Stories from the Mountains, Stories from the Sea: The Digressions and Similes of Oppian's Halieutica and the Cynegetica 9783666252495, 3525252498, 9783525252499

Citation preview

Hypomnemata Untersuchungen zur Antike und zu ihrem Nachleben

Herausgegeben von Albrecht Dihle, Siegmar Döpp, Dorothea Frede, Hans-Joachim Gehrke, Hugh Lloyd-Jones, Günther Patzig, Christoph Riedweg, Gisela Striker Band 150

Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht

Adam Nicholas Bartley

Stories from the Mountains, Stories from the Sea The Digressions and Similes of Oppian’s Halieutica and the Cynegetica

Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht

Verantwortlicher Herausgeber: Siegmar Döpp

Bibliografische Information Der Deutschen Bibliothek Die Deutsche Bibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deutschen Nationalbibliografie; detaillierte bibliografische Daten sind im Internet über abrufbar. ISBN: 3-525-25249-8 Hypomnemata ISSN 0085-1671

© 2003, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht in Göttingen Internet: www.vandenhoeck-ruprecht.de Alle Rechte vorbehalten. Das Werk einschließlich seiner Teile ist urheberrechtlich geschützt. Jede Verwertung außerhalb der engen Grenzen des Urheberrechtsgesetzes ist ohne Zustimmung des Verlages unzulässig und strafbar. Das gilt insbesondere für Vervielfältigungen, Übersetzungen, Mikroverfilmungen und die Einspeisung und Verarbeitung in elektronischen Systemen. Printed in Germany. Druck: Hubert & Co., Göttingen Einbandkonzeption: Markus Eidt, Göttingen Gedruckt auf alterungsbeständigem Papier.

Foreword

It has been pleasing to observe the upswing in interest in these fascinating

and entertaining but little considered works by European researchers, in particular the new edition of the Halieutica by Prof. Fritz Fajen, the examination of style by Prof. Enrico Rebuffat of that same work, and the recent articles about the Cynegetica by Tomas Silva Sanchez. Would-be scholars of the Halieutica and Cynegetica are often advised that their time might be more profitably spent, in career tenus, examining authors from the more traditional canon. Perhaps the time is now coming when there is a value seen in examining these works that outweighs the stigma attached to their later date of composition. It is my hope that this work, far from being of itself definitive, will help to make these poems more accessible to English-speaking scholars and draw attention to the richness of their content and the many unanswered questions that pertain to them. It would be encouraging to see the renewed interest in the Dionysiaca of Nonnus and Post-Homerica of Quintus of Smyrna mirrored here. The prospect of thereby being able to identify a cultural identity that is particular to the Greek Near East distinct from that of Classical Greece or Rome through the fragments of Hellenistic literature and the authors of the Imperial Period is a tantalising one. Now I wish to turn to the more pleasant task of thanking those who have helped me through often only barely charted waters. The two midwives to this work are Dr Alan James of the University of Sydney and Professor Heinz-Giinther Nesselrath of the Georg-August Universitat, G6ttingen. Dr James provided invaluable and patient guidance, advice and encouragement in helping me present the initial version of this book as my PhD thesis at the University of Sydney. Professor Nesselrath guided me through the process of transforming a dissertation into that quite distinct thing, a book. That process has opened me to a wealth of new ideas and techniques that have built profitably on all that I have learnt during my PhD programme. As with Dr James, this work would have certainly been poorer without his guidance. Now to the chorus: Professors Simon Goldhill, Neil Hopkinson and Richard Hunter of the University of Cambridge ensured that my brief stay v

