritus of Ancient Greek Literature at theDepartment of Philology of the University of Ioannina His teaching and researchinterests focus on ancient Greek Literature with an emphasis on moral valuesand political behaviour from Homer to Plato and Aristotle and the reception ofancient Greek in Modern Greek Literature He has written extensively onHomer Hesiod lyric poetry Greek tragedy Plato and Modern Greek LiteratureHis publications include The Concept of Wealth in Herodotus (Ioannina 19982)and Archaic Lyric Poetry (Athens 2012) He is currently working on the ancientquarrel between philosophy and poetry

Kyriaki Petrakou is Professor at the Department of Theatre Studies of the Univer-sity of Athens Her research focuses on Modern Greek Theatre from the mid-nine-teenth century onwards She is the author of seven books including The DramaCompetitions 1870ndash 1925 (Athens 1999) Theatrological Miscellanea (Athens 2004)Kazantzakis and the Theatre (Athens 2005) The Impact of Modern Greek TheatreAbroad Translations ndash Performances (Athens 2005) Theatrical Attitudes andCourses (Athens 2007) She has taught in the Universities of Vienna (2000) Sile-sia (2002) and in the Open University of Cyprus (2011ndash2013)

Andrej Petrovic is Senior Lecturer at the Department of Classics and Ancient His-tory of Durham University His research interests and publications concern GreekEpigraphy and Religion His published work on early Greek epigram includes themonograph Kommentar zu den Simonideischen Versinschriften (Brill 2007) andArchaic and Classical Greek Epigram (co-edited with M Baumbach and I Petrov-ic CUP 2010)

Ivana Petrovic is Senior Lecturer in Greek literature at the Department of Classicsand Ancient History of Durham University Her book Von den Toren des Hades zuden Hallen des Olymp Artemiskult bei Theokrit und Kallimachos (Brill 2007) stud-ies contemporary religion in Hellenistic poetry She has co-edited volumes on theRoman triumph (Stuttgart 2008) and on Greek Archaic epigram (CUP 2010) Shehas also published papers on Greek poetry Greek religion and magic Her forth-coming monograph co-written with Andrej Petrovic discusses the phenomenonof inner purity in Greek religion

Margarita Sotiriou is Lecturer of Classical Philology at the University of the Pe-loponnese She is the author of Pindarus Homericus (Goumlttingen 1998) Her pub-


lications concern Archaic lyric poetry mainly choral song its poetics perform-ance and reperformance as well as its reception within antiquity and intertex-tuality Her current main project is a commentary on the Epinician Odes of Bac-chylides

Hara Thliveri (PhD Kingrsquos College London) has taught at the Department of Greekand Latin at UCL at the University of London MA programme lsquoThe classical pastin Modern Greecersquo and at the Open University Her publications include lsquoThe Dis-cobolos of Myron Narrative Appeal and Three-dimensionalityrsquo in F MacfarlaneC Morgan (eds) Exploring Ancient Sculpture (London 2010) lsquoTowards a ModernUnderstanding of Topos and Logos The Olympia of Angelos Sikelianosrsquo SkepsisXXIIii (2012) lsquoArt and Poetics in Nikos Engonopoulosrsquo in A Bakogianni (ed)Dialogues with the Past (London 2013) In 2013 she edited a volume in honourof the composer Mikis Theodorakis

Eleni Volonaki (MA PhD Royal Holloway University of London) is Assistant Pro-fessor at the Department of Philology University of the Peloponnese She hasalso taught at the Department of Classics Royal Holloway (1995ndash2004) at theOpen University UK (2003ndash2007) and at the Hellenic Open University (2006ndash2014) She is the author of A Commentary on Lysiasrsquo Speeches Against Agoratosand Against Nicomachos (Athens 2010) and has published in international jour-nals and in collective volumes in the fields of ancient Greek law and rhetoricGreek values and epic poetry and Hellenistic rhetoric She is completing a com-mentary on Lycurgusrsquo speech Against Leocrates which is to be published in BICSSupplements

Maria Ypsilanti obtained her first degree from the Department of Greek Literatureof the University of Athens (1991ndash 1995) She studied at Kingrsquos College London(MA in Classics 1996ndash1997) and at University College London (PhD in Classics1998ndash2003) PhD thesis An Edition with Commentary of Selected Epigrams of Cri-nagoras forthcoming (revised and enriched with the rest of Crinagorasrsquo poems)in Oxford University Press Since 2004 she teaches Ancient Greek Literature atthe University of Cyprus Her research interests include Hellenistic poetry poetryof Late Antiquity epigram tragedy and textual criticism


General Index

folgt

Index of Homeric Passages

folgt

Documents

Homeric Receptions across Generic and Cultural Contexts