Callimachus II 9042914033, 9789042914032

Citation preview

CALLIMACHUS II

HELLENISTICAGRONINGANA PROCEEDINGS OF TIIE ~ONINGEN

WORKSHOPS

ON HELLENISTIC POETRY

Editors M.A. Harder R.F. Regtuit G.C. Wakker

HELLENISTICA GRONINGANA 7

CALLIMACHUSII

Edited by M.A. HARDER R.F. REGTUIT G.C. WAKKER

PEETERS LEUVEN - PARIS- DUDLEY, MA

2004

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication

Data

Groningen Workshops on Hellenistic Poetry (6th: 2002: Groningen, Netherlands) Callimachus II/ edited by M.A. Harder, R.F. Regtuit, G.C. Wakker p. cm. -- (Hellenistica Groningana; v. 7) Papers of the Groningen Workshop on Hellenistic Poetry 6: Callimachus II, Groningen, 2002. Includes index. ISBN 90-429-1403-3 (alk. Paper) 2. Greek Poetry, l. Callimachus--Criticism and interpretation-Congresses. Hellenistic--History and criticism--Congresses. 1. Title: Callimachus 2. II. Title: Callimachus two. m. Harder, Annette. IV. Regtuit, R.F. (Remco F.) V. Wakker, G.C. VI. Title. VII. Series. PA3945.Z5G76 2002 881 '.Ol--dc22 2003065460

© 2004 - Peeters - Bondgenotenlaan 153 - B-3000 Leuven - Belgium

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval septem, or transmitted, in any fonns or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the holder of the copyright. ISBN 90-429-1403-3 D. 2004/0602/14

PREFACE

In 1992 the Department of Classics in the University of Groningen initiated a series of 'Workshops on Hellenistic Poetty', to be held every two years. The format of these workshops is that the papers offered by speakers are circulated to the participants in the workshop well in advance of the actual meeting, so that during the workshop there is ample opportunity for detailed and informed discussion. Some workshops have been devoted to individual authors, others to wider aspects of Hellenistic poetty, such as the implications of developments in modem literary criticism for research on genre. The workshops are informed by a keen awareness of the contribution that linguistic studies can make to the interpretation of texts, and of the importance of relating the social and cultural background of Hellenistic poetty to literary questions of form and content. The workshops are also designed to enable and encourage younger scholars and research students to present their research. The proceedings of the workshops are published in the series Hellenistica Groningana. The first such workshop, on Callimachus, was held in 1992; the second, on Theocritus, in 1994; the third, on genre in Hellenistic poetty, in 1996; the fourth, on Apollonius Rhodius, in 1998, the fifth, on Hellenistic epigrams, in 2000 and the sixth, again on Callimachus in 2002. The workshops are now recognized as a valuable meeting-place for scholars working on the Hellenistic period, and a forum where information is exchanged, interpretations are tested, and ideas evolve. An important reason for holding a second workshop on Callimachus was the large amount of scholarly interest in this author during the last ten years. This has resulted in several monographs, commentaries, translations as well as in a large number of articles. Thus discussion was stimulated and further insights into the work of this complex and sophisticated author were developed. While many aspects of Callimachus' work were dealt with there was a particular interest in issues like metapoetics, intertextuality, fictional orality, the impact of poetic collections and the function of his poetty in Ptolemaic Alexandria as well as an ongoing interest in the reception of Callimachus' poetty among Roman poets. The papers at the workshop were selected to represent these main areas of interest and, as these areas are closely related, most of the papers touch upon several aspects.

VI

PREFACE

Stephen Heyworth explores the way in which hymns 5 and 6 may be regarded as a kind of hymnic version of Sophocles' Oedipus Tyrannus and Euripides' Bacchae and thus addresses the somewhat neglected subject of the reception of Greek tragedy in Callimachus' work. Annemarie Ambuehl investigates the way in which Callimachus weaves a web of intratextual connections between the Victoria Berenices and the Hecale. She suggests that the (comic) Victoria Berenices plays with the Hellenistic epic as it is shaped in the (tragic) Hecale, where the modest meal stands for the reduced epic of the earlier tradition, in particular the Odyssey. Jim Clauss and Jackie Murray both address the subject of the creative reception of Callimachus' poetry in Rome, focusing on Virgil's sixth Eclogue in relation to the Aetia and the story of Erysichthon in Ovid's Metamorphoses and Callimachus' sixth hymn respectively. There is a strong meta-poetic focus in the article by Simon Slings, who discusses hymn 4 as an allegory of Callimachus' work, as the small island of Delos seems to show the same qualities as his poetry. In a similar vein Benjamin Acosta-Hughes and Ruth Scodel investigate the metapoetic aspects of Aesop in the Iambi, regarding him as emblematic for the ill-received speakers of truth and thus as a metaphor for the whole collection. The self-conscious treatment of issues of (fictional) orality and literacy forms the subject of the papers of Jon Bruss and Michael Tueller: they draw attention to the emphasis on oral strategies in the Aetia and to the ambiguity of the speakers in the epigrams respectively. The subtle praise of monarchs, and hence the function of Callimachus' hymns in contemporary Alexandria, forms the subject of the paper by Mary Depew: she shows how the interaction of poet, ruler and god helps to achieve the effect of the hymns and how the collection as a whole is arranged in a way which reflects these issues. Other papers deal with the detailed interpretation of some of Callimachus' poems. Thus we find careful close readings of hymn 3 in the papers by Adolf Kohnken and Mirjam Plantinga, in which questions about the hymn's structure and unity as well as of its position in the collection of hymns are addressed. The paper by Martijn Cuypers offers an analysis of the first part of the first hymn, again with attention for its metapoetical implications. A detailed study of repetition of words in Callimachus' epigrams can be found in the paper by Markus Millke, who shows that these repetitions are a sign of deliberate poetic technique. Nita Krevans reminds us of the fact that Callimachus did not only write poetry, but also produced a large number of prose-works, which also demand further study, whereas on the other hand he could tum prose into poetry as becomes clear in his summary of the work of Xenomedes in the story of

PREFACE

vn

Acontius and Cydippe in the Aetia. Questions concerning Callimachusin-translation are discussed in the paper by Frank Nisetich: why and how does one translate Callimachus? What should one do about fragments? What aspects of Callimachus' poetry can be conveyed by means of a translation? Generalconclusions of the results of a workshop like this are always hard to draw, but the contents of the papers on the whole seems to reflect a tendency observable in recent scholarship on Callimachus. On the one hand recent research moves away from the old notion of the ivory tower and /'art pour /'art and allows Callimachus' poetry a function in contemporary society and on the other hand it shows very clearly that his poetry is too sophisticated and too much concerned with intertextual and structural subtleties to be fully appreciated by large audiences. As editors we hope that this refinement of earlier views on Callimachus, which was well under way also before the workshop, may derive further stimulus from the papers in this volume. As always, most of the work of making the manuscript camera-ready has again been done by Remco Regtuit: his accurate and energetic handling of this task is of great value for the steady progress of this series. The proofs have been read for us with great care and enthusiasm by Fred Williams. While this volume was in press, one of the contributors, Simon Slings from the Free University of Amsterdam, sadly died. His death is a great loss for the study of classics. We are very glad and proud that his article on the Hymn to Delos is part of this volume. Annette Harder

Groningen, August 2003

CONTENTS

AEsoP POETA: AEsOP AND TIIE FABLE IN CALLIMACHUS' IAMBI Benjamin

ACOSTA-HUGHES, Ruth SCODEL .

ENTERTAINING 'fHEsEUS AND

.

.

.

.

.

.

1-22

IIERACLES: THEHECALE AND THE

VICTORIA BERENICES AS A DIPTYCH

Annemarie

AMBOHL.

LEsSONS FROM CJms:

.

.

.

.

.

. .

.

.

.

.

.

.

23-48

WRITTEN AND SPOKEN WORD IN CALLI-

MACHUS Jon Steffen

BRUSS

.

.

.

.

.

.

VERon.'s SIXIHEcLooUE:THEAETIA James

J. CLAUSS .

.

.

.

•

•

.

.

49-70

.

IN ROME

•

•

•

71-94

.

PRINCE AND PRINCIPLE:THEPHILoSOPHYOF CALLIMACHUS'HYMN

To'ZEus Martijn

CUYPERS .

GENDER,POWER,

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

95-116

BOOKOF

AND POETICS IN CALLIMACHUS'

HYMNS

.

117-138

RlvER: LITERARY HISTORY AND INTERPRETATION IN CALLIMACHUS, HYMNS 5 AND 6 S. J. ffEYWORTH . . . . . . . . . . .

139-160

Mary DEPEW

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

LooKING INTO TIIE

ARTEMIS IM ARTEMISHYMNOS DES KALLIMACHOS

A. KoHNKEN .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

161-172

CALLIMACHUS AND TIIE PEDESTRIAN MUSE Nita KREVANS.

•

•

•

•

.

•

.

.

173-184

.

WORTWIEDERHOLUNGENIN DEN KALLIMACHEISCHENEPIGRAMMEN

Markus

MOLKE

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

185-206

CONTENTS

X

THEMETAMORPHOSES OF ERYSICHTIION: NIUS, AND OVID Jackie MURRAY • • • . • • •

Frank

•

.

.

•

.

APou..o•

.

•

207-242

MANY OR "THE HAPPY FEw"? REIN 11ffi AFfERMA TH OF 'fRANSLA TION FOR 11ffi

CALLIMACHUS: FLECTIONS

CALLIMACHUS,

NISETICH

•

•

•

•

A PARADE OF LEARNING:

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

.

•

.

•

243-256

HYMN TO ARTEMIS

CALLIMACHUS'

(LINES170-268)

Mirjarn Pl.ANTINGA

•

•

THEHYMN TO DFLOS as a

•

•

•

•

.

•

.

•

.

•

•

•

257-278

PARTIAL All..EGoRY OF CALLIMACHUS'

POETRY

S. R. SLINGS THE ORIGINS

•

• •

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

.

•

•

•

•

•

279-298

OF VOICE AND IDENTITY AMBIGUITY IN CALLI-

MACHUS' EPIGRAMS

Michael A. 1'uEu.ER.

298-315

INDEXES.

317-320

.

.

.

.

AESOP POETA: AESOP AND TIIE FABLE IN CALLIMACHUS' IAMBI Benjamin Acosta-Hughes

Ruth Scodel

1. Introduction A remarkable parallel feature frames Callimachus' first and second Iambi, two poems that can be read as paired from several perspectives. Iambus l opens with the figure of Hipponax, come from Hades to Callimachus' contemporary Alexandria: cptpmv laµpov of> µax11v .dti6JoVta / titv BoJv1_tJu..J~lQY,'bearing a iambus, one not singing the Bupalean battle' (Iambus l [fr. 191 Pf.] 3-4). Iambus 2 closes with the figure of Aesop, in an ironic moment of disassociation from Callimachus' contemporary Alexandria: tauta 6' A.l Kaipla ouyy&AaV1t01.T)µiltO>V ©V 1tE1t01T)KaV11 auv&\6uia tautfl t11V PPQ66tr1ta06 6\&A\X& tptxoooa, Kai o&t0>KO\µa,µ&vov tov Mycoovxapa6paµoiiaa tlti to ppap&iov tijv vilCfl~dq,iK&to. •A tortoise and a hare quarreled over their quickness. And on agreeing upon a day and a place they parted company. Now the hare, due to its habitual speed, was unconcerned

about the course; falling by the side of the road he went to sleep. The tortoise, recognizing his slowness, did not ~ running, and so passing by the slumbering hare anived at the finish line.'

·o toy~ 6flAOi4n\ xoUalC\~ q,i>mvdµ&loiiaav 7t6V~ tvilCfloi / (iooVta µfi9ov OUIC~ eotl;aVto encapsulates Aesop as foreigner, as ill-used, and remarkably as singer (i.e. poet). Aesop's situation here is exactly that of the harrassed Hipponax at the Sarapeum in Iambus 1. And, of course, in his act of 'singing mythos', i.e. rendering mythos as µou¼µot P [) - is untiring Heracles complaining? Perhaps he stepped on a thorn like his little son Hyllos in the first book of the Aetia36, or he painfully experienced the thorns of the wild pear in Molorchos' farmyard when, famished by his long trip, he plucked an (unfortunately quite inedible) fruit (SH 257.15-16: auA.dTtVnap' liX[Epoov / t~tpoo' tpµaiQ[t>) - the first appearance of the comic hunger motiP 7• The paraphrase by •Probus' (SH 266) preserves the detail that, after his victory over the lion, Heracles fell asleep and almost did not make it back to Molorchos in time, on the thirtieth day after his departure. In this 33. The source for Hccale is the Atthidographer Philochoros (cf. Hollis 1990: 6-7); Molorchos probably stems from the Argo/ilea by Agias and Derkylos, which Callimachus also used for the Aetia (cf. Morgan 1992: 538). In both cases Callimachus will have contributed substantial inventions of his own (cf. Hollis 1990: 7; Parsons 1977: 43; Fuhrer 1992: 105). 34. Unless Molorchos, too, had a son who was killed by the lion (test. xii in Parsons 1977: 3) and subsequently avenged by Heracles, as Theseus had already unknowingly avengedthe murder of Hecale's son by Cercyon. 35. For Theseus cf. Kerkhecker(1993: 14 with note 64), for Heracles cf. Fuhrer (1992: 107-112). 36. In the Theiodamas episode the motif of hunger and weariness is transferred from Heracles to Hyllus who has been pricked by a thorn (fr. 24.1 Pf. = 26.1 M.: mcci>A~t1tt:i µ1v hultf£ 1tooo~ 9tvap). 37. Livrea (1978: 8 with note 6) notes that this fruit was normally used to feed pigs! Cf. Lloyd-Jones - Parsons (1983: 112).

30

ANNEMARIEAMBOHL

episode, Heracles appears all too human, especially so if the double motivation in 'Probus' stems directly from Callimachus: either Hera out of hatred - wanted to prevent him from obtaining heavenly honors, or he was simply exhausted 38 • The incongruity of the epic motif of divine wrath with the trivial explanation strikes a comic note. Likewise, the celery wreath, the future victory crown of the Nemean games, seems to have been a makeshift, for Heracles, in his hurry, could not find a more noble plant and had to content himself with the first weed that came to hand 39• An unmistakably comic stock motif is that of Heracles' appetite which is associated with the tradition of comedy and satyr-play. In these genres, Heracles appears in the stereotypical role of an insatiable glutton and excessive drinker"l. There are some traces left in the fragments to indicate that Callimachus played with the traditional motif of Heracles' hunger. Heracles' motivation to defeat the lion is perhaps not as altruistic as it might seem. After all, Molorchos held out the prospect of a feast to Heracles if he killed the lion (SH 257.23-24). Moreover, Heracles rather boastfully prophesies that Molorchos will soon be the master of a whole herd of cattle (SH 260A.8: fmm Kai ~*~a PouKt&avo[c;), if he only so much as approaches the lion with his club. The epic paradigm of Melampus and lphiclos' cattle, which Heracles uses to confirm his promise, does not fit the peasant Molorchos (SH 260A.5-6). I suspect that Heracles here falls victim to wishful thinking with his own benefit in mind: to satisfy his heroic appetite, he would surely prefer roast beef to Molorchos' mutton. We have seen that in the VictoriaBerenices, Heracles is characteriz.ed by some comic traits. However, this does not mean that he is unequivocally a comic figure. On the contrary, heroic, human and all too human components are combined to form a well-balanced character4 1• The comic traits, especially, do not lie on the surface, but are hinted at in a subtle way so that they are recognized only by a reader who is familiar with the literary tradition. For such a strategy, the young Heracles is an ideal choice. The comic effect derives from the contrast between his 'innocent' character in Callimachus and his 'later' image which is already written down in earlier texts,

38. SH 266: {interfecto autem leone cum sopitus esset ... Keil] vel odio lunonis, ne ei caelestes honores contingerent, vel fatigatus, expe"ectus mira damnum celeritate cor• rexit... 39. So Fuhrer (1992: 67-68 note 238, 116, 137). 40. Cf. Galinsky (1972, xii, 81-100); Effe (1980, 160-161). 41. Cf. Fuhrer (1992: 110). The readers' reaction may have wavered between 'sympathetic' and 'ironic identification' (Effe 1980: 147).

ENTERTAINING TIIESEUS AND HERACLES

31

but which he himself does not seem to be conscious of yet42• In the Victoria Berenices, Heracles is trying hard to behave like a modest and polite yOW1gman. All the same, in despite of himself, he embarrasses Molorchos due to his traditional reputation as a glutton. Entertaining Heracles becomes Molorchos' main problem. This is the starting point for the self-ironical rewriting of the Hecale in the Victoria Berenices (see below §4). The same strategy of representing Heracles in his 'formative' youth holds true also of the epic Heracles familiar for example from Panyassis' Heracleia. In Callimachus, he seems to have been taught by the mouse-hunter Molorchos how to fight the lion 43 • As a cross-check, I would like to take a short look at the role of Theseus in the Hecale. In contrast to Heracles, Theseus is not a typical figure of comedy. If he was to be portrayed as a comic hero, comical traits would have had to receive much more emphasis than in the case of Heracles, where a few hints at the literary tradition sufficed to evoke his comic image 44 • On the contrary, in the Hecale, Theseus is less clearly marked as a comic figure than Heracles in the Victoria Berenices. This, however, does not prevent Theseus from sharing some realistic and everyday traits. After all, he is deterred from his heroic purpose by the bad weather and glad to find refuge in Hecale' s hut where he arrives 45 and without havsoaked (fr. 28 H.: ou:pitv o' dnecrdcrato 1..aiq>TJV) ing had any dinner (fr. 120 H.: lbcµTJVOV06p1tot0) 46 • He even seems to have helped the old woman with the cooking and apparently enjoyed the rustic meal she prepared for him (cf. below §4). These realistic elements in the character portrayal of Theseus have been juxtaposed by Amd Kerkhecker to the tendency to view Theseus as a traditional epic hero, whose only function is to act as a foil for the 'new epic hero' Hecale 47 • 42. Hunter identifies a similar strategy in 'Theocritus' 25, where Heracles himself does not seem to be aware of his identity yet (1998: 122-123). Cf. Barchiesi's 'Future reflexive'(1993). 43. Test. xii in Parsons (1977: 3): "[. .. / didicitque ab eo quemadmodum adversus ferum coiret." er.Amblihl (2002: Ch. IIl.3.1.3) and below note 82. 44. er. Cameron (1995: 447). Although Theseus, too, appears in satyr-plays, especially as vanquisher of Cercyon and Sciron, he does not seem to have been characterized as a comic figure. 45. The sorry state of Theseus is illustrated already by the Hamburg hydria, the earliest iconographic evidence for the myth (c. 460 BC; cf. Simon 1988). Kerkhecker also attributes fr. 139 H. (t6o& µol µaAIC\atatov ~µap) to Theseus complaining about the bad weather (1993: 16; differently Hollis 1990: 313-314). 46. For fr. 120 H. cf. Hollis (1990: 306); Kerkhecker (1993: 16). Already before, the time of the approaching storm had been indicated by a reference to girls asking their mother for their evening meal (fr. 18.5f. H.). 47. Kerkhecker (1993: 13-16) refers for the traditional interpretation to Zanter (1987: 213) and Hutchinson (1988: 61). For the sympathetic character portrayal of Theseus cf. also Nisetich (2001: xxxiii-xxxiv).

32

ANNEMARIEAMBOHL

Kerkhecker's interpretation, however, relies in part on the supposition that Theseus shares with Hecale' s pet crow a preoccupation with food . He reads fragment 74.1 H. (ya Moooat 7t0AM1vtµovn j3ota I cruv &{7t&V [do106~] / IC&ivo~ µ680~ tj3{u..ovto nap' i:xvtov o~to~ tnnou. Inspiration and performance are linked. The Muses' composition (cruv ... tj3alovto) issues from the poet as speech (&{n&v).Here, Callimachus the 'singer' 'speaks', and the envisioned experience of the poem is oral-aural. In.fr. 191, Hipponax shouts dKoooa9' •1mrcilva1Ct~and continues by assuring his audience that he has come cpepcoviaµj3ov ol>µa:x11vd&iOovta (fr. 191.3)55 • When Callimachus portrays the legendary Aesop's fortunes among the Delphians, he records that the latter did not kindly receive [Aiaconov] {ioovta µuOov (fr. 192.17). The fable in.fr. 194 is also envisioned as experienced aurally: li1c:ou& o,; tov alvov (fr. 194.6). In lamb 6, something of a propemptilcon, verbal exchange is at least mimicked (Ai:xvo~taai -yapI Kai t6 µ&unu9ta9m (fr. 196.45--46),and dntp:x&u (fr. 196.62)56). The Diegesis for lamb 12 declares baldly, touto -yt-ypantat, though Callimachus engages a typical supplication for divine favour (fr. 202.18-19) and then embarks upon his - song (d&icmµa1 / 51. On the syntax of the passage, see the sane treatment of Hutchinson (1988: 96--97); for the fable, 337 Halm; generally, ArnbUhl (1995: 21 I). 52. 'a demurral by the narrator' (Nisetich 2001: 77); 'Theiodamantis in Hercutem convicia cum contumcliis mulierum in Pclca dictis comparari vidcntur' (Pfeiffer. ad foe.). 53. Pfeiffer (1.95). 54. [dot~) / K&ivoc;reconstructed by Mair and Maas. dot~ docs not stand in POxy. 101 I; and for Mair and Maas' IC&ivoc;,the papyrus has K&iv. Sec Pfeiffer ( 1.124-125). 55. For q,tpc:.owith incorporeal objects, esp. oral messages, sec, e.g., JI. 10.288. et LSJ, s.v. q,tpc:.o, A.IV.3.b. 56. Pfeiffer's comment ad Joe.: 'hunc familiarem alloquitur poeta'.

LESSONS FROM CEOS

61

µ11e1cfltt,fr. 202.19-20)! When Callimachus defends Ion's Moooa Tf1 polymetric work in lamb 13, he refers to the insbuments of performance: Aooov 1t~ aOA.OVA........ Kai x6poac; (fr. 203.47). Later in the poem, poets are dotooi, evoking their role as performers of poetry (fr. 203.52-53). Indeed, Callimachus pictures his own role as poet as that of 'singing' (dd&o,fr. 203.63). In the Deification of Arsinoe, the end of the first line has Callimachus again singing (dd&o,fr. 228.1). Poets of the (notably performance-oriented) dithyramb, while perhaps not wellregarded, are nonetheless also singers (v68a1 o' ftv&rioav do1oai, fr. 604). In another unplaced fragment, Callimachus claims that he 'performs nothing unattested' (dµapn>pov oootv d£i&o,fr. 612). The scholion which cites the fragment connects it with invocation of the Muses 57, evocative of performance and not precedent research. Callimachus again uses d£i&o in a passage which cannot be assigned: v6µov o' fte1oev w Ap11oc; (fr. 644). Here, the term unequivocally refers to performance since the scholion uses the passage to discuss the effect of martial modes: S1tt:tT)Ot:UOV 1taA.al µtA.11nva npo..iaacowith performance, ibid., 51-52. 62. On the attitudes, sec Birt (1907: 135-154). Cameron (1995: 68 and n. 280) argues that a statue heretofore identified as that of Poscidippus the comic poet (Richter 1984: 187 and pl. 149) belongs to Poscidippus of Pella. The comments of Lloyd-Jones ad SH 705.16, following Pfeiffer, arc unhelpful and misleading. 63. Sec also above in section l.l onfr. 191.

62

JON STEFFEN BRUSS

fAA.o.tE vuv, tA.t-yoimo' tvi'lfl1aaa8e li1tCOOw; / xeipw; tµoic;, tva µoi 1touli>µtvcomv ft~.). When contrasted with certain Pindaric precedents, the physicality of the elegies, noted by Bing 1988, is striking. However, in light of the final clause ((va ... ft~) this physicality needs to be read as

inextricably bound with concerns over transmission64• In the archaic world performance and transmission are virtually one and the same65 : physical transmission is barely countenanced. Indeed.Simonidesfr. 581.5-7 PMG strikes a pessimistic note in considering whether an inscription even on something as permanent as stone can survive: li8ov oi:/ 1eai pp&rem UOEPo6Ml.Considering the frailty of 1taUtµm 9pa6ovtt" µropou / qx:o-roc; papyrus, it is no wonder that Kallimachos should exhibit concern for transmission - particularly since, while his written text will have served as an aide-memoiremuch as an archaic text66,unlike many older texts it did not have the benefit of being learned by choruses. What I have attempted to do above is to create a matrix which will help both pin-point and illuminate various aspects of literacy and orality connected with the reuvre of K.allimachos.By sorting references to literate and oral experienceof literature into the constitutiveelements of production,perfonnance, and transmission,one can shed light on the background and hence isolate the purpose of certain key passages. Furthennore, by distinguishing between the fictive Callimachusrepresentedin the poetry and the real Kallimachos, the poet-scholar, we have been able to discern deliberate and selfconscious intrusions into his text by Kallimachos which serve to crack the illusion of his oralist fiction. lbis intentionalcracking allows Kallimachosto acknowledge conditions of the literary experience which belie the received tradition. More importantly, however, it enables Kallimachos all the more pointedly and forcefully to reconstitutethe traditional oralist presence of the poet's voice as an important feature of his own poetry. 4. Judgment

Ascertaining Kallimachos' judgment on the voice and the use of writing is important for several reasons. First, to my knowledge no one has 64. Other archaic passages which can be illuminating are those such as Pindar, Nem. 5.1-5, where the poet engages the conceit of poetry's distinction from statuary lying in its ability to move about by word of mouth, or Sappho frr. 55, 193 L-P, where "confidence in the survival of her poetry lay in its continuation in song, not in its existence as a written text" (Thomas 1992: 114; discussion of Pindar, ibid., 114-115). 65. Though it has been rightly noted in drawing attention to the inscription in gold in a temple of Pindar, 01. 7, that "the chances of an individual poet's texts being lost were that much smaller" (Thomas 1992: 106-107). 66. Thomas (1992: 118-119).

LESSONSFROM CEOS

63

explored whether Kallimachos understood the problem of literacy and orality67 • His deliberate strategies, outlined above, coupled with the aniculation of a judgment on the matter implies that he did. Finally, his evaluation creates one more window through which to view his complicity in the mediation between orality and literacy. Important for ascertaining Kallimachos' judgment, Iamb 1 preserves a brief vignette of the crazy Euhemerus as a mad scribbler on papyrus, placed notably outside the walls of the Museum (fr. 191.10-11 : 06 tov 1taA.Ul Ilayxatov o JtAtlO'a~ zava I yeprov '}..a').l,I,rovli6uca PtPlia 'l''IXEt). The judgmental freight (nlacr~, laAt't,rov, li6tKa, 'l''IXEt) gives 'scribbled upon papyrus' as Callimachean code for insignificant and untrustworthy. Two further juxtaposed episodes reinforce the sense of Iamb 168• The elegies, both of which treat of Ceans, hinge on orality and literacy. The first, called by Pfeiffer Sepulcrum Simonidis, revolves around the failure of written words; the second, Acontius et Cydippa, is set into motion by the success of uttered words. Fr. 64 records Simonides' speech, rather than his tomb inscription 69• In fact, the failure of the inscription led to his tomb's destruction and hence incites him to use his voice to vindicate the inscription. Ironically, the destruction of his tomb spoken of infr. 64 is itself a vindication of words attributed to Simonides. Diogenes Laertius (i.89 = PMG 581) preserves a pessimistic poem that juxtaposes the µevo~ crtaMI~ with the power of the gods by an argumentum de minore: even a stone may be ripped down by human hands (li0ov 6t / Kai pp6teot na)..aµm 0pauovn, II. ~) - this from the most famous composer of sepulchral epigram! Simonides' interest in PMG 581, of course, is not the written word. But Callimachus extends his meaning to embrace also that in this elegy by exploring the causes of the destruction of Simonides' tomb. In archaic paratactic fashion, Simonides supplies the reason for Phoenix' destruction of his tomb for incorporation into a military siege tower: oo6t to ypaµµa / f16ecr811 (fr. 64.7-8). The failure of Simonides' epitaph is trenchantly ironic. Probably on the basis of Suidas 70, it has been assumed that Phoenix is the 67. That Kallimachos would not have been conscious of a change in literacy/orality

and the uses to which literacy was put seems, in light of the evidence, not to be believable. 1be debate over orality and literacy raged in Greek intellectual circles from the fifth century onward. See n. 6 above for just a few recent works that engage the matter. 68. The order is guaranteed by the Diegeseis. 69. Anodic, like Hipponax in Jamb 17 It is difficult to tell; the text gives no clear indication (see Harder 1998: %-98; also Krevans 1984: 240, 250, Clayman 1988: 284, andBing 1988: 67-68). 70. s.v. l:1µoviorii;; cited by Pfeiffer ad fr. 64.6. The name of an Acragantine commander Phoenix is otherwise unattested.

64

JON STEFFEN BRUSS

name of a Greek commander of Acragas. Equally likely, cpoivt~ here is not a personal name, but an ethnic71 , and alludes to the sack of Acragas under Himilco in 406n. Simonides' tomb lay before the city walls (fr. 64.3). To aid in his siege Himilco built a tower73, gathering together stones from among those available outside the city. Naturally, pre-cut stones, including Simonides' tombstone, were preferred. In any event, the ethnic cpoivt~ recalls the ascription of Greek writing to the Phoenicians and the term q,01vt1eeiaas the term for the alphabet (Her. 5.58)74 • Ironically, the ethnos that gave the Greeks writing cannot understand it ('to ypaµµa, I. 1 - inscribed 'words' distilled to their categoric essence, 'lettering') and is incapable of uttering aloud the words inscribed ('to "A.f.yov, I. 8)75• In short, the written word, preserved on nothing less than stone, fails when unvoiced. This constitutes no less than a failure of memory itself (implied by the mention of Simonides' invention of mnemonic devices, µvftµTJVtq,pacraµT)v, /. 10)76• If Kallimachos projects the elegy to be performed rather than read (at least this is Callimachus' pose), the final vindication for Simonides comes only in the utterance of the words of this episode. This denouement of Simonides' story - predicated on the failure of both memory and writing - in fact plays generic games with sepulchral epigram by subverting its aims. For when the genre works, it yields a happy marriage of writing and memory that keeps alive the tlf.0oivt~;attested for Carthaginians in Pindar, Pyth. 1.12, Thuc. 1.116, and Diodorus Siculus, 13.80. 72. Asheri (1992: 168); and Lewis (1994: 129, 131-132, 135, 142, and 149). 73. m'>py~ is often, though not necessarily, an integral part of a defensive wall; see LSJ s.v. 74. And see Knox (1985: 2) and Thomas (1992: 53-56). Use of the cpotv-stem for letters and writing was not restricted to literature; Jeffrey (1970) shows the use of the stem in the nomenclature of polis officials and their activity. 75. For the conceit of 'voiceless writing' in inscriptions receiving its voice through a reader, see Svenbro (1993: 44-63). 76. On Simonides' cOMexion with memory-training, see Pfeiffer ad foe .• von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff (1913: 142) and Post (1932: 106-107). On his Thessalian sojourns. see most recently Molyneux (1992: 117-146). 77. As Simonides himself asserts in his encomium on the Spartan dead at Thermopylac, PMG 53 I (= Diodorus 11.2.6), II. 8-9: dp&t~ µeyav A.&A.ouul>iovi\ 8tov ao-c6v,dti µt-yav, atev livaic-ca, Il11Aa'Y6vcov tAU-cfjpa,6iicaa1t61..ovOopavi6ncn; 1tcilv tov xpci>tovd&iy&vtcov, ·Ep~. &faro,

tci>v~aaou~ ·Ep&j36~t& 1taMlll3aai1.&uit& nai~ y&ivato Ni>~1t&Miy&aaiv {m' &upto~ ''2,c&avoio· fi at y& K(mpioo~ ufa 1t&picppovo~. f)t a& raiT)~. i\ 'Avtµrov· tto1maa 6 1ea1eacppovtrovdAltAT)O'at dv8pco1tOl~ f)o' t0'8M· to Kai ato aci>µaoicputov.

3 6

My heart is in doubt, for your genos is much-disputed. Am I to call you the first of the eternal gods, Eros, those whom in old times Ercbos and queen Night bred as their children under the waves of broad Ocean? Or am I to call you the son of nimble-witted Cypris or of Earth or of the Winds ( ... ) you wander about devising both ill and good for men; and your body is double-natured as well.

Since Antagoras was active at least until the 260s, when he composed an epitaph for the Academic philosophers Polemo and Crates 7, it is 3. Translation indebted to Stephens (2003: 80) and Nisetich (2001: 20). 4. D.L. 4.26-27 = Antag. fr. I Powell. The hymnic nature of these lines appears from their introduction as ~ "Eporra 1t&1tonwtva, from the address of the god ("E~. 2), the focus on his genealogy, and the narrator's hesitation to choose between options (cf. esp. h.Bacch. 4-1 and hAp. 207-214). 5. I agree with Von der Miihll (1962: 31), Renehan(1964: 379-380), and Stephens (2003: 80) that the transmitted dµq,iJ3orrmv is probably sound. Antagoras' point of departure appearsto be Homer's use of Po~as a metonym for 'battle' (so e.g. E. Schwartz ap. Von der Miihll I.e.). The conjecture dµq,icrP11tov (Meineke e.a., rec. Powell), though not extant otherwise (though cf. Hesych. a4103 dµq,icrlJata· dµq,mP11n'tmµa = Hellan. FGrH 4Fl 93), can be defended as a poeticism (Grundform of 'denominative' dµq,lcrP11tt0>),but it is unnecessary. The issue does not affect the interpretation of Callimachus. 6. I find neither toi~ iJptcrrov for dµq,iPoTltOV.Stephens (2003: 80) has already argued the relevance of the Homeric instances of dµq>iJptcrto~. in the chariot-race of the lliad 10• But this is not the only relevant intertext. In this poem full of etymological wordplay, dµq>iJptcrto~ must 8. So for example Hopkinson (1988: 123): "it is hardly certain who borrowed from whom". 9. On this dissonance between narratorial and auctorial voice see further §3. 10. She argues that Iliad 23.382 evokes the idea that the two places claiming to be the birthplace of Zeus are 'in a dead heat', just like Homer's competing charioteers.

98

MAR11JNCUYPERS

also evoke Eris ('Strife'), the force which differs from Eros by only one letter, which may be regarded as its exact opposite, and which Hesiod credits with a dual nature in Works and Days 11-13:

o{nclipa µouvov f11v'Epi&ov ~. d>..A.' t1ti yaiav µtv teev t1tatviio-ernvoiJo-a a', ol 6' 'IKapq> fiv&µotaan / q>aa'. ol 6' tv Na!;q>, 6iov ytvoc; &lpaqnrota, / ol 6& ... / 1t1&u66µ&vot( 1-6). In the third century the Hymns were probably considered non-Homeric, but it is difficult to know whether or not the collection that is preserved in the manuscript tradition originated at that time. Allen, Halliday. and Sikes (1936: lxxvii, lxxix). 14. Line 8 quotes Epimenides: Kpi\t&c; d&i lll&Uatat, KaKa 811pia, yaat&p&c; dpyai (Fr. 5 Kinkel). Epimenides' words themselves recall the Muses' address to Hesiod: 11:01µtv&c; liypaulot, KaK' tUn&a, yaat&p&c; olov (Th. 26). 15. Called by Hinds "reflexive annotation" (1998: eh. 10). 16. See, for example, McLennan (1977: on lines 14 and 20).

120

M.DEPEW

poetry about the gods 17 - has rather to do with the persuasive power of language and representation, as well as with the poet's assertion of command over the poetic tradition. Here, at the outset of his collection of six hymns, Callimachus thematizes this command of the tradition as a collusion between himself and the father of the gods 18• The ability, shared by the poet and the god, to range allusively through the tradition, moreover, parallels the range of control over geographical boundaries that Zeus and Ptolemy share: Zeus' birth, which the polyvalence of the tradition grants to locations throughout the Aegean, causes subterranean rivers to become visible above ground (31); the god holds sway over men who traverse the sea (75), and over men who measure the earth (74); he governs the rulers of cities and the warriors who capture and defend them (73-74). Likewise, Ptolemy himself 'is widely established' (1ttpl1tpo yap tupu l3tl3111Ctv,86) 19• The king's ability to effect by evening whatever he conceives in the morning - apart from the 'little things' he can do right away - coincides with Zeus' ability, admittedly while still a child, to effect everything to completion20. "tK ~lavto(70-73). 55. Depew (1994: 410-415). I talce POxy 2509 as belonging to the Hesiodic Catalogue of Women; that the fragment's placement is most likely to have been in the E~e of Cyrene may be relevant to its presence in the fifth hymn. 56. Actaeon's intrusion upon Artemis' bath had been ttansferred to Tiresias and Athena in a version of his blinding extant before Callimachus in Phcrecydes. Depew (1994: 412 and n. 16). 57. POxy 30, line 7.

58. A.O>tpox60\, µlltTIP 6' oGnc; ft\lCt&9&av, / dlla Aloe;Kopucpa.ICOpucpa Atoe; tmv&6&t / 'lf&U6&aa 9uyatl'IP- The lines echo A. Eu. 827-828.

OUK

GENDER, POWER. AND POETICS

129

probably Ptolemy IV Philopator. whose queen. Arsinoe m. was worshipped as the Tenth Muse. who lent support for the reorganization of the Mouseion there59 • Callimachus himself may have referred to Arsinoe (or Berenice) as the 'Tenth Muse• at the beginning of the Aitia6". There are other overt links between hymns 3 and 5. The song that Artemis 'inspires' in her hymn's second half (183ff.) begins with a short list of the nymphs of whom the goddess is 'especially fond.' Foremost among these is Britomartis (f~oxa 6' cU.AUCOv ropwvioo q,ii..ao v6µq>T1V, 189), who is celebrated here for preserving her virginity by leaping into the sea to escape the pursuing Minos, who is 1ttOtT18Ei&ai My sister locks were missing me when I was just new-shorn.

When her new husband Ptolemy departedfor the war against 'Assyria' (Cat. 66.12), such was Berenice's distress and longing that she vowed to dedicate a lock of her hair to all the gods, if he returned safely (Cat. 66.9-35). When he did so, she placed the newly shorn lock in the temple of Aphrodite at Zephyrium. Then (as the passage has been expounded by Stephanie West 13) _ the goddess sent Zephyr, the west wind, which seized the lock, taking it out to sea towards the rising planet Venus, and deposited it in the goddess's lap (fr. 110.52-57: n.b. Kfotplo~ £~ 1e6l1to~ ... f9rJ1ee, 56) She then placed it as a new constellation amidst the old stars (63-64): u6am) Aoooµ&v6v µ& 1tap' d8a[vatouc; dvl6vta KU1tpl)c; tv dpxaiolc; acrtpov [f8111e&vtov. 10. Bulloch ( 1985: 131-132) rightly makes much of the extended allusion to TheoClitus 18.22-32, where the 240 singers of the epithalamium for Helen claim that they have shared 5p6µ~ co6t6~; the 240 lengths run by Athena were presumably all different 11. Even in verse 30 Heracles is artfully put in the place of Pollux, as Bulloch's commentary well brings out. (8), 1tA6icaµotvepeu:raµevoc; 1t&'tpc;i y6vu· 'tai 6t xap' ai:>'tav aiye1po1 1t'tEA.&at 'tE tua,c1ov ID..aoc;uq,a1vov X,A.O>poim V1tE'ttlAOl&Ev, 1tcotrovto;ou0ai 1tt:pi1ti6aKac;dµq,i µtAtV oliyov fliov ~ tt 6ElVOV cruKOucpTJ / yivEo raia q>iATJ, / Muci>lo; d n novripov t7tT1vEcra, 31 lfilL rum ooiµovE; ot µ' f:XEtE(26 Pf. (47 G.-P.)) • In einigen Fallen triigt der argumentative, reflektierende Ton solcher Struktur sogar die inhaltliche Aussage: So zergliedert sich das spitzfindige ontologischeschatologische Anliegen, mit dem jemand den Philosophen Timarchos im Hades suchen konnte, in: ft n 1tEpi'lfU:Xft;ft ncUt nmc; foEat (10 Pf. 32 (33 G.-P.], 2) • Da8 sich in dem wiederholungsreichenEpigramm 41 Pf.

.u.m~-

(4 G.-P.):

fuwmµtu vuxfic; ft1 to nvtov, fnucru &' oi>JC oio·, tiI: ~ ih' 'Ai6TJc;fip,cacrE,1ti..1)vdcpavtc;. ~ ~a nv' tc;,cai6rov,cai..tvXEto; 1eaiµev d,cEi,cov

t

1tolla.1e1·"t1)v 6pficrttv µ1) {l1to6txEa8Evtoi". ou1e1cruvicpTJcrov· t1eEicrEyap ft i..t86ltUmcEtv von '(cine Person liuBerlich) wiedererkennen' (V. 2) zu '(cine Ursache) erkennen, verstehen'. 40. Vgl. Ferrari-Zanetto (1992: 121 ["affettuosa partedpazione emotiva")) und Wills (1996: 57'11J mit Parallelen, v.a. Theoc. 6, 8). 41. Ludwig (1967: 314) hingegen meint, "die sprachliche Leichtigkeit, die kurzen Slitze, die lnterjektionen und Parenthesen, sowie die umgangssprachlichen und drastisch volkstiimlichen Wendungen, die einen lebendigen Gesprlichston herstellen" seien charakteristisch filr dieses Gedicht; vgl. Luck (1956: 227 ("a conversational touch")). Da8 solche 'Anadiplosen' (vgl. z.B. h.Ap. 2) Ausdruck der "forte personalitAde) poeta" (Capovilla I1970: 98)) sein sollen, ist weit hergeholt.

WOR1WIEDERHOLUNOEN

195

nepiq>O\tOVtproµevov, o~· d1to KP11V11~ I 1tivro· 01.KxaivroJtavta ta 6T1µ601.a)beschreiben, auf einrnal (V. 5) Lysanias mit vaix1 1eaJi.oc; 1CQ.A6c; angesprochen wirci, dann wirkt diese Affennation iibertrieben, ja wegenihrer Banalitiit42 nach dem zuvor fonnulierten Anspruch komisch - und wird umgehend in der emeut iiberrraschenden Schlu6wendung des Epigramms konterkariert43• Im Pentameter hingegen gewinnt die "adjacency" 44 eigenstiindige inhaltliche Bedeutung und kann entscheidend zur Pointe eines Epigramms beitragen. Die zweite Vershalfte des Pentameters bildet in der geschlossenen Form des elegischen Distichons regelma8ig eine Art Schlu6akkord, der bald auflosend und abrundend, bald iiberraschend und gegen die Lesererwartung einen Gedankengang beendet45 • Die unmittelbare Wortwiederholung hat daher, ahnlich wie das Wortspiel, an dieser Stelle besondere Wirkung, auch weil das schnelle Drangen zum Abschlu8 des Ausdrucks dort nicht mehr von einem Verseinschnitt unterbrochen werden kann. Kallimachos bietet fiir diese Verwendung einige schone Beispiele. Epigramm 52 Pf. (6 G.-P.): tOVto lCCIA.OV µEA.QVEUvta 0E61CpltOV,&l L&EYfµ' fx0Et, tEtpalCt µ1croiTJc;,£1.M!l!lbfil, !l!lM.01', vaixt 1tpoc;EIJX«itECO ravuµiJ6Eoc;. OIJpClvtE ZEU, µa1epa A.tyro. 1eaicru1t0t' fipaa0T)c;- 01J1C£tt 1st er mir feindlich gesinnt, Thcokrit mit dem herrlichen Schwarzhaar, Viennal hasse du ihn; liebc ihn, wenn er mich liebt, Himmlicher 2.eus, bcim schon gelockten, bci Ganymcdes, Ja, dcnn einst liebtest auch du. Aber ich sage nicht mehr. (Obcrsetzung Howald-Staiger) 42. Vgl. Cameron (1995: 390 ["the usual exclamation of the lover"]) mit dcm Hinweis (und Lit.), da8 vergleichbarc Wcndungcn in zahlreichen Graffiti und Vasenaufschriftcn bclegt sind (dazu schon Schmid (1915: 146 1]). DaB das Adjektiv bier "only for its utility in the word-play between 1CaMc;and liU.~" wicderholt sei (so Wills (1996: 73]), trifft also nicht zu. 1CaA6c;wird geme wiedcrholt (vgl. nur Asklepiades AP 12, 163 (24 G.-P.J, I sowie die Stcllen bci Hopkinson (1982: 164. 166-167) und Reed (1997: 235]). Die steigemdc Adjektiviteration anstclle der Formcn des absoluten Supcrlativs gibt es noch hcule, etwa im ltalienischen ('ha gli occhi ncri neri ... '). Au8erdem: "vaixt is a vulgarism ... undoubtedly chosen with some care by Callimachus" (Cameron [1995: 391392]; vgl. 52 Pf. (6 G.-P.), 3). 43. Vgl. schon Schmid (1915: 146):" ... die scherzhaftc Wirkung des Epigramms bcruht auf dem Gcgensatz zwischcn dem mit vier Beispielen brcit und grossartig aufgeputzten Prinzip cnKxaivco navta 6T]µoom und der in schnippischer Kiirze eingefiihnen Enttauschung, die der Dichtcr mit diesem Prinzip bcim nachsten praktischen Fall erlebtc"; Howald-Staiger (1955: 187); Cameron (1995: 390-391); anders z.B. GowPage (1965: II 156-157). Vgl. auch das schwierige Epigramm 29 Pf. (5 G.-P.), 3-4: ~ b naic;. 'Axi:i.qn:. All'JV~El 6t nc; ooxi / q>TJO"lV - tntcrtaiµTJV µouvoc; tyci> GM; dazu Giangrande (1967: 148); Gutzwiller (1998: 223). 44. Vgl. Wills (1996: 390-394). 45. Vgl. Ferguson (1967: 75-76) und Lausbcrg (1982: 40. 91 ).

ta

ta

196

MARKUS

M0LKE

Die Wende des Epigramms liegt zwischen den Versen 2 und 3. Erst im zweiten Distichon erflihrt der Leser, wen der Dichter zu Beginn iiberhaupt angesprochen hat, Zeus nimlich 46 • Hier erst lost sich die Erwartung, die sich in V. 1-2 schrittweise aufgebaut hatte, zuniichst durch die lange Vorstellung des Geliebten - dessen Name Theokritos erst an fiinfter Stelle, betont nach der Zasur x:ata tphov tpoxaiov und vor der bukolischen Diirese, genannt wirvac; µ&yCLA.ouc; t~tcpuy&v6avtcov, 0ijK&0&oic;uµ68pn~1 A.tycovon tiJv6&Kat' &i>xiJv, © A.aOi,O'C00⁣ t~ ~ &a•i0&_1Q. Das ihn mit billigem Salz emiihrte, mit dem er dem gro8en Stunn der Schulden entrann, weihte, das SatzfaS, Eudem Samothrakes Gttemund sagte, kraft des Geliibdes Hab • er, der Salzflut entflohn, bier es, ihr Leute, geweiht. (Ubersetzung Howald-Staiger)

Das Verstiindnis dieses Epigramms ist durch Kohnken entscheidend befordert worden 58 • Sein eigentiimlicher Reiz erwachst aus dem spielerischen Urngang des Dichters rnit der Gattungstypik des Weihepigramms. Das Gedicht gibt sich als Erkliirung einer kurzen Weihinschrift59 fiir ein Salzf a8, das ein gewisser Eudemos den samothrakischen Kabiren in Einlosung eines Geliibdes dargebracht hatte. Diese Inschrift lautet 'zitiert' (Aeyrov l>n)f•0 : tiiv6& [sc. titv ClAiflV]Kat' &uxitv, 6>A.aoi, crro0Eic;;£~ ClAO6' f0eto [sc. Eudernos]. Der Satz 56. Vgl. Mariotti (2000: 392):" ... non solo Berenice c una delle Cariti, ma fa sl che le altre Cariti siano Cariti, c la 'Grazia' per eccellenza, ha in se l'essenza della xap1c;"; vgl. auch Meillier (1979: 149) und Ferrari-Zanetto (1992: 81-2). Ob das Epigramm allerdings als 'barocco' zu bewerten ist (Mariotti [2000: 392)), sei dahingestellt. 57. Auch die syntaktische Funktion des Eigennamens wechselt: Das erste Xap1t&c;ist Subjekt, das zweite Priidikatsnomen; vgl. Wills (1996: 53) mit Belegen. Die pointierte Zuspitzung der Wiederholung bei Kallimachos liiBt sich gut ermessen durch den Vergleich mit der Imitation eines spiiteren Anonymus (AP 9,515): Tp⁣&lcriv Xap1t&c;·au 6& 6iJ µia taic; tplooa" (quoting line I of the fragment)

CALLIMACHUS: FOR TIIE MANY OR "TIIE HAPPY FEW"?

249

there, in the arrangement itself and in the Latin notes accompanying it. lbey had become clearer and stronger and more exciting to contemplate thanks not only to the appearance of substantial new fragments since Pfeiffer but also to the ingenuity applied to their placement and elucidation by the editors of SupplementumHellenisticumand by others writing in their wake. Callimachus' fragments were no longer scattered about in ruins. They lay now in patterns suggesting the outlines of the poetic books to which they had once belonged. How long were they to remain like that - pieces of them in Pfeiffer, others in SupplementumHellenisticum,still others elsewhere - even though the way these pieces fit together was now clearer than it had been since the books themselves had vanished? If scholarship had done this much, Callimachus might be ready for a new appearance on the larger stage, the stage he had known when he was whole. Whether the Twenty-first Century was ready for him or not, I couldn't say. But the impression that he was as ready as he was likely to be any time soon was challenge enough to translate him. Another rendering of the extant works might do no harm, but it was not likely, by itself, to reflect the progress made. For that, as full a rendering as possible of the fragmentary works had to be attempted. And for that, again, scholarship was absolutely indispensable. When it came to rendering the fragments of Callimachus - the remains of his greatest works - no scholarship meant no translation, either. 4. The parting of the ways But translation and scholarship do not always go together. At times they must part company. 'Thetranslation of an ancient poem cannot embody everything that has been said about it, even everything most scholars would agree on. There is a sense in which it passes judgment, negative as well as positive. Though this may appear,at first, strictly a matter for translators (and no one else) to be concerned about, I believe that it has deeper implications. To take but one example, Kerkhecker in his commentary on the first Iambus considers the question whether its opening line, spoken by a resurrected Hipponax, is something the authentic Hipponax had once said or something invented and put in his mouth by Callimachus. The question cannot be answered without taking into account a number of related issues. Was Callimachus in the habit of quoting other poets? Is there anything in the line itself, a telltale choice of words, a linguistic clue of some kind, that would make it anachronistic on the real Hipponax 'slips? If not, should the line, perhaps with a question mark after it, be assigned to Hipponax in future editions of the iambic poets? Has

250

FRANK NlSETICH

Callimachus, so fragmentary himself, contributed in this way to augment the pitiful remains of his predecessor? In the end, Kerkhecker offers a more modest conclusion, the stronger likelihood that the line "is not original Hipponax, but Hipponactean pastiche" (Kerkhecker 1999: 30). Most of these considerations go some way toward establishing the feel and tone of Callimachus in Greek. Whether we agree with the conclusion or not, our sensitivity to Callimachus' style in the Iambi has gained from exposure to the discussion. Commentators on ancient texts, of course, do other things, but this is one for which translators should be especially grateful even if, much of the time, they can make no use of it. No direct use, that is, for it is not the sort of thing that can be translated. The most a translator can achieve is to give, here and elsewhere, the impression of a poet who delights in pastiche and similar literary amusements. The pastiche itself must be foregone. The consequences for translation do not appear to be all that dire, unless the "Hipponactean pastiche" is the most important thing happening at this particular moment in Callimachus' poem. If sensitivity to it is the sine qua non of appreciation, if hearing it is the decisive factor and not to hear it is to be deaf to what Callimachus most wants us to hear, then we could not dismiss it so easily as another of those things that are regrettably 'lost in translation'. We would be back, in other words, at the point we started from: the scholar of Greek may penetrate to the center, the reader of the poem in translation must stop at the periphery. But there are reasons for taking exactly the opposite view. It is the echo of Hipponax - even if only the privileged can hear it - that sounds at the periphery; the utterance itself, what Callimachus actually says in the guise of Hipponax, comes from the center. However deftly created, the echo remains, after all, an effect. There are times, of course, when effects and essentials coincide. It may well be that in Callimachus such coincidences occur more frequently than they do in other Greek poets. I am not certain they are more noticeable in him than in Pindar, whom I have also translated (Nisetich 1980). In either case, I despaired of preserving them, but in neither was I left with nothing to do: the effect sacrificed, there was always something left over - call it the content, if not the essence; no longer buttressed or even carried by the effect, but still there, and still capable of being rendered. The reader of Iambus I in translation, no doubt, must put up with certain losses, but they are far from total. They need not include the excitement of the situation, the complex, satirical, combative tone, or anything else that remains appealing to Greekless readers today - as to ancient readers, who may also have missed that possible Hipponactean resonance in the opening line.

CAWMACHUS:

FOR 1liE MANY OR "TiiE HAPPY FEW"?

251

Even when stripped, then, of effects that can be achieved only in Greek, enough of Callimachus is left to engage us, not only at the level of content but also at the level of form - that is to say, as poetry. The conclusion is simple, even obvious; and yet it needs to be stated. Not everything can survive the transition from one language to another, but a poet who had everything to say in his own tongue and nothing (or nothing important) to say in translation would be a strange creature indeed, imaginable as the hero of a book that has yet to be written, a book entitled, perhaps, The Comp/eat Aesthete. Callimachus has never been quite reduced to that, but he has come closer to it than most.

S. Narrative and drama

To put the aestheticism of Callimachus, and all it involves, in perspective; to see it, even at its strongest, in relation to the rest of his poetry, not always or only as the most important thing about it, would have, I believe, a liberating effect. This is not to deny that he was keenly conscious of poetic technique, or clever, or prone to perfectionism, or, at times, difficult. He was all those things, sometimes maddeningly so. The point is that he was much else besides, and it is here that translation, while it is not, as Wilamowitz said, scholarship itself, has a scholarly or at least a critical role to play. Translation, of necessity, distinguishes between what is bound to the original and what can escape it. In a situation where complexities have absorbed most of the interest and the basics have as a result tended to be neglected or even forgotten, distinguishing between what is translatable and what is not may have a salutary function. It may remind us of the more important distinction between what is essential and what is not. A word or two about the narrative ingredient in poetry may illustrate the point. First, there is nothing untranslatable about a story. A translator, for this if for no other reason, would find it strange to consider the skill with which a story is told in a narrative poem unessential; he would be even less inclined to take other features of the poet's art, features appreciable only in the original language or only to an expert, for the only ones that count. In so doing, he may show less subtlety than a critic, but not less judgment. The delight all readers get from a story well told can hardly be a trivial matter either to a poet about to tell a story or to a translator about to translate one. Whatever else a narrative poet may consider important, he would have to be muve not to know

252

FRANK NISETICH

that, once his story flags, everything - all his precious special effects will be in danger of falling by the wayside too. The same can be said of that other quality described a while ago as one possessed by Callimachus, though not, apparently, in sufficient degree to have secured him a wider readership. The capacity for drama, for enlivening a story with scenes that show characters in conflict with one another or with the world in which they find themselves has to rank high on a list of any poet's credits. No less than is the case with narrative, drama poses no inherent obstacles to translation. It is totally capable of transposition from one linguistic medium to another. It can, of course, be dissipated through a translator's ineptitude, but that is another matter. And yet, whenever Callimachus' narrative and dramatic skills are discussed, the emphasis almost always falls on the way he makes use of his •sources'. A gap has opened up between what interests scholars in Callimachus and what a translator can translate. The reason for this lies well beyond the confines of the present essay, but it may be helpful to recall that things were not always so. There was a time when people looked to Callimachus with very different expectations. The thirty-three-year-old Milton, when he was considering what direction he should take as a poet, thought of 'odes and hymns' as possible choices. 'Odes', of course, meant Pindar; 'hymns' brought Callimachus to mind. Pindar and Callimachus: it is harder, today, to utter the names of these two in one breath. The use of the earlier by the later is often enough the subject of scholarly discussion 3, but who today thinks of them side by side as sources of inspiration? The sublimity of Pindar, presumably, would have drawn Milton to him; what would he have found attractive in Callimachus? His playfulness? His formal virtuosity? Neither of these is indicated in the adjective Milton applied to his potential ancient models here. He referred to Pindar and Callimachus together as authors of 'magnific' odes and hymns 4 • Milton in the Seventeenth Century evidently did not yet feel the allure of 'Alexandrianism' when he read his Callimachus: 'magnific' hardly 3. E.g. Smiley (1919); Bing (1988: 97-110); Fuhrer (1993). 4. The Reason of Church Government,Preface to The Second Book (1642). The most elaborate of Milton 's allusions to Callimachus appears in Mansus (Poemata 1645), 35-48. Here he identifies Callimachus' Hyperboreans (Hymn to Delos 291-294) with the ancient British, claiming "nos munera Phoebo ... misimus" and even going so far as to describe Callimachus' Hyperborean maiden as "Corineida Loxo", after Corineus, a British hero; he finishes with the picturesque detail that the original maidens appeared on Delos with their naked breasts dyed "Caledonio ... fuco." Milton evidently aspired to write in a manner worthy of Callimachus. That he went on to do so in a heroic poem is too largea topic to explore here. I owe my recollection of Milton's interest in Callimachus to the reminder in Clausen (1987: Preface).

CAWMACHUS: FOR TIIE MANY OR "TIIE HAPPY FEW"?

253

consorts with that. He was not yet susceptible to the channs of Hellenistic literature as they would be described later by Wolf, who listed them in contrast to the hallmarks of the classical age: ... in place of genius rich in its own resources appeared timid imitation, which undertoookonly modest tasks; in place of a very elevated spirit of poetry and eloquence appeared sober andsometimes chill erudition, reading spread over all areas of learning; in place of original ideas appeared thoroughness, care, and a certain polish of arrangement and poetic diction; in place, finally, of the magnificent native bloom of all the arts appeared garlands composed of the blossoms from everywhere (Wolf 1985: 167).

A possible response to this would be that we have grown to appreciate the qualities disdained by Wolf. They are not so bad; in fact, there is a lot to be said in their favor. I would suggest a different answer. Not that the qualities themselves are unobjectionable, or that there is much to relish in them. Not that Callimachus likes to imitate, but isn't "timid" in his imitations. Not that, in undertaking "modest tasks", he claims, convincingly, the sanction of Apollo. Not that his "erudition" never chills. No: the objection I would make is to the exclusions that Wolf insisted on. None of the features in his list has to be incompatible with "genius rich in its own resources". None of them, to judge from Milton' s witness alone, necessarily stifles an "elevated spirit of poetry and eloquence". But, all this aside, we still must ask: where are we to find Callimachus' "genius"? Where does he exhibit an "elevated spirit of poetry and eloquence"? One place to look is the fifth Hymn, described by Sir Hugh LloydJones as "a profound meditation on the unalterable sadness of the human condition" (1990: 245). What could produce such an impression? The spell of the elegiac couplets has something to do with it, but won't suffice by itself. It surely doesn't derive from the erudition on display, the arcane references to Argive ritual and other matters that clutter the commentaries but manage, somehow, not to clutter the poem. There is something unsettling in the appearance, near the beginning, of the mighty Athena as the loser in a beauty contest. Did Callimachus have to bring that up? Such questions besiege the afterthoughts of scholars and translators conning the text millennia later; they must have flitted across the minds of the original audience too. But whatever relation they might have to the overall impact of the hymn, they do not dissipate the atmosphere, the predominant feeling evoked in it, of mystery and tragedy, the same that often arises in the best Greek poetry, when the divide yawns between us and the gods. Nowhere in Greek literature is the power of Athena more in evidence than it is here and yet, in this hymn, she never hurls a

254

FRANK NISETICH

lightning bolt, never shakes her aegis, never darts from heaven to earth. We might well ask, again, how? How does Callimachus achieve all this? The short answer is, through his ability to tell a story dramatically. One has to wonder, was this the only time he displayed it? 5 How curious, that he should display it only once! Too curious not to rouse suspicion. In fact, when we think of it, this is not the only place where narrative and dramatic power are in evidence. In the Hymn to Delos geography itself comes to life as it had not since Hesiod and Homer described the world thrown into tumult by conflict among the gods. Hera's outburst at Leto (240-243), full of jealousy and frustration, caps the long persecution of her rival (55-239); and yet, when it is spent, the rage of the goddess begins to soften in favor of Asterie, the nymph and island soon to be called Delos, who had once escaped Zeus' embrace (36-38) and so could be pardoned now for harboring a goddess who had not (244-248). The tale is told with a consummate sense of timing, eliciting a whole range of emotional effects, from wonder to amusement to suspense to celebration - and not a phrase, not a nuance in the progress of the story itself leaves a translator in the lurch 6• The scale of the drama can be miniature as well as vast. Someone approaches a tomb, reads the inscription, and recognizes the name of the deceased. All this transpires before the poem itself (Epigram 13 Pf.) has even started! The opening words are l'H p' imo croi Xapioa~ dvanai>Etm; Why does he ask? What is it about the name carved in the stone that moves him to seek further confirmation? Charidas himself answers from the grave, engaging in a brief dialogue with the inquisitive passer-by. We get so vivid an impression of the dead man by the end that we understand the living man's bewilderment in the beginning: to judge from the epigram, Charidas was so lively a character in life that anyone who had known him, passing his grave, would not believe that he was really dead. Even these few examples show the range of Callimachus' dramatic ability. He does not seem to have deployed it elsewhere with the tragic intensity we find in the fifth Hymn, but this may well be an impression created by the loss of most of his greatest work. We know only the barest outline, for example, of the story of Antigone's grief for her dead brothers, told in Aitia IV (105 Pf.). Here was a place where the tragic element might have been prominent. It was at least a place for pathos, of a kind most likely very different from that on display in the Hekale. Another 5. "Satyric dramas, tragedies, comedies" appearin the list of works attributed to him in Suidas, Testimonium 1 (Pf. II: xcv, 12). See also Epigram 59 Pf. 6. According to Bing (1988: 125), appreciation of the story depends on our "noticing deviations [sc. from earlier tellings] in the specifics of narrative."

CALLIMACHUS: FOR TIIE MANY OR "TIIE HAPPY FEW"?

255

opportunity was surely at hand in the poem Callimachus wrote commemorating the death and deification of Arsinoe (228 Pf.). The combination of the spectacular and the pathetic that is so memorable in the Hymn to Delos does not seem to have been unique there; here, in the Arsinoe poem, it may have had a tragic dimension as well. The image of Egypt drapedin black in the last of the surviving fragments suggests as much. But it was not my intention to preach to the converted. The point is not that Callimachus was a great poet: none of us, 'the happy few' who can read him in Greek, would argue with that. The point is that a good part of his greatness can survive in translation; even more important, for scholarship, is what this translatability implies about him. His complexity, his allusiveness, his sophistication, his learning were not, after all, the only things that made him great, even if they made him 'Callimachean'. The truly distinctive character of his achievement is that all these features, though they require assessment, description, and explanation, need not get in the way of others that do not. It is these others, appealing immediately to anyone susceptible to the charms of poetry, that will secure him an audience now, as they did then. REFERENCES Bing, P., 1988, The Well-Read Muse. Present and Past in Callimachus and the Hellenistic Poets. Gottingen. Cameron, A., 1995, Callimachus and his Critics. Princeton. Clausen, W., 1987, Virgil's Aeneid and the Tradition of Hellenistic Poetry. Berkeley. Fuhrer, T., 1993, "Callimachus' Epinician Poems". In: M.A. Harder et al. (eds.). Callimachus (Hellenistica Groningana I). Groningen, 79-97. Kerkhecker, A., 1999, Callimachus' Book of Iambi. Oxford. Lefkowitz, M., 2001, "Myth and History in the Biography of Apollonius Rhodius". In: T. Papanghelis and A. Rengakos (eds.). A Companion to Apollonius Rhodius. Leiden, 51-71. Lloyd-Jones, H., 1990, "A Hellenistic Miscellany". In: Greek Comedy, Hellenistic Literature, Greek Religion, and Miscellanea. The Academic Papers of Sir Hugh Lloyd-Jones. Oxford, 231-249 (= SJFC 77, 1984, 52-71). Lloyd-Jones, H., - Parsons, P. (eds.), 1983, Supplementum Hellenisticum. Berlin. Nisetich, F., 1980, Pindar's Victory Songs. Baltimore. -, 2001, The Poems of Callimachus. Oxford. Smiley, M., 1919, "Callimachus' Debt to Pindar and Others". Hermathena 18, 46-72. Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, U. von, 1982, History of Classical Scholarship. Baltimore. Originally published as: "Geschichte der Philologie". In: A. Gercke and E. Norden (eds.). Einleitung in die Altertumswissenschaft. 2nd ed. Leipzig/Berlin 1921. Wolf, F., 1985. Prolegomena to Homer. Princeton. Originally published as: Prolegomena ad Homerum. Halle 1795.

A PARADE OF LEARNING: CALLIMACHUS' HYMN TO ARTEMIS (LINES 170-268)1

Mirjam Plantinga

1. Introduction

Callimachus' third Hymn to the goddess Artemis contains many memorable scenes. The opening vignette, for example, in which little Artemis sits on her daddy Zeus' knees has attracted particular attention and praise from scholars2• The final part of the hymn (170-268), however, has not been so fortunate: after the strong narrative and visual feasts of the first 169 lines, the remainder of the hymn seems at first sight somewhat of a disappointment. It has usually been regarded as just an appendix to the rest of the hymn 3• In this article I shall focus on this final part of the Hymn to Artemis, analyse its structure and literary devices, and consider whether there are any relationships among the various parts of the hymn. I shall also have a closer look at the scholarship reflected in these lines, in which we find a dazzling display of knowledge; but is it a mere 'parade of learning'? 4

1. I should like to thank Dr Malcolm Campbell, Professor Tony Woodman, and the participants of the Workshop for their comments. 2. Herter (1975: 379-393); Bulloch (1984: 216-218). 3. Those who praise the final part of the hymn do not include a detailed discussion of this section of the hymn. See, for example, Hutchinson (1988: 70) or Bulloch (1985a: 568) who characterises the final part as an "elegant virtuoso listing of Artemis' cult centres and followers". Most scholars, however, have been negative in their assessment. McKay (1963: 143-156) only discusses the first 182 lines in his article on "Mischief in Kallimachos' Hymn to Artemis" and considers 183-268 "a possibly unfortunate addition" (1963: 144). Herter (1975) similarly devotes just two pages out of 45 to the final 100 lines. Haslam (1993: 114) states that "the Artemis hymn continues to slip and slide; it progressively disintegrates, as the clear structural framework with which it started fades totally from view." In response Bing & Uhrmeister recently addressed the key issue of the unity of the hymn in an article discussing the treatment of Artemis in the entire hymn (1994: 19-34). They suggest the unifying concept of a maturing goddess. More attention is paid by them to the last part of the hymn, although the emphasis is still on the first 169 lines. There have not been any articles which focus on the entire final part of the hymn; Bing (1984); Talamo (1984); Brioso Slinchez (1987) all concentrate on a single scene. 4. Herter's opinion is typical (1975: 416): "aber der Alexandriner konnte nicht darauf verzichten, seine Gelehrsamkeit noch etwas mehr zu zeigen, als er bisher Gelegenheit gehabt hatte."

258

MIRJAM PLANTINGA

My discussion falls into four parts: I shall begin with an analysis of the jealousy-competitiveness theme, then study the portrayal of the singer, the display of learning, and finally the sbllcture of the final part of the hymn. 2. The jealousy-competitiveness theme The important theme of jealousy-competitiveness is established early on in the hymn. In line 7 Artemis asks Zeus to give her 'many names that Phoebus not contend with me' (7: Kai 1tOA.OO)voµi11v, tva µft µ01 5 Cl>oiPoc;epil;;n) • Artemis asks her father to give her the honours and powers that she deserves but immediately links her aretai with those of her brother and asks Zeus to enable her to rival her brother. It is easy to see why Callimachus would have wanted to use this theme of sibling rivalry. Even though both are major gods, Apollo had always attracted more attention than his twin Artemis 6 • Many stories were associated with Apollo: in hHom. 3.19; 207 the singer asks typically mi>c;t' lip' cr' oµvftcrro navtroc; euuµvov e6vta ('How am I going to hymn you, you who are altogether well provided for when it comes to hymns?') 7• We see this reflected in the amount of literature devoted to both gods: there is a major Homeric Hymn to Apollo but only two minor ones to Artemis; in one of these hymns she does not even receive her own salutation at the end of the hymn but has to share it with her brother8. But it is in fact this paucity of mythological material which made her a very attractive subject for an Alexandrian poet; hymning Artemis presented Callimachus with an interesting challenge and a chance to rival other poets. In addition, the hymnic form, with its emphasis on the inclusion of details of local cults, of cult titles, and of aetiological nature offered him the opportunity to include much recondite and local mythological material. Both the 5. Translations used: Fowler, 8.H. 1990. Hellenistic Poetry: An Anthology. Wisconsin. For the Homeric Hymns: H. Evelyn-White. 1936. Hesiod, Homeric Hymns, Epic

Cycle, Homerica. Harvard. 6. See also Haslam (1993: 115; 117). Until the third century BC Artemis as a child was usually only included as an afterthought to Apollo's adventures. See Beaumont (1998: 80). 7. The same sentiment is also expressed in the Callimachean Hymn to Apollo: H. 2.30-31: ouo' 6 xop~ tOV Cl>oij3ovtq,' !iv µ6vov ~µap d&iTJ;o(i n; t6aov 6aaov 'A1t6>..A.C.Ov ('there is none so endowed with skill as Apollo'). Cf. also H. 4.4: e(iuµVO\. 8. hHom. 27.21: Xaipne, t&Kva Ato; Kai ATJtoii; i'juK6µoto ('Hail to you, children of Zeus and riched-haired Leto!'). In hHom. 9.1 Artemis shares the salutation with all other goddesses: Kai vot'>A.ll~CO ticrifloA.ov 'A1t6Ucova / oµvtcov dpyup6to~ov: 'I will never cease to praise Apollo, god of the silver bow'); H. 2.30. 10. The first 169 lines conlain only seven scenes. In the final part of the hymn the pace is increased by the fact that there are only a few extended scenes; the many names mentioned are meant to evoke their own story to the reader. 11. Both are slayers of wild beasts (for Apollo see: hHom. 3.300-374; H. 2.35; 100101) and receive the epithet 'far-shooting': hHom. 9.1 (Apollo) 'Eicato10 - 9.6 (Artemis) ticatriflowv. See on this also Kohnken (this volume: 162-163). In a hymn gold is the chosen metal to emphasise the divinity of the god(dess) (e.g. H. 2.32-34 - H. 3.110-112). But instead of her usual golden shafts and bow (hHom. 5.16; 118: XPUspaiTJ. Callimachus avoids using obvious epithets such as loxtmpa (e.g. hHom. 27.2; hHom. 3.15; 159; 199) or 1t6tVla 8TJpo>V (//. 21.470). For Apollo's epithets in H. 2 see 3; 11; 19; 35; 47; 69; 70; 71; 80. For a discussion of epithets in Callimachus' Hymns see also Henrichs (1993: 128). 31. 373: Il68loc;; 386: Ts)..cpou tf: icai •Aptsµtv lo)'.&alpav). On the etymological play on Apollo's name see Hunter/Fuhrer (2002: 163). 34. The Artemis Hymn mirrors and rivals all the major models. Cf. hHom. 3.19-20; 143; H. 2.20: mivtn; 22: niiaal; 34: noAuxpuaoc;: 35: 1toA.uicttavoc;;70: 1tcivtTJ6t tOl o(lvoµa 7t0\JA.u;80: 7t0A.UA.A.ltf:. H. 4.266: cl,µsyciA.TJ ltOA.ujxoµs7tOA.U7ttOA.l 7tOA.A.a cp&poooa.On the 1tavt-motif in hHom. 3 see Sowa (1984: 185).

264

MIRJAM PLAN11NGA

between Apollo and the nymph Cyrene since the foundingof the eponymous city dominated the Hymn to Apollo (65-96, esp. 90-95). A more indirect reference to Apollo is made in the first scene of this final part of the hymn ( 170182). References to nymphs surrounding Artemis are found in Homer, the HomericHymns,and ApolloniusRhodius35, but the mention of the choruses dancing and circling round Artemis would also remind the reader of similar scenes in hymns to Apollo36• Again the goddess rivals her brother. Toe fact that we are meant to recall Apollo's association with nymphs is made more explicit at the end of the scene when the speaker says that the gcxl Helios gazed for such a long time at the dancing girls that he forgot all his obligations as the gcxl of the Sun ( 180-182). Apollo was often identified with Helios and we are meant to make this identificationhere37• Toe singer's praise of Artemis' temple in Ephesus forms an apt climax to the theme of jealousy and competitiveness.Here we find the combinationof several types of rivahy. The most direct example is found in line 250 where the narrator boasts that Artemis' temple could easily surpass Apollo's famous temple in Delphi (250: pt.aKEVIlu8rova xapt.l8o1) 38• The rivalry theme is strengthenedthroughthe allusions to descriptions of Delphi in the Homeric and Callimachean Apollo hymns (cf. H. 2.35: Kai 6e JtOAl>ICtt.av~· Ilu8rovi KEtEKµiJpmo; H. 3.248 ~ hHom. 3.295). Apollo is again seen in his role of the God of the Sun when the speaker says that 'dawn will never look upon a gcxllieror richer one [= Artemis' temple in Ephesus]' (249-250: tou 6' oirtE 8ECotEpov5'1'Etm ftroc; / oM' dcpvE1otEpov).A more subtle fonn of rivahy can also be found here: in Callimachus' fourth Hymn the Greeks attribute their victory over the barbaric Gaulsto Apollo in Delphi (171-185); here, Artemis defeats the equally barbaric Cimmerians and defends personally her temple at Ephesus (251-258) 39• In the Homeric Hymn to Artemis 27.13-20Artemis goes to her brother's house to arrange the dances of the Muses and Graces. In Callimachus' hymn, Artemis has her own temple and Amazons who dance to honour her'1°. 35. Od. 6.101-109; hllom. 5.117-21; A.R. 3.876-884. 36. E.g. H. 2. 8; 28. On Apollo's close associations with nymphs sec Larson (2001: 96) who argues that in mythology and cult nymphs were previously much more associated with Apollo than Artemis. 37. Burkert (1985: 149). The singer plays with the identification of the god by delaying Helios' name until line 181. We would have expected either Apollo (H. 2.90-95) or Hermes to look on(//. 16.179-185). 38. See also Bing & Uhrmeister (1994: 31). 39. Artemis defeats an equal number of soldiers. The great number of the barbarians involved is compared by means of a very similar nature simile: H. 3.253 (sand) - H. 4.175-176 (snowflakes). 40. The dancing of the Amazons around the statue of Artemis (233-250) is an allusion to H. 2.71-96 where the Cyreneans are seen to dance in honour of Apollo.

A PARADE OF LEARNING

265

3. The singer Line 186 {El1tt, 8Eit, cmµtv liµµtv, tyro 6' fttpounv O.Eiaco:'Tell me, Goddess, and I shall sing to others') has attracted the attention of scholars, and many state that it is intriguing that Artemis is addressed here instead of the Muses41• Addresses to the Muses are common in epic and are found in about a third of the Homeric Hymns42• The direct address to Artemis in 186 emphasises above all the intimate relationship between the singer and the goddess. This accords well with the traditional reciprocal relationship between the singer and the god(dess) in a hymn and the frequent use of apostrophes by the narrator seems to be designed to stress further the special relationship the poet enjoys with the goddess ( 186)43 • But this close connection can perhaps also be seen as yet another expression of the rivalry theme. In his capacity as the god of prophecy and song Apollo is expected to have such a relationship with his own singers, and thus a similar relationship is emphasised in this Hymn to Artemis44.The sentence marks the singer's important part in ensuring the memory of the Artemis' deeds. The prominent position of the singer was already emphasised in the parenthesis in the very first line of the hymn (I: oo yap tA.aq,pov de106v::reqcn MI8ta6at)45 • The ideas in these two lines are closely linked together: for a poet not forgetting a goddess involves singing to others about her. The concept is well known, but we should perhaps think here especially of the Homeric Hymn to Apollo in which lines very similar to those here are found at the beginning and end of the 'Delian' section46 • Hymns are characterised by the fact that there is communication between the singer and the god and between the singer and his audience; but in this hymn, in marked contrast to the close relationship between the singer and the goddess, there is a distance between the singer and his 41. E.g. Bornmann (1968: ad 186); Hutchinson (1988: 69); Depew (this volume:

132). 42. Cf. H. 4.82-83. In the Homeric Hymns we commonly find these Muse invocations at the very beginning of the poems. Cf. hllom. 4.1; 5.1; 9.1; 14.1-2; 17.1; 19.1; 20.1; 31.1-2; 32.1-2; 33.1. 43. Race (1982: 8); Depew (this volume: 119). 44. See, for example, H. 2.28-29; 43-44. On the privileged relation between singer and Apollo see also Sowa (1984: 185); Calame (1993: 44). 45. On the constant presence of the poet see also Harder (1992: 392). 'An6llcov~ ticatoto ('I will remember 46. hllom. 3.1: Mvi)croµat oo6t A.ciQwL4a\ and not be unmindful of Apollo who shoots afar'); hllom. 3.174-176: ftµEic; er' oµtt&pov dt~ otcroµ&v, oocrov tn' alav / dv9pcil7t..fooolV; 204-5: Kai 6t crt K&iVT)i:; Ka>..to\)(J\vtncovuµillv cino vilµcpt1i:;. 57. Sec Harder (1992: 394).

A PARADEOF 1..EARNING

269

but, as was shown above, its reference to Delos is also part of the rivalry theme58.These are only a few of the means by which the narrator can display his learning. In this section I shall discuss more types of learning used by the singer and explore each time whether there is perhaps a specific reason behind his choice. In a passage so rich in allusions this will be by no means an exhaustive list. In line 188 the singer names Taygetus as Artemis' favourite mountain. This is a highly appropriate choice and the reader is expected to make more than one association when the name is mentioned. The Spartan mountain range was named after the nymph Taygete who was under the special protection of the goddess Artemis. Taygete was a nymph of Atlas; when she was seduced by Zeus, she was granted help by Artemis who changed her into a doe. A reference to a mountain range named after a nymph is apt in a passage where the narrator has just described the dancing of anonymous nymphs and then proceeds to give a list of Artemis' favourite nymphs and heroines. Sparta was also a favourite hunting ground of the goddess; hunting is of course one of the key aspects of this goddess and most of her female followers mentioned are also accomplished hunters 59 • Moreover, the singer refers to this specific mountain in order to echo the passage in the Odyssey in which Nausicaa is compared to Artemis surrounded by nymphs on this mountain 60 • The allusion to the Odyssean passage, in which the goddess is said to outshine all nymphs, helps the reader to focus again on the beauty of Artemis. The fact that the speaker has just dwelt upon the beauty of the goddess and her nymphs (170; 181-182), and in the verses immediately following that scene alludes to a Homeric passage which also tells about Artemis' beauty, suggests that we are meant to 61 • A simple consider her appearance here as well (cf. 204: erom) short reference to a name can thus hide a wealth of material. When the singer names the huntress Atalanta as one of Artemis' favourites (215), he makes another interesting choice. It is immediately obvious that he omits to tell the better known parts of the myth and chooses to focus only on the early stages of Atalanta's life. By the addition of the epithet 'swift-footed' (215: no6oppmp11v) the speaker manages to refer obliquely to those elements of the myth he could not use in

58. On the lnopus' contemporary references see also Bing (1988: 136-137). 59. Cf. II. 5.51-52; hHom. 27.2-10; H. 2.60-61. 60. Od. 6.101-109 (esp. l 07-108). On this simile see also Larson (200 l : 107). See also hHom. 3.197-199. 61. For Apollo's youth and beauty see H. 2.36-37.

270

MIRJAMPLANTINGA

this context, that is the race with her suitors and her loss of the race in which the Golden Apples are used. In passing, the singer touches on mythological debate by naming the Arcadian Iasius, rather than the Boeotian Schoeneus or Menalus, as the father of Atalanta (216)62 • In this hymn the singer concentrates on Atlanta's capture of the Calydonian boar, but there is no mention of her special relationship with Meleager or of the resentment of Meleager's two maternal uncles about the honours awarded to Atlanta after her victory over the boar63• These elements would not have been appropriate in a hymn celebrating the accomplishments of a virgin goddess. The singer also corrects the Iliadic version in which Atalanta's important role in the Calydonian boar hunt was not mentioned (/I. 9.529-599). Here her role is restored and her fierce reputation, which she shares with Artemis, is expanded upon in lines 222225. Atalanta's killing of two centaurs who tried to rape her (222-224) can be compared with Artemis' slaughter of two giants who courted her (264-265). Several nymphs and heroines are mentioned by the singer, but not many details are given about them. As with Atalanta, the speaker each time mentions briefly the aspect they share with Artemis in order to explain why a particular nymph or heroine became special to the goddess64. Their stories and epithets thus reveal more about the nature of the goddess herself. The brevity of the references ensures that the main focus remains on Artemis (cf. 138). Her female followers do reintroduce a key theme which has so far not received much attention in the hymn, namely that of Artemis' dedication to virginity (e.g. 233236)65. Virginity was the first thing Artemis asked for from Zeus (6), and after her discussion with her father, her first act is to gather a group of young nymphs to accompany her (42-43; see also 110: Ilap0Eviri). Virginity, however, is not something she can acquire; rather, it is something she wishes to maintain (6: 66VTt; 38-39 - 259. 73. The noise made by both the Amazons (241-247) and by the Cyclopes (54-65) is another example. Cf. H. 4.136-137.

A PARADE OF LEARNING

273

who encircles the goddess with song. Unlike Hippo, the speaker has not neglected Artemis. It is easy to see, however, how some came to regard this part of the hymn as merely an appendix. After all, the first section starts with Artemis sitting on her father Zeus' lap and the scene immediately preceding this final section tells of Artemis• triumphant arrival at Olympus, the house of her father (168: t~ 1tatpo~ 66µov). The nymphs of Amnisus, chosen to serve her in lines 15-17, are seen to care for her deer (162-167). The Olympus episode clearly forms a climax within the hymn, but it does not complete it. A transition to the final part of the hymn is provided through the activities of the nymphs. They are first seen to fill the troughs with water on the meadows of Mount Olympus and are dancing round various springs on earth in the next scene 74 : after all their work there is time for their traditional leisure activity. For Artemis too the work is finished; no more journeys are undertaken by her to obtain her attributes. As said before, in the final part of the hymn Artemis receives what she asked for in her opening speech, and it is in this section that she receives the many names promised to her by Zeus (32-39). His promises concerning the great number of cities and islands are also fulfilled in the final part of the hymn. This does not mean to say that she becomes merely an object of cult after line 17075 • The final part of the hymn ( 170268) concentrates rather on the relationship between the goddess and her followers and falls into three further sections (170-224; 225-250; 251267): in lines 170-224 the emphasis is on the honour Artemis bestows on her followers, with the emphasis on the goddess's love and favour 76 ; in the final two sections the response from the followers is considered, with 225-250 concentrating on the honour she receives from those who worship her and 251-267 focusing on the consequences of slighting her. Honour and dishonour are the key themes. The increased use of negatives in this final section to describe the actions of both humans and goddess clearly illustrates the essential reciprocity of their relationship (260267). 'Anµ11crn (260) and dnµiJcravn (261) underline the strong moral tone of this final paragraph n. The repetition of xaip&, encircling the final ten lines of the hymn (259; 268), signals the formal end of the hymn. Both connotations of the verb are important: the singer bids the goddess farewell but, at the same time, 74. For a different interpretation of the connection see Bing & Uhnneister (1994: 31). 75. er. Mineur (1984: 126, n. 57); Bing & Uhnneister (1994: 33). 76. 183; 185; 187; 189; 211; 215. 77. See also Bulloch (1985b: 70).

274

MIRJAM PLANTINGA

hopes to have pleased her with his song 78 • In this hymn the second function of the conventional formula is even more in evidence because of the fact that the formulae surround material which details the punishments meted out by the goddess to those who have dared to oppose her (cf. 268: &OOvtT1crov).Before each specific example is given, the speaker states a general warning and thus cautions the reader of the hymn 79 • Even within the series of examples there is ring composition since the first and final warnings concern the dangers associated with the neglecting of the proper rites due to the goddess. A satisfying conclusion is thus reached and the hymn is complete. Yet again there cannot be a complete closure. As said, hymns traditionally refer to further songs to be sung, and the poet had already asked to sing about Artemis forever. Here, however, this topos reappears in a much more subtle way. In the final paragraph the singer refers to the fates of Oeneus (260-261), Agamemnon (263) and Hippo (266-267) 80 • All three slighted the goddess and paid dearly for it. In each case the reader is made to return to their stories within the hymn. The first case is the most oblique: the reader needs to know that Oeneus was the king of Calydon and that his slighting of Artemis led to her sending of the Calydonian boar. Oeneus' neglect of Artemis is the beginning of this myth and the reference to it here leads us back into the hymn, to the passage describing Atalanta's victory over the Calydonian boar (219-221). Agamemnon's boasting is similarly the beginning of the lphigeneia story and, because of the way in which the poet has told the myth in reverse order, we are led back into the hymn again. In 228-230 he is seen to sacrifice to Artemis and in 173-174 reference is made to her temple and rites in Attica. Hippo refuses to dance round Artemis' statue and this transgression also leads us again back into the hymn. There, in the description of the rites performed by Hippo and her fellow-Amazons, we see the queen performing the proper rites and the Amazons dancing a war-song round Artemis' statue (241-242: aiel ot 1CU1CAQ> / CTt'TICJCLµ&vm xopov &upuv)81• The dance and the song continue.

78. Race (1982: 8). Cf. line 136 in which the poet expresses the hope to be a q>iAo;

... dA.110iJ;. 79. On the cruelty of the goddess see also Burkert (1985: 151-152); Cole (1998: 28); Cropps (2000: 53). Cf. also 121-135. 80. Various scholars draw attention to the puzzling ending of the hymn: Bornmann (1968: 130); Talamo (1984: 201); Nisetich (2001: 213, n. ad 37). 81. Cf. H. 2.85-87. A similar structure is found in the hllom. 3 where celebrations honouring the god conclude both the 'Delian' and 'Pythian' sections of the hymn (140178; 474-544).

A PARADE OFLEARNING

275

6. Conclusion

A study of four topics confirms that Callimachus has written an extraordinarily rich poem. The final part of this hymn exemplifies all Callimachean style principles: wit, erudition, allusiveness, self-consciousness82. Analysis of the rivalry theme clearly underlines the strong connection between various parts of the poem. This finding is further confirmed when the role of the singer and the structure of the poem are considered. Analysing the latter demonstrates the importance of the literary device of ring composition. As we have seen, the inclusion of local nymphs and myths is used to serve a multiplicity of reasons within the poem. The final part of Callimachus' Hymn to Artemis indeed includes a parade of learning, but not one which merely boasts of scholarship for scholarship's sake. This Hymn to Artemis is a hymn worthy of Artemis (cf. 104: li~t.ov) and a worthy rival to any hymn to Apollo.

BIBLIOGRAPHY Beaumont, L., 1998, "Born old or never young? Femininity, childhood and the goddesses of ancient Greece". In: S. Blundell and M. Williamson (eds). The Sacred and the Feminine in Ancient Greece. London and New York, 71-95. Bing, P., 1984, "Callimachus' cows: a riddling recusatio". ZPE 54, 1-8. -, 1988, The Well-Read Muse: Present and Past in Callimachus and the Hellenistic Poets (Hypomnemata 90). Gottingen. Bing, P.-Uhrmeister, V., 1994, "The Unity of Callimachus' Hymn to Artemis". JHS 114, 19-34. Bornmann, F., 1968, Ca/limachi Hymnus in Dianam. Firenze. Bremer, J.M., 1981, "Greek Hymns". In: H.S. Versnel (ed.). Faith, Hope and Worship: Aspects of Religious Mentality in the Ancient World. Leiden, 193-215. Brioso Sanchez, M., 1987, "Un Supuesta enigma en Calimaco, Himno m 170182". Ha/is 17, 63-71. Bulloch, A.W., 1984, "The future of a Hellenistic illusion: some observations on Callimachus and religion". MH 41, 209-230. -, 1985a, "Hellenistic Poetry". In: The Cambridge History of Classical Literature I. Cambridge, 541-621. -, 1985b, Ca/limachus: the Fifth Hymn. Cambridge. Burkert, W., 1985, Greek Religion. Oxford. Cairns, F., 1986, "The Milanion/Atalanta exemplum in Propertius, 1.1: videre /eras (12) and Greek models". In: Hommages a J. Veremans. Bruxelles, 29-38. 82. Hopkinson (1984b: 122).

276

MIRJAM PLANTINGA

Calame, C., 1993, "Legendary narration and poetic procedure in Callimachus' Hymn to Apollo". In: M.A. Harder, R.F. Regtuit, G.C. Wakker (eds). Hellenistica Groningana Volume/: Callimachus. Groningen, 37-55. Cameron, A., 1995, Callimachus and his Critics. Princeton. Clay, J.S., 1989, The Politics of Olympus: Form and Meaning in the Major Homeric Hymns. Princeton. Cole S.G., 1998, "Domesticating Artemis". In: S. Blundell and M. Williamson (eds). The Sacred and the Feminine in Ancient Greece. London and New York, 27-44. Cropps, M.J., 2000, Euripides' lphigeneia in Tauris. Warminster. Depew, M., 1993, "Mimesis and Aetiology in Callimachus' Hymns". In: M.A. Harder, R.F. Regtuit, G.C. Wakker (eds). Hellenistica Groningana Volume /: Callimachus. Groningen,57-78. Evelyn-White, H.G., 1936, Hesiod, Homeric Hymns, Epic Cycle, Homerica. Harvard. Ferguson, J., 1989, Among the Gods. London & New York. Fowler, B.H., 1990, Hellenistic Poetry: An Anthology. Wisconsin. Furley, W.D., 1993, "Types of Greek Hymns". Eos 81, 21-41. Furley, W.D.-Bremer, J.M., 2001, Greek Hymns. Tilbingen. Harder, M.A., 1988, "Callimachus and the Muses: some aspects of narrative technique in Aetia 1-2". Prometheus 14, 1-14. -, 1992, "Insubstantial voices: some observations on the Hymns of Callimachus". CQ 42, 384-394. Haslam, M.W., 1993, "Callimachus' Hymns". In: M.A. Harder, R.F. Regtuit, G.C. Wakker (eds). Hellenistica Groningana Volume /: Callimachus. Groningen, l ll-126. Henrichs, A., 1993, "Gods in action: the poetics of divine performance in the Hymns of Callimachus". In: M.A. Harder, R.F. Regtuit, G.C. Wakker (eds). Hellenistica Groningana Volume /: Callimachus. Groningen, 127148. Herter, H., 1975, "Kallimachos und Homer: Ein Beitrag zur Interpretation des Hymnos auf Artemis". Kleine Schriften. Munich, 371-416 = 1929, Xenia Bonnensia. Festschrift zum 75jiihrigen Bestehen des Philologischen Vereins und Bonner Kreises. Bonn, 50-105. Hopkinson, N., 1984a, Callimachus Hymn to Demeter. Cambridge. -, 1984b, A Hellenistic Anthology. Cambridge. Hunter, R.-Fuhrer, T., 2002, "Imaginary Gods? Poetic Theology in the Hymns of Callimachus". In: Entretiens sur l'Antiquite Classique Tome XLVI/I. Fondation Hardt, Vandrevres-Geneve, 143-187. Hutchinson, G.O., 1988, Hellenistic Poetry. Oxford. Keams, E., 1998, "The nature of heroines". In: S. Blundell and M. Williamson (eds). The Sacred and the Feminine in Ancient Greece. London and New York, 96-110. Larson, J., 1995, Greek Heroine Cults. Madison. -, 2001, Greek Nymphs: Myth, Cult and Lore. Oxford. Lyons, D., 1996, Gender and Immortality: Heroines in Ancient Greek Myth and Cult. Princeton. Mair, A.W.-Mair, G.R., 1955, Callimachus: Hymns and Epigrams, Lycophron, Aratus. Harvard.

A PARADE OF L.£ARNING

277

Miller, A.M., 1986, From Delos to Delphi: A Literary Study of the Homeric Hymn to Apollo. Leiden. Mineur, W.H., 1984, Callimachus: Hymn to Delos. Leiden. McKay,K.J., 1962, The Poet at Play: Kallimachos, the Bath of Pallas. Leiden. -. 1963, "Mischief in Callimachus' Hymn to Artemis". Mnemosyne 16, 243256. Nisetich, F., 2001, The Poems of Callimachus. Oxford. Pfeiffer, R., 1953, Callimachus, vol. II, Hymni et Epigrammata. Oxford. Race, W.H., 1982, "Aspects of rhetoric and fonn in Greek hymns". GRBS 23, 5-14. -. 1992, "How Greek poems begin". YCIS 29, 13-38. Richardson, N.J., 1974, The Homeric Hymn to Demeter. Oxford. -, 1993, The Iliad: A Commentary, Volume VI, books 21-4. Cambridge. Sowa, C.A., 1984, Traditional Themes and the Homeric Hymns. Princeton. Talamo, C., 1984, "Note Critiche e Filologiche sull' Artemision di Efeso". PP 39, 200-216. Williams, F., 1978, Callimachus Hymn to Apollo. Oxford.

THE HYMN TO DELOS AS A PARTIAL ALLEGORY OF CALLIMACHUS'POETRY S.R. Slings

1. Introduction Poetry about poetry has always been a focal point in the study of Callimachus. But over the last few decades we have seen a veritable explosion of this kind of analysis in most areas of Greek poetry as a whole. One has only to think of the enormous growth of metatragedy, and to a lesser extent, metacomedy, to realise that the 'poetry about poetry' approach is now the single greatest fashion in our trade. Before joining the club, which I intend to do in this paper, I would like to make some points about methodology and terminology. The major distinction in discussions like these should be the one between explicit and implicit poetical texts, passages, statements, or other textual elements. Let me first quote a passage that is as explicit as can be, fr. 1.21-24: Kai yap 6t& 7tpCOttcrtOV tµoiVQIC't0~ tA.ioo>pin 110), because of the rule that appositions to relative clauses that follow them take the case of the relative pronoun. 12. The spring is opposed to the dirty river of Assyria, but the sea is by nature, or so the Greeks thought, dµiavtoi; (cf. d1paavto i\ Kata cpcoVTIV i\ Kata crxi\µa µ1µ&icr8ai£attv £K&ivovcf,liv ttpacr1tlEia~.I 1C6pt1Cttltcroµm I a\Ei, civ-riyaµo I 1tapa 9tov -rou-roI Mxoo' l>voµa. I, the marker of Phrasikleia, will always be called 'maiden,' having received this name from the gods instead of a marriage. (CEG 24, dated c. 540? BCE)

The sentiment we would naturally expect here would be that Phrasikleia will always be called 'maiden'. But this is not quite what the epigram says: it says that the sema of Phrasikleia will always be called 'maiden'. The reason for this is plain: people will call the sema 'maiden' because it looks like one. But the sema goes on to take a feminine participle and make claims about its marital prospects as if it were the real Phrasikleia. If

306

MICHAFJ..A. TUELLER

one tries to resolve the ambiguity by re-reading, one realizes that it is not entirely clear whether the kore is speaking, insisting that she will be called sema, or the sema is speaking, insisting that it will be called kore. Since both are now motionless objects, perhaps, in the end, it does not matter; but, on the other hand, for the reader to conclude that 'it does not matter' to a large degree negates the apparent intent of the monument: to give the girl everlasting fame. This epigram has carefully subverted itself, and poetically put its finger on the irony in living forever through early death.

3. Callimachus'Innovation: The Case of the Bronze Maiden To sum up to this point, when Callimachus took stylus in hand to create a written literature, and knew he would have to confront the issue of the identity of the speaker, he had a long epigrammatic tradition to fall back on. These texts, too, had to deal with an unknown speaker, and had developed conventions for dealing with the problem. Of course, they had also used those conventions in ways - sometimes haphazard, sometimes clever - to make the problem even more acute. I would like now to look at a few Callimachean epigrams, and how they work with, and depart from, the tradition that preceded them. First, a hexameter epigram transmitted in the Palatine Anthology, as well as by Plato and others. Attributed to Homer, it is probably archaic:

:X,vcpaivn Aaµ1tpat£ cstAT}Vfl, Kai 1totaµoi 1tAT}8rom. 1t£ptKAt'.x;;TI 6t 8CLAacscsa, t1ti t6µfkt> autoii tf16t µtvoooa 1tOAUKAU(mp Cf11µavtro 1tap1oiim,Mi6ac; on tf16t tt8a1ttat. I am a maiden of brass, and sit on Midas· tomb. As long as water flows, and tall trees put fonh their leaves. and the rising sun shines - and the bright moon, and the rivers are full and the sea resounds all around, abiding here upon the tearful tomb, I will indicate to the passers-by that Midas is buried here. (Pfohl 24., AP 7.153; translation by Paton, modified)

It is not at all uncommon for sepulchral inscriptions to identify the speaker immediately with elµi. But here there is a compact irony: maidens, as we know, are living things, and bronze is not. A bronzemaiden, then, is not a real maiden, and certainly not one that can talk: but here it - or she - delivers six lines of poetry, and has a very clear message for the reader, contained in the last line.

VOICE AND IDEN1ITY AMBIGUITY

307

Svenbro notes that such first-person inscriptions have no 'psychological depth'. That is, as he says, the " ... use of the first person. . . should not run up against a metaphysical conviction on the part of the receivers of the message, namely the conviction that the first person necessarily implies an inner life and voice" 14• It~ true that this epigram, along with the majority of other archaic epigrams, does not force the reader to consider the personhood of the voice that speaks. Ho~ever, the reader may consider this issue anyway, depending on his or her disposition toward that sort of thinking: I just did so, pointing out that a brome thing cannot really be a maiden. Callimachus has a number of epigrams that respond to the issues raised by this one. I would like to cite three, which divide up the issues more or less neatly. The first two explore the identification of an object with the person or being it represents: that is, they ask the question, can a bronze thing really be called a parthenos? The third explores the 'psychological depth' of that 'person' - can a bronze parthenos really speak? What else can or can't it do? In the first example, voice is not nearly as important as identification of an object: tEO'O'apEc; a\ XapltEc;· 7tOtiyap µia taic; tplO'i KEivmc; liptt 7tOt£7tAll0'8tt, K1'tt µupOlO'lvotEi, Eoaicovtv 1tiimv dpi~111..oc; BEpEviKa, &c;iitEp oo~• aOtai tai XapltEc; XapltEc;. Four are the Graces: for beside those three another one has just been molded and is still wet with perfume. Happy Berenice and resplendent above all without whom not even the Graces themselves are Graces. (Callimachus, Epigram 15 Gow-Page= 51 Pfeiffer= AP 5.146. Translation by Mair, modified.)

Callimachus begins with an assertion: 'Four are the Graces'. The ancient reader, knowing that there are three Graces, assumes that Callimachus is about to make the case that some woman deserves to be added to their number. This argumentwill presumablybe made on the basis of her preternatural beauty, and that quality that we continue to call 'grace'. But these very reasonable expectations are violated in the next clause: 'for beside those three another one has just been molded.' With this sentence Callimachussuddenly shifts the object of the reader's considerationfrom the actual Graces to statues of Graces. This distinction, which caused only minor problems in the statement 'I am a bronze maiden', gains new prominence because Callimachus has reversed the usual directionalityof imitation.The simple statement of identity, 'this is the god/goddessX' was perfectly intelligibleto the 14. Svenbro (1993: 42).

308

MICHAFL A. TIJELLER

Greeks as meaning that an object was made in imitation of divine reality, but, as Callimachus startlingly demonstrates, it could also be taken to mean that divine reality is made in imitation of an object The second half of the second line has caused some problems: why is the statue still damp with perfume? Two explanations suggest themselves. First, it is wet from the process of its construction and finishing 15• That much seems certain, and is sufficient to explain the state of the statue. But the poem has not explicitly said that its subject is a statue. Taken at face value, it insists that it is dealing with a real person, and with real Graces. If that is the case, then a second possibility emerges: perhaps the statue/Grace still drips of perfume because it used to be Berenice herself. She, gracious as she is, naturally wears perfume, and it is certainly possible to speak of a statue as if it were simply a new version of the 'real thing' 16• In the third line of this epigram, the speaker finally gives us a name: Berenice. The statue is hers. Of course, true to the conceit of the epigram, brazenly equating reality and representation, it does not say 'statue'. It is Berenice who was created. The final line brings this identification to a head: without Berenice, the Gracesthemselves are not Graces.The basic idea is clear, but what is this line actually saying? The nominatives could be arranged in many ways. Pemaps the representative vs. identified issue is being brought into even higher relief; the line could almost read: 'besides the Graces(i.e. the statues) not being complete, also the Gracesthemselves are not complete without her', or even 'with the addition of Berenice's statue to the other statues, the statue-Graces have now become the Gracesthemselves.' The multiplicity of possible readings reinforces the ambiguity that has been this epigram's feature from the start. Callimachus made the same point, though with a different strategy, in the following epigram:

WHpcoc; 'Heticovoc;£1tipc:p, Ao~ov6q,1v,cai µouvov fxcov ~iq,oc;·dvtp1 o' \1tmii 0uµco0eic;1te~ov,cdµt 1tapaiOpou 1tatOicJ>1i..o!;eviOECO. Evaenetus, who set me up, says - for I know not that in return for a victory of his I am offered - a bronze cock - to the Tyndaridae: I believe the son of Phaedrus, son of Philoxenides. (Callimachus, Epigram 25 Gow-Page= 56 Pfeiffer= AP 6.149.

Translationby Mair.)

The key difference between the speaker here and the speaker in the 'bronze parthenos' epigram is, in fact, 'psychological depth'. This comes out right away, with the rooster's interjected comment "for my part, I don't know." The personality of the rooster is asserted just as strongly in the last line, where he states that he 'trusts' his dedicator. As we look more closely at this epigram, we realize that it is even more ironic than first supposed: after all, the rooster does not actually 17. i6puµat is somewhat ambiguous; it can be used of objects, though it is more often used of people. Also, the Planudcan Anthology reads tm crta8µov for tnicrta8µ~ in line one. This could be read 'upon a pillar,' interrupting the illusion. But tnicrta8µoc; is much more common than the collocation tni crta8µ6v, and seems more likely with the verb i6puµat. Furthermore, tni crta8µ6v, too, can have a more 'human' meaning, e.g. X. An. 4.1.19 dcpi1Covtotni crta8µ6v, 'they came to a way-station.'

310

MICHAELA. TUELLER

say that he is unable to speak; rather, he is unable to know the reason for his dedication. Bronze roosters do not have the capability for thought. Or do they? In the last line, Callimachus undercuts even this conclusion: the rooster does have the capability for thought, because it can trust 18• Callimachus' rooster is an innovation, but there were hints of 'psychological depth' in archaic epigrams. Consider the following:

liv8pm:t£hoCTt£lX,£[l]~ : Ka8' O~QIV : cppmrlv:ID.aµ£VO\VOV, : cn&81I Kai olKnpov : cr&µa8pacrovo~ : loov. 0 passerby on the road, having other intentions with your mind, stand and pity, while you look at the marker of Thraso. (CEG 28, dated c. 540-5307 BCE)

This epigram is one of many that give commands to the reader, here explicitly identified as a passerby. The command is the usual, to lament as one sees the grave of the deceased. What I would like to focus on is the phase q,pacriv IDJ..a µEvotvci>v.µEvoivaro is not a particularly common verb; it is generally defined as 'to desire eagerly'. On the face of it, then, this epigram is trying to attract the attention of a passerby whose mind (inevitably) is on other things. However, the collocation of this verb with the object ID.MI occurs three times in the Odyssey (2.92, 13.381, 18.283), each time describing Helen's promises to the suitors: she promised to marry one of them, but had 'other intentions'. More revealing is an almost exact parallel in the Homeric Hymn to Hermes. Hermes has just invented the lyre, and has sung a series of songs. Then the hymn continues:

Kai ta µtv oliv fJe16e,ta ot cppecrivID.MIµevoiva. \tpq> tvi A.\lCVQ) Kai tflV µtv Kat&8T1K£ q>EJ)(l)V 0£0~tK µeyapmo, bpµaivcov oolov abti>vtvi cppecrivola t£ cpcote~ q>T1AT1tai OlE7tOOO\ µ£MliVll~VUK'tO~ tv ropn. But while he was singing of all these, his heart was bent on other matlers. And he took the hollow lyre and laid it in his sacred cradle, and sprang from the sweetsmelling hall to a watch-place, pondering sheer trickery in his heart - deeds such as knavish folk pursue in the dark night-time; for he longed to taste flesh. (Homeric Hymn to Hermes 62-67. Translation by Evelyn-While.)

This passage constitutes the transition between two episodes in the hymn. After inventing the lyre and singing to it, Hermes now turns his mind to stealing Apollo's cattle. Again, as in the Odyssey passages, ID.MI µEvoivaro refers to a planned deception. If these passages represent the 18. Kohnken (1993: 129) also observes the interplay of these two words. Note also Meyer (1993: 167). who focuses on the possibilities of the rooster as its own reader.

VOICE AND IDEN1ITY AMBIGUITY

311

usual archaic understanding of this phrase, then CEG 28 is saying somewhat more than it appears to: it is accusing its readers of having deceptive purposes in mind. If the reference is specifically to the Hymn to Hermes, it is recognizing that its reader is caught in a choice between Hermes' two activities in the hymn - song and deception - and is perhaps openly advocating song over the more deceptive purpose, which is, perhaps, nothing more deceptive than pretending not to have seen the intruding inscription. CEG 28, then, seems strangely 'Hellenistic'. It refers to a Homeric text, but uses it in an unexpected way. What is more, knowledge of that Homeric text helps the reader complete the meaning of the epigram: a song, it seems, is in order. Also, the inscription appears to have some 'psychological depth': it knows a little about its reader, and is not afraid to use that knowledge to its own advantage. This epigram is not unusual in commanding pity for the deceased. But if that pity is going to take the form of a song, as the reference to the Homeric hymn implies, what song would be fitting? By the time the reader has discovered the answer, he has already complied with the epigram: the most appropriatepoetry for the occasion is the epigram itself, which he has read, deceived by an epigram with its own ulterior motives. The epigram has thus motivated and embodied the occasion of its own performance. This pattern, too, is a Hellenistic one. Many of Callimachus' 'mimetic' hymns innovate in embracing and describing the occasion of their own performance. For instance, the quintessential mimetic hymn, the Bath of Pallas, begins "All ye that are companions of the Bath of Pallas, come forth/ come forth!" (lines 1-2, translation by Mair). What makes this hymn so strongly 'mimetic' is its direct address and command to those who are supposed to enact the appropriate ceremony that is, exactly the same thing that the archaic epigram does. There are archaic epigrams that go even farther. Consider the following: [- - - tt]S alxµuo,

crlµa

Xcrev6tlee~. dvopo~ I [tmcr],a~:

,o crov 1tpomoov yv6[cre,]c;ittv[optav?J.

He who beholds your marker, Xenokles, the marker of a speannan, will stand and know your manliness. (CEG 19, dated c. 550--530? BCE)

This epigram is nothing but a description of its own reading - fully 'mimetic' in the sense that Callimachus' hymns are. Anyone reading this epigram would have the sensation of overhearing a conversation from the past that predicts his own behavior in the present - and predicts it accurately, for, by reading the overheard conversation, he has accomplished its aims. CEG 19 completely elides the expected inscription

312

MlCHAfl. A. 1VELlBt

itself: yet one of Callimachus' epigrams, number 40 Gow-Page (15 Pfeiffer, AP 7.522) is consideredquite innovative for eliminatingall but one word of the inscription, 'Timoooe', and replacing the rest with a reaction to an unvoiced reading19•

4. Callimachus' Innovation: The Case of the Corpse on the Shore

In the foregoing examples, I have by no means intended to deny some sort of innovation to Callirnachus. 1be point is that the fuel for Callimachus' innovation in indicating the written speaker can be derived from examples he found in the earliest written literature. I do want to show one example from Callimachus that goes much farther, where he allowed the ambiguity of the speaker to persist throughout the entire epigram, with very pointed results. (I have refrained from translating this epigram, in order to avoid glossing over the ambiguities of the original.)

- ti~ ;tvo~ J, vauriyt; - A&6vnx~ tv8ao& v&icpov ta.cpcp &6p&vt1t' alyla.AOU,xcoo&6& tcj>6& 6aicpoo~ t1tiicripovtov ~iov· ou6i: yap aot6~ fiO'\.lxov, aUh>in6' lcsa 8a>..aoo01top&i. (Callirnachus, Epigram 50 Gow-Page= 58 Pfeiffer= AP 7.277)

The first four words of this epigram have been the subject of a great deal of conttoversy 20• In the end, however, every commentator has assumed that this is a question in the voice of the readerof the 'inscription', addressedto the corpse. But why? There are indications both that it is the corpse speaking and that it is the reader. Callimachus subtly mixes two traditions of sepulchral address in order to make it far from obvious who is speaking here. The first word, tic;, clearly shows that identity is being questioned; in inscribed epigram, the presence of a direct or indirect interrogative pronoun almost invariably indicates the question asked by the reader (or at least in the reader's mind), trying to get information from the inscription 21• Thus, we would expect the first person to be the reader of the 'inscription'. On the other hand, ~tvoc; is the traditional word used to indicate that reader22, causing us to expect (whether ~tv~ is a nominative here, or a nominativeformed vocative) that the reader is the second person. 1be last word, vau19. Meyer (1993: 165-166). 20. See Gow-Page (1965: ad loc.) and Schneider (1870: ad /oc.). 21. See CEG 108.2, 120.1, 429.1. CEG 526.6, 732.2, and 865.1 are less clear, but certainly compatible with the reader as speaker; CEG 861.3 is something of an exception. 22. See CEG 13.1, 112.1, 123.2, 131.1, 462.2, 597.l, 648.1, 713.1. 878.6, and probably 120.3. CEG 865 seems to posit two readers, one a ~&v~ and one a 1to>..in1c;.CEG 108.3 is certainly an exception.

VOICE AND IDENTITYAMBIGUITY

313

T'IYE,then again indicates that the corpse - a shipwrecked man - is being addressed23. So, out of the first four words, the first and last point toward the reader as speaker, while the second, even more sttongly, points toward the reader as addressee. The reader of the epigram is left in a state of uncertainty. There is not even a verb to assisL I will read the text both ways. First, the way commentators have ttaditionally done it24 • The question is in the voice of the reader of the 'inscription'. Then, in answer to the question, someone must recount how the corpse came to be buried here: Leontikhos found it and buried it. This is fine, as far as it goes. However, a few things need to be pointedout. First, a survey of inscribed epigrams shows that there are only three potential speakers who would be able to answer the question: the deceased, the inscribed stone itself, and possibly the burier, who, in this case, also seems to be the reader. Of these, the stone cannot respond, as it would not have been addressed as vau11ye.With only the burier and the deceased remaining as possibilities, the response to the question should either be phrased 'I buried you' or 'you buried me'. But there are no personal pronouns or verbal forms in the first or second person in the entire epigram as transmitted. How can this be resolved? Some editors have attempted conjecture: T.L. Agar proposed elipe µ' for elipev,justifying it simply by saying "the speaker is the tenant of the tomb"; Gow and Page accept the conjecture 25• Others have opted for the opposite correction: Otto Schneider proposed (and printed) fv0a CJ& for tv8aoe; Volger proposed elipe cr' for elipev. On the other hand, we must beware the usual risk in correcting a text - particularly a text like an epigram of Callimachus: that correction may render the text more plain than it was intended to be in the first place. After so difficult an introduction as the first four words give us, it seems more likely that Callimachus would have continued, rather than easily resolved, the ambiguity of speaker. Second, the key question about the identity of the deceased is never answered, and thus the usual question asked of a tomb, and answered by the tomb - information nearly always included in a sepulchral epigram 23. However, Callimachus' near-contemporary Euphorion used the word to refer to Jason in his capacity as captain of the Argo, a usage the grammarian Helladius later condemned as a KaK6/;TJ"-~ 1,.t~1; (Euph. 158). If that usage could have been thought of here, this vocative, too, would be ambiguous; it could be the dead man, or a ship's captain reading the inscription. 24. Gutzwiller (1998: 203-209) represents a notewonhy departure from this interpretive tradition. While she does not note the possibilities for interpreting both ways, as I do here, she does argue for the epigram to be in the mouth - actually the mind - of Leontikhos. 25. Agar (1923: 83), Gow-Page (1965: ad loc.).

314

MICHAELA. 11JELLER

is left hanging: who is this corpse? This suspension is desirable: its ominousness reinforces the awful fate awaiting seafarers, which resonates in the life of Leontikhos himself. Now let us consider the epigram the otherway. Here, the corpse is speaking, asking his burier, whom he presumes is also shipwrecked, who he is. This time, the question has an answer, and it is exactly where we might expect it: 'Leontikhos' is the first word after the question. In this reading, we notice that there is a strange lack of accusatives in line 2. t~ptv has an object, vtKpov, but x,oot needs one. ooKpoo~. in line 3, can take an object, but is usually intransitive. Lines 2 and 3 can thus be read to say that he 'tearfully buried beneath this tomb his own hazardous life'. In fact, though this reading is somewhat harder in terms of sense, the 6t in line 2 makes it syntactically the easier of the two readings. What is more, in intent it reinforces the previous reading: Leontikhos is in the same hazardous position as the corpse. Even if the difficulties in senseat this point finally force the ancient reader to abandon the possibility that Leontikhos is the speaker here, the final sentence strengthens the idea that Leontikhos and the corpse are in very similar positions: both either have faced or are facing the dangers of the sea26• The total lack of personal pronouns, the inability to tell who is asking and who is answering (or even what exactly is being buried), and our lingering desire to put a name to the deceased are integral to the message of the epigram: who is the corpse, and who is the burier? Can the two be disentangled? Are they not, in their own fates, really the same? The confusion of persons is resolved only in the assertion that the same fate - discovering, lamenting, and burying their own lives - awaits them both. Callimachus was a writer of poems. His audience could, with greater truth than in any previous historical period, fairly be described as readers. As such, they, like archaic readers of inscriptions, could not see the speaker of his poems, and would have to be shown the speaker's context and the things to which the speaker would refer. Callimachus had to discover a way to include context in the work itself - but in so doing, he was not without precedent. Inscribed epigrams, even the very oldest ones, provided a starting point for his imitation and innovation.

REFERENCES Agar, T.L., 1923, "Notes on the Greek Anthology". CQ 17, 82-86. 26. Alternatively, one could follow Gutzwiller's reading (1998: 208-209), in which Leontikhos is not, precisely speaking, the speaker, but rather the composer of the epigram: by her reasoning, the entire epigram represents his thinking about what he will write on the tombstone, speaking of himself in the third person.

VOICE AND IDEN1ITY AMBIGUITY

315

Austin, Colin-Bastianini, Guido, 2002, Posidippi Pel/aei quae supersunt omnia. Milano. Bing, Peter, 1993, "Impersonations of voice in Callirnachus' hymn to Apollo". TAPhA 123, 181-198. -, 1995, "Callirnachus and the hymn to Demeter". Sy/IC/ass 6, 29-42. Calame, Claude, 1993, "Legendary narration and poetic procedure in Callimachus' hymn to Apollo". In: Harder et al. 1993, 37-55. Depew, Mary, 1993, "Mimesis and aetiology in Callirnachus' hymns". In: Harder et al. 1993, 57-77. Evelyn-White, Hugh G., 1967, Hesiod, the Homeric hymns, and Homerica. With English translation. Cambridge, Massachusetts. Friedlander, Paul, with Hoffleit, Herbert B., 1948, Epigrammata: Greek inscriptions in verse from the beginnings to the Persian wars. Berkeley and Los Angeles, California. Gow, A.S.F.-Page, D.L., 1965, The Greek Anthology: Hellenistic Epigrams (2 vols). Cambridge. Gutzwiller, Kathryn J., 1998, Poetic garlands: Hellenistic epigrams in context. Berkeley and Los Angeles, California. Hansen, Peter, 1983, 1989, Carmina epigraphica graeca (2 vols.). Berlin. Harder, M. Annette, 1988, "Callimachus and the Muses: some aspects of narrative technique in Aetia 1-2". Prometheus 14, 1-14. Harder, M. Annette, Regtuit, Remco F., Wakker, Gerry C. (edd.), 1993, Callimachus (Hel/enistica Groningana 1). Groningen. Hutchinson, G.O., 1988, Hellenistic poetry. Oxford. Kerkhecker, Amd, 1999, Callimachus' book of iambi. Oxford. Kohnken, A., 1993, "Gattungstypik in kallimacheischen Weihepigrammen." In: Religio graeco-romana: Festschrift far Walter Potscher (Grazer Beitriige Supplementband 5). Graz, 119-130. Lewis, D.M., 1987, "Bowie on elegy: a footnote". JHS 107, 188. Mair, A.W.-Mair, G.R., 1921, Callimachus: hymns and epigrams; Lycophron; Aratus. With English translation. Cambridge, Massachusetts. Meyer, Doris, 1993, "Die Einbeziehung des Lesers in den Epigrammen des Kallimachos". In: Harder et al. 1993, 161-175. Murray, A.T., 1999, Homer: Iliad (2 vols.). With English translation. Revised by William F. Wyatt. Cambridge, Massachusetts. Paton, W.R., 1916--1918, The Greek Anthology (5 vols.). With English translation. Cambridge, Massachusetts. Pfohl, Gerhard, 1967, Greek poems on stones, vol. 1 (Epitaphs from the seventh to the fifth centuries B.C.). Leiden. Raubitschek, A.E., 1968, "Das Denkmal-Epigramm". In: Raubitschek, A.E. (ed.), 1968, L'epigramme grecque (Entretiens sur l'antiquite classique 14). Vandoeuvres-Geneve, 3-36. Schneider, Otto, 1870, Callimachea. Leipzig. Shorey, Paul, 1943, Plato: the republic (2 vols.). With English translation. Cambridge, Massachusetts. Svenbro, Jesper, 1993, Phrasikleia: an anthropology of reading in ancient Greece. English translation by Janet Lloyd. Ithaca, New York. Volger, H.F.M., 1817, Callimachi hymni et epigrammata. Leipzig. Walsh, George B., 1991, "Callimachean passages: the rhetoric of epitaph in epigram". Arethusa 24, 77-105. West, Martin L., 1998-2000, Homerus. llias (2 vols.). Stuttgart.

INDEXES

l.

INDEX OF PASSAGES DISCUSSED

Antagoras fr. 1 Powell: 96-102

Anthologia Palatina 7.153 = Pfohl 24: 306-307 Apollonius Rhodius 1.1003-1005: 221-222 2.79-82: 221-222 2.296-297: 228 2.311-316: 217-218 2.326-327: 222-223 2.390-391: 218 2.468-490: 208-212 3.61-73: 230-231 4.1229-1235: 228-229 Callirnachus fr. 1.1-16 Pf.: 72-75 fr. 1.13-16 Pf.: 292-293 fr. 1.21-24 Pf.: 56, 72-75, 279 fr. 1.29-30 Pf.: 59 fr. 7.13-14 Pf.: 50, 57-58, 61-62 fr. 74 H: 32 fr. 75.50-77 Pf.: 180-181 fr. 75.53-55 Pf.: 54 fr. 112 Pf: 88-90 ep. 1 Pf: 109-110 ep. 24 Pf.: 308-309 ep. 31 Pf.: 281-282 ep. 41 Pf.: 192-193 ep. 41 Pf.: 198-200 ep. 51 Pf.: 196-198, 307-308 ep. 56 Pf.: 309-310 ep. 58 Pf.: 312-314 ep. 52 Pf.: 195-196 ep. 53 G.-P.: 7

h. 1: 95-116, 118-121 h. l.1-2: 105

h. 1.1-10: 95-96 h. 2: 121-125, 212-216 h. 2.111-112: 285 h. 3: 125-134, 161-171 h. 3.170-268: 257-277 h. 3.189-205: 271-272 h. 4: 279-297 h. 4.4-5: 294-295 h. 4.5-6: 295 h. 4.7-8: 195 h. 4.14: 284-286 h. 4.16-22: 288-290 h. 4.30-35: 286-288 h. 4.57-58: 292 h. 4.82-85: 293-294 h. 4.191: 283-284 h. 4.268-273: 296 h. 4.276-277: 292 h. 4.312-313: 291 h. 5: 125-134, 139-146, 153-157, 253-255 h. 6: 134-135, 146-157, 212-216

hec.: 23-47

ia. 1: 13-16 ia. 1.1-4: 280 ia. 2: 9-10, 13-16 ia. 4: 10-11 ia. 6: 8-9 Viet. Ber.: 23-47 CEG 14: 19: 24: 27: 28: 50: 51:

302 311-312 305-306 304 310-311 304-305 303-304

318

INDEXES

58: 303 119: 305 159: 303 197: 304 235: 304 459: 303

Plato Phd. 60-61: 4-5 Smp. 177ab: 109 Posidippus PMil.Vogl.

hymni Homerici Mere. 62-67: 310-311

vm 309:

130-134

Propertius 3.1.1-6: 213

Homerus II. 1.16-21: 299-300

Theocritus 7: 147-150

Ovidius

Amores 1.14.35-36: 146 Ars 1.305-306: 146 Met. 8.585-589: 237-239 Met. 8.547-884: 223-233 Met. 8.611-619: 235-239 Met. 8.741-742: 210 Met. 8.765-767: 235-239 Met. 8.770-776: 211-212

Tibullus 1.8: 145-146 Vergilius Eel. 6.1-12: 71-75 Eel. 6.13-30: 75-78 Eel. 6.31-42: 78-79 Eel. 6.43-60: 79-72 Eel. 6.61-73: 82-85 Eel. 6.74-81: 85-87 Eel. 6.82-86: 87-90

Philitas fr. 6 Spanoudakis: 148-150

Pindarus P. 5: 123-124

2. INDEX OF GREEK WORDS

at8cov:215 lixV11:284-286

µVT)µTI:55 µvriµTIµu8oA.6-yoc;: 54 vi;croi; dpat ii: 283-284 7tOA.A.il1Cl: 141, 144-145 t&XVTI:121-125 t>A.TI :214

-ypaµµatuc6c;: 51 6&A.toc;:56 6t-: 143 6ic;: 141, 145

3. INDEX

OF

NAMESANDSUBJECTS

Achelous: 224-231, 236-239 Acontius and Cydippe, aition: 180-181 aetiology: 176-177 Aithon: 215, 219-220 Alexandrian footnote: 210-211, 228 allegory: 281

Amycus: 220-221 Antagoras of Rhodes: 96-102 Ares: 292-293 Argo: 221-222 Arsinoe: 74-75, 125-126 Artemis: 127-135

319

INDEXES

-, dogs of-: 165-166 -, epithets of-: 162-163 -, first hunt: 166-167 -, temple in Ephesus: 264 Asia minor in iambi: 9 Athena: 128-135 -, as a masculin goddess: 139-140 -, similar to Artemis: 168-169 Berenice IT:124-125, 13 I, 308 Burina (spring): 147-149 Callimachus, poetics: 40-44 -, prose: 173-182 -, sources of-: 178-181 comedy: 26-28 communication in hymns: 265-267 competitiveness in h. 3: 258-264 Cretans as liars: 103-105 cross-generic references: 25 Cyclades: 290-291 Demeter: 134-135 -, grove: 147-151 -, metapoetic aspect: 212-214 Dioscuri: 129-130 display of learning: 268-272 Echinades: 227-229 epigram, length and contents: 189 epistemology: 102 eros: 106-109 Euhemerus: 104-105 Eumaeus scene: 32-40 Euripides Bacchae: 155-157 fable, of the ass: 6 -, Socrates and-: 4-5; 7-8 fragments, translation of-: 244; 248249 Gallus: 82-85 hearing as source of knowledge: 52-53 Helen: 129-130 Heracles: l 09-110, 112, 129- l 30 -, appetite: 29-31 hesitation topos: 267-268 Hipponax: I, 13-16 hospitality scenes: 32-40 Hylas: 80-82 hymn of Zeus, occasion for its composition: 98-99 hymns, order of-: 260 inscriptional use of first person: 65 Jason: 230-233

literacy vs orality: 49-66 lock of Berenice: 143-145 memory: 66 Milan Posidippus papyrus: 130-135 mimetic poetry: 311-312 mirror: 142-143 muses: 128-129 -, invocation of-: 265 mythic chronology: 231-233 Odysseus and Erysichthon: 214-216 pairs of poems: 126 paradoxography: 175-176 pentameter, secondhalfof-: 195-196 performance of hellenistic poetry: 58-61 perfumes: 15-17 Philadelphus: 124-125 -, rule over mediterranean: 288-289 -, recipient of h.l: 113; 114 Philitas: 146-153 Phineus: 216-223 pinakes: 173-174 Plato Symposium: 106-113 poetic book: 117-118 poetical metaphors: 40-42 Posidippus: 176 praise poetry: 118 Praxiphanes: 174 Ptolemy m: 124-125 quadripartite songs: 89 rejection of gold: 16 relationship betweengod andman: 153-

154 repetition: 24-25 ring composition: 272-274 scholar-poet: 119-12 l Scylla: 86-87 Silenus: 76-91 Simonides, tomb of-: 63-64 Sophocles Oedipus Tyrannus: 157 source indications: 268 Sparta: 133 speaker, change of-: 299-301 -, in epigram: 302-314 speaking objects: 309-310 sphragis: 293-294 stoic interpretation of Zeus: 100-102 Strepsiades: 110-112 tears of divinities: 152-153 techne: 17, 121-123

320 Telchines: 287-288 Theseus: 223-233 tragedy: 26-28 ttansmission of texts: 58. 61-62 Victoria Berenices: 83-85

INDEXES

victories in panhellcnic games: 131133 water representing poetry: 89-90 written source: 54 Xenomedes of Ceos: 179-181