at that university was very developmentally productive. Professors Peter Toohey of the University of Calgary and Stephen Hinds of the University of Washington, Seattle have given a wealth of guidance on issues methodological during and beyond the thesis process. I must also thank my anonymous PhD examiner for the thoughtful contributions which have directly and indirectly contributed greatly. Hopefully it will be understood if some of the excellent suggestions were beyond the scope of this work. Professor RudolfKassel, Dr Markus Stein and all of the staff at the Institut fiir Altertumskunde at the Universitat zu Koln, as well as Prof. Stephan Schroder of the Universitat Erlangen-Niirnberg, brought a welcome range of probing questions concerning the manuscripts of these works - a rare opportunity when working with Oppian - for which I am grateful. Pro£ Siegmar Dopp gave timely and enthusiastic advice and encouragement in bringing this work to print in this series. Professor Sir Hugh Lloyd-Jones gave generous encouragement and arranged for me to share my ideas at the Universitat zu Koln. Thanks go to Miss Stacy Dorgan of the Carnegie Corporation, New York, for her input on a title. Hopefully the eventual choice meets her approval. I could not have come to Germany at all were it not for the support of the German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD), instrumental to which has been Prof. Fritz Fajen of the Universiilit Regensburg, who has not only been supportive of my research but has also helped navigate my way into the German academic system. I should like to acknowledge the wann encouragement that I received from the late Prof. K.H. Lee of the University of Sydney, my thesis co-supervisor and himself an Alexander von Humboldt fellow, for a research stay in Germany. It is a great pity that I will not be able to share my experiences with him upon my return. Lastly and most importantly Miss Bernadette Cousin has been an unfailing supporter throughout the twin difficulties of embarking on an academic career and bringing a monograph to print. It is to her that this book is dedicated. Gottingen, 2003

vi

Contents

1. Introduction

1

1.1 The Halieutica 1.2 The Cynegetica 1.3 Similes in heroic and didactic epic 1.4 Digressions 1.5 Digressions in heroic and didactic epic 1.6 Digressions and similes in the Halieutica and Cynegetica

3 4 5 9 10 11

1.7 Why examine the digressions and developed similes?

14

2. Digressions

2.1 Overview 2.2 Summary of digressions

2.3 Quantity of digressions 2.4 Scope of digressions 2.5 Placement 2.6 Classification of digressions 2.6.1 Encomiastic/Hymnic Digressions 2.6.2 Philosophical and Religious Digressions 2.6.3 Digressions integrated with the technical discourse 2.7 Aspects of the digressions to be examined 2.7.1 Themes and images 2.7.2 Language 2.7.3 Rhetorical and Other Forms of Styling 2.8 Digressions modelled predominantly on a single passage 2.8.1 The pleasures afforded by hunting, fishing and fowling, Hal. 1.1-79 2.8.2 The nature of Justice and her departure from the earth, Hal. 2.664-688 2.8.3 Address to Eros, Cyn. 2.410-425 2.8.4 How octopods devour their limbs for food, Cyn. 3.176-82

16 16 17 19 19 20 21 21 23 23 25 25 26 26 26 27 43 48 55 vii

Contents

2.9 Digressions modelled on a range of passages 2.9.1 Relationship between sky, air, water and earth and their denizens, Hal. 1.409-20 2.9.2 Description oflove between humans and young, animals and young, with extension to dolphins, Hal. l.702-733 2.9.3 The absolute power of the gods and how men live by their leave, listing of the main gods along with their fields of influence, Hal.2.l-42. 2.9.4 Mythological digression on the daughter of Theias - Smyrna, Hal. 3.402-408 2.9.5 Aetion concerning the creation of Mint, Hal. 3.486-97 2.9.6 Opening invocation to emperor: the place of man (and his inventiveness) within creation, Hal. 5.1-45 2.9.7 Story of boy and dolphin, Hal. 5.448 - 518 2.9.8 Closing address to the emperor and prayer to Poseidon, Hal. 5.675 - 680 2.9.9 Comparison of hunting, fishing and fowling, Cyn. l.47-80 2.9.10 Stories offamous horses, Cyn. 1.198-269 2.9.11 Eugenics in horses, doves and men, Cyn. l.326-367 2.9.12 Mating instinct is strongest in spring, Cyn. l.376-392 2.9.l3 The transformation of the Curetes into lions, Cyn. 3.8-19 2.9.14 Story ofDionysus and Pentheus, Cyn. 4.233-319 2.10 Strongly innovative digressions 2.10.1 Poseidon's love of dolphins, Hal. 1.385-393 2.10.2 Moralising digression on the perils of gluttony for men, Hal. 2.217 - 224 2.10.3 Mythological digression on Telegonus and sting ray spear, Hal. 2.497 - 505 2.10.4 Opening dedication with prayer to Hermes and mythological digression on Pan, Zeus and Typhon, Hal. 3.1 - 28 2.10.5 Address to Emperor and Son, Hal. 4.4-10 2.10.6 Eastern marriage customs and jealousy, Hal. 4.203-15 2.10.7 Extended prayer to Earth for protection from the terrors of the sea, Hal. 5. 336-349 2.10.8 Dedication and Dialogue with Artemis, Cyn. 1.1-46 2.10.9 Address to Artemis and list of discoverers of hunting as a pastime, Cyn. 2.1-30 viii

58 58 62

68 75 77 79 87 95 97 104 115 121 125 129 149 149 152 155 158 163 165 167 170 178

Contents

2.10.10 Aition on Heracles and the opening of the Orontes to the sea, Cyn. 2.109-158 2.10.11 How moles are sprung from king Phineus, Cyn.2.614-628 2.10.12 Lion seen in imperial procession, Cyn. 3.46-47 2.10.13 Invocation to the emperor Caracalla and to Artemis, Cyn.4.10-24 3. Similes

186 196 201 202

207

3.1 Overview of similes

207

3.2 Quantity

207

3.3 Placement

207

3.4 Classification 3.4.1 Anthropomorphic similes 3.4.2 Generically inspired similes 3.4.3 Other developed similes

208 208 208 208

3.5 Differences between these similes 3.5.1 Allusion/Originality in theme 3.5.2 Allusion/Originality in language 3.5.3 Rare and new language 3.5.4 Anthropomorphism

209 209 210 210 210

3.6 Anthropomorphic similes 3.6.1 Comparison ofpagurus to a man who has been tended by a physician, Hal. 1. 298-302 3.6.2 Comparison of fish enjoying the arrival of spring to citizens of a city relieved from a siege, Hal. 1. 463-9 3.6.3 Comparison of fishing-frog with a bird trapper, Hal.2.99-104 3.6.4 Comparison of the ox ray to a small boy trapping mice, Hal.2.156-61 3.6.5 Comparison of the muraena and the crayfish with a pair of chieftains challenging each other to battle, Hal. 2.326-30 3.6.6 Comparison of octopus and crayfish to a highway robber attacking a passing drunkard, Hal. 2.408-17 3.6.7 Comparison of ami a (a type of shark) attacking a dolphin with leeches draining a patient's wound, Hal. 2.597-604

211 211 213 214 216

218 219 221

ix

Contents

3.6.8 Comparison of a grey mullet that has been caught with a terminally ill man, Hal. 3.108-14 3.6.9 Comparison of anthi as to men at a banquet, Hal. 3.221 - 226 3.6.1 0 Comparison of the struggle between the anthias and the fishermen to that between two wrestlers, Hal. 3.316 - 320 3.6.11 Comparison of bream to a dissolute youth and his friends, Hal. 3.358 - 363 3.6.12 Comparison ofthe grey mullet to a traveller at crossroads, Hal.3.501-6 3.6.13 Comparison of the grey mullet to a little girl in the kitchen, Hal.3.512-518 3.6.14 Comparison of swordfish to men besieging a city, Hal. 3.560 - 565 3.6.15 Comparison ofthe parrot-wrasse with men leading each other over difficult terrain in darkness, Hal. 4.65-70 3.6.16 Comparison ofparrot-wrasse to men in a foot race, Hal.4.101-106 3.6.17 Comparison of the merle-wrasse fretting over his mates with a mother fretting over her daughter about to give birth, Hal.4.195-201 3.6.18 Comparison of dogfish mourning for their fellows with parents mourning for their only son who has died, Hal.4.256-61 3.6.19 Comparison ofthe sargue mourning for the departed goat with a mother mourning for her son going to sea, Hal. 4.335-342 3.6.20 Comparison of male sargue to shepherds that count their flocks as they enter the steading, Hal. 4.393-8 3.6.21 Comparison ofpelamyds slain by a spiked log with men disfigured in battle, Hal. 4.555-9 3.6.22 Comparison of fish killed by the poisoning of the waters of a small bay with men slain during a siege when their water is poisoned, Hal. 4.685-91 3.6.23 Comparison of the whale guide with a son caring for his aged father, Hal. 5.84-89

x

223 225 226 228

230 231 233 234

236

237

239

241 243 245

247 249

Contents

3.6.24 Comparison of fishermen hunting a whale after capturing its pilot fish with soldiers attacking a city after overcoming guards that are asleep, Hal. 5.114-20 3.6.25 Comparison of men diving for sponges with men preparing for lyre competition, Hal. 5.617-620 3.6.26 Comparison of frantic dog to a pregnant girl, Cyn. 1.494-501 3.6.27 Comparison of the return of the dog to the return of a harvest-laden wagon to the homestead, Cyn. 1.527-534 3.6.28 Comparison oflion to a warrior in battle, Cyn. 4.189-95 3.6.29 Comparison of drunken leopards to drunken boys, Cyn. 4.346-51 3.6.30 Comparison of hunting dogs to girl gathering flowers in the springtime, Cyn. 4.367-73 3.7 Generically inspired similes 3.7.1 Comparison ofthe muraena and the octopus to the battle between a stag and a snake, Hal. 2.289-94 3.7.2 Comparison of the muraena to a leopard at bay, Hal. 2.350-6 3.7.3 Comparison of parrot wrasses with flies attacking farmers, Hal. 2.445-452 3.7.4 Comparison of the fighting amia and dolphin to a fight between a stag and jackals, Hal. 2.614-26 3.7.5 Comparison of anthias seeking food to hungry swallow chicks, Hal. 3.243 -248 3.7.6 Comparison of the octopus hunting for olives with a dog that hunts by scent, Hal. 4.274-278 3.7.7 Comparison ofthe sargue (sea-bream) with kids that are joyful as adult goats return to the steading, Hal. 4.325-329 3.7.8 Comparison of anchovies with winnowed grain, Hal.4.497-501 3.7.9 Comparison of the water stirred up by the whale with turbulent straits, Hal. 5.215-220 3.7.10 Comparison ofthe pain of the whale's wounds with lightning striking a ship, Hal. 5.282-285 3.7.11 Comparison of the whale that has been hauled ashore with a merchant ship being refitted during winter, Hal. 5.312-315

251 253 254 257 258 260 261 264 264 266 269 270 273 274 276 277

279 281 282

xi

Contents

3.7.12 Comparison of the hunting of dolphins with a snake attacking the brood of a swallow in their nest, Hal. 5.579-586 3.7.13 Comparison ofa lion to the river Ganges, Cyn. 4.164-69 3.8 Other developed similes 3.8.1 Comparison of ship with deer hit by an arrow, Hal. 1.237-41 3.8.2 Comparison of the admon with a leopard trapped by a hunter with a yelping dog as bait, Hal. 3.386 - 395 3.8.3 Comparison of parrot wrasse with birds caught by a bird trapper using another bird as a decoy, Hal. 4.120-125 3.8.4 Comparison of the hippurus with ravenous hunting dogs, Hal. 4.428-32 3.8.5 Comparison ofpelaymds caught by a light net to deer snared by the hunter, Hal. 4.586-92 3.8.6 Animals that bury their heads to escape the notice of predators, Hal. 4.624-31 3.8.7 Comparison of the tiring whale with a horse that is blown after hard work, Hal. 5.183-6 3.8.8 Comparison offishennen with men exulting at a herald returning from a battle, Hal. 5.232-235 3.8.9 Comparison of bears to young cattle licking each other, Cyn.3.163-7

284 286 288 288 289 292 293 294 296 297 298 300

4. Conclusion

302

Bibliography

307

Indexes

313

XlI

Names and Subjects

313

Sources Cited

317

Greek Words

341

1. Introduction

In the past century the Halieutica of Oppian and the pseudo-Oppianic Cynegetica have received only limited scholarly attention. Modern studies of the two works include a critical edition of the Cynegetica by P. Boudreaux, Mair's notes on the subject matter of both poems\ which amount to a substantial and important commentary, an examination of the intertextual relationship of the Halieutica with works of technical prose by R. Keyde1l2 , an examination of some of the textual issues in the Halieutica by AS.F. Gow\ an examination of the use of similes in the Halieutica, an examination of compound words used in Halieutica and a word index of both works by AW. James4 , an unpublished commentary of the fIrst book of the Cynegetica by W. Schmitt5, a critique of some aspects of Schmitt's commentary by Giuseppe Giangrande6 , a brief examination and commentary on short selections of both works by Neil Hopkinson7, an article examining the depiction of religion in the Cynegetica by Claudia Engelhofet, an examination of the Heracles aition in the Cynegetica by AS. Hollis 9 and, most substantially, a thorough examination of the 1 Mair, ed., Oppian, Colluthus, Tryphiodorus. 2 Keydell, "Oppians Gedicht von der Fischerei und Aelians Tiergeschichte", in Hermes 72, 1937,411-34. 3 Gow, "On the Halieutica of Oppian", in CQ 60,1968,61-8. 4 James, "'The honey on the cup' in Oppian and others" in PCPh 192, 1966, 24-36 and Index in Halieutica Oppiani Cilicis et in Cynegetica poetae Apameensis, and Studies in the Language of Oppian of Cilicia. 5 Schmitt, Kommentar zum ersten Buch von Pseudo-Oppians Kynegetika, PhD thesis, Westfalische Wilhelms-Universitat, 1969. This work is mainly focussed on the influence of prose sources about zoology and hunting such as Aristotle and Xenophon on its content, although there are strong observations on the influence of the epic tradition. 6 Giangrande, "On the Text ofps.-Oppian, Cynegetica" in GRBS 13, 1972,489-496. 7 Hopkinson, Greek Poetry of the Imperial Period: An Anthology, 185-204. Hopkinson follows James and Mair in suggesting that there may have been a fifth book of the Cynegetica no longer extant. Although this is possible, there are no obvious unfulfilled promises by the poet or gaps in the poem's structure to support the case. 8 Engelhofer, "Giitterund Mythen bei Oppianos von Apamea" in GB 21,1995,157-73. 9 Hollis, "[Oppian], Cyn. 2.100-158 and the mythical past of Apamea-on-the-Orontes", ZPE 102, 1994, 153-166. Hollis notes particularly the possible influence of the aetiological passages

1

1. Introduction

manuscripts for the Halieutica by Fritz FajenlO • More recently, an edition of the Halieutica edited by Fajenll, incorporating the changes to the text recommended in his earlier work, has been published which includes a translation into German and a synthesis of earlier research into the taxonomy of species of fish and other marine creatures in the Halieutica. Lastly, a study of some of the features of language and style within the Halieutica has been written by Enrico Rebuffat12 • Rebuffat's work is, for the most part, descriptive. He provides a most useful survey of the features of language and style used in the Halieutica and charts some of the influences from earlier literature. His work does not, however, attempt to systematically set the Halieutica in literary context, particularly with respect to the earlier tradition of didactic and heroic epic, focussing more on influences from developments in rhetorical style and prose literature. Nevertheless this book provides a catalogue and taxonomy of the features ofOppian's style that will be an important tool for future research. For two works which were obviously popular in Byzantium, as shown by the large number of manuscripts which survive, 58 for the Halieutica and 17 for the Cynegetica, it is surprising that there are no significant literary analyses examining both the poems per se and the way in which they reflect the influence of some 900 years of epic tradition. The issues of intertextuality have received only limited attention, with the most detailed examination coming from Schmitt's commentary, which addresses the influences from the epic and prose traditions in the first book of the Cynegetica in some detail. This work seeks to examine those aspects which are common to the tradition of Greco-Roman epic as a whole, namely the digressions and more developed similes which ornament descriptions of the practice of fishing and hunting. The intention is to show that the way digressions and developed similes are used in these poems is a reflection of the difference in style and intention of the two works, which corresponds with the independently established difference of authorship. from the Hellenistic poets on the aition in the Cynegetica, although neglecting possible influence from an aetion in the Halieutica at 3.12-25. 10 Fajen, Noten zur handschriftlichen Uberlieferung der Halieutika des Oppian. 11 Oppian, Halieutica: Der Fischfang, ed. and tr. F. Fajen. Unless noted otherwise, this has been the source for all textual quotes in this thesis. 12 Rebuffat, TTOIHTH2 ETTEQN - Tecniche di composizione poetica negli Halieutica di Oppiano.

2

1.1 The Halieutica

1.1 The Halieutica The Halieutica is a didactic epic on salt water fishing in five books of about 600-700 lines each. It was written by Oppian, who tells us he was a Cilician at line 8 of book 3, and seems to have been completed between 176 AD when Commodus, the son of Marcus Aurelius, was made imperator and the death of Marcus Aurelius in 180 ADl3. The work is written in the Homeric manner and approaches the language and expression of Homer and Hesiod more closely than either the Phaenomena of Aratus or the Alexipharmaca and Theriaca of Nicander of Colophon14. The books of the Halieutica describe the different species of fish and other sea creatures, the way they interact, the equipment and skills of the fishermen, the way that fish may be caught by exploiting their passions, and the hunting of 'sea-monsters'. All five books are characterised by a wealth of developed similes which are mostly anthropomorphic, and by a range of digressions. As is usually the case with didactic epic, the overall style is more artistic than technical. The technical information provided gives the impression of being compendious, although the descriptions of fish and fishing techniques are generally too brief to be of genuine use to a prospective fisherman. The technical material in the Halieutica is mainly omamented by similes that are developed beyond the essential point of comparison, but there is also a wealth of genuine digressions from the technical discourse, covering a range of topics. The style of this non-technical material recalls heroic epic such as the Iliad and the Odyssey and the earlier didactic epics. A distinguishing feature, however, is the large number of anthropomorphic similes describing the behaviour of the fish which help to engage the reader's sympathies in their struggle and downfall. The way that material on topics as divergent as fishing techniques, cosmology and theogony, among others, is incorporated into genuine digressions suggests it may be in part a deliberate display of Oppian's learning, similar to the practice among the Hellenistic poets. It may also be that this material is a deliberate re-evocation of some highlights of the preceding works in the genre.

13 For a full examination of the dating and authorship of the Halieutica and the Cynegetica see Mair, xiii-xxiii. For a somewhat dissenting point of view on the positive identification of separate authorship see Toohey, Epic Lessons, 199-200. The differences noted between the style and approach to earlier literature of the two works discussed in this thesis suggests that Mair's confidence in separate authorship is well founded. 14 James, Studies in the Language ojOppian ojCilicia.

3

1. Introduction

1.2 The Cynegetica The Cynegetica is a didactic epic on hunting in four books of about 500600 lines each, devoted to the breeds of horses and hounds, herbivorous animals, carnivorous animals and hunting techniques. It was written by an unnamed Syrian author, possibly another Oppian 15 , who tells us he was from Apamea-on-the-Orontes at line 127 of book 2. The Cynegetica may seems to have been completed some time after 212 AD, since it is dedicated to the Emperor Caracalla, and is likely to have been completed after the imperial tour of the province of Syria in 215 AD and almost certainly no later than his assasination in the field in 217 AD. It is possible that its composition was undertaken as early as 202 AD, when Caracalla celebrated his coming of age and joint consulship with Septimius Severus in Antioch 16 • The Cynegetica is broadly similar in style to the Halieutica, to which it frequently alludes. Notable differences include a greater incidence of genuinely digressive material, with far fewer developed similes and few of these being anthropomorphic. The poet of the Cynegetica makes greater use of features of rhetorical style i7 , while, like Oppian, seemingly coining a range of compound words. Another significant difference in approach is that the poet of the Cynegetica on occasion includes contemporary detail in his digressive material, taking traditional themes and innovating by incorporating contemporary details. Although Oppian also does this on occasion, it is not a distinctive feature of his style. When examining the allusive relationship between these works it is clear even to a casual reader that the poet of the Cynegetica has been strongly influenced by the Halieutica of Oppian. The popularity of the Halieutica in late antiquity and the middle ages can be seen, as noted above, from the large number of manuscripts that survive. As the first Greek didactic epic 15 James, Studies in the Language ojOppian ojCilicia, 2-3 notes that the earliest reference to Oppian as the author of the Cynegetica comes from Sozomenus Hist. Eccles. Pref. 1.5-6, written in the 5th century A.D.; but Sozomenus' text does not support this. As the majority of our manuscripts for these works are Byzantine era schoolbooks, in which the two texts were often published together (see esp. Fajen, Oppian Halieutica: Der Fischjang, introd. xii and James, Studies in the Language ojOppian ojCilicia, 3-4) this may do no more than recall this traditional reception of these works, which is recalled in the anonymous AP 16.311 ( = A. PI. 4.311) 'Q-TT1TWVOs aEAC6wCJlV cXAClTAOa cpOAa CJuvaljJas / {J-l'jKaTo lTO:CJl VEOls oljJov CilTElpECJOlV.

16 Downey, 109f. 17 Norden, 834-837. Norden notes in some detail one of the most notable features of style in the Cynegetica, that is the extended use of rhyme.

4

1.3 Similes in heroic and didactic epic

extant since the Hellenistic period it has influenced the poet of the Cynegetica to such an extent that he makes frequent homage to it. What is less obvious is the considerable variety of ways in which ideas from the Halieutica are adapted. In addition to straightforward borrowing of language and theme, the poet has adapted broad structural concepts, such as the inclusion of an obscure aetiology to refer to one's own homeland, but tells a very different aetiological myth, describing the opening to the river Orontes to the sea by Heracles at Cyn. 2.109-58, compared with the digression in the Halieutica concerning the staining of the Cilician shores red by the battle between Typhaon and Zeus and Pan at Hal. 3.1-28. On several occasions the poet takes a passage that includes digressive and technical material in the Halieutica and inverts the relationship between technical discourse and digression when including it in his own work. An example of this is the comparison of a bear eating its own feet to the octopus eating its tentacles at Cyn. 3.170-82. This is drawn from a description of the octopus at Hal. 2.241-52, which compares the octopus to the bear eating its own feet. 1.3 Similes in heroic and didactic epic In the Halieutica similes play an important role in the artistic embellishment of the technical discourse, which would otherwise become dry and repetitive. What follows is a brief discussion of the role that similes play in epic literature as a whole and in the Halieutica and the Cynegetica in particular, although the latter will be discussed more fully later. A further issue to consider is the manner in which the style of similes in the Halieutica, in particular, strongly reflects the rhetorical tradition as preserved by earlier commentators. What was meant by a simile and the way in which the role and function of similes was understood by these writers has been discussed most ably by M.H. McCall 18 and the discussion that follows draws strongly on that work. A range of distinctive features of similes in the Halieutica are commended by the ancient rhetoricians and it is interesting to see how these features suggest particularly strong influence of rhetoric on the education that Oppian appears to have received.

18 McCall, esp. 1-76.

5

Introduction

The function of similes may, in its most basic meaning, be to fully illustrate an idea or the quality of an object by means of a case that is either similar to the matter being described or different in an illustrative manner. The discussion by ancient rhetoricians of figures of speech strongly analogous to what we would understand by modern definition as similes focusses strongly on their persuasive function and is therefore not without relevance when considering a work ostensibly aimed at instructing the reader. The figures of comparison considered critical to persuasive argument include similes that become elaborated beyond their fundamental point of comparison. Such similes are explicitly praised by Aristotle 19 as a means to increase dramatic impact on the reader and, therefore, their persuasive force. I shall refer to these similes henceforth as extended similes. The great majority of the similes in the Halieutica, all of which are considered in some detail in this work, deserve this label, whereas there are only a few such in the Cynegetica. Given the wide range of other rhetorical features seen in the Cynegetica, such as newly coined terms, longer forms of certain verbs and exaggerated forms of expression20 , it seems likely that the poet of the Cynegetica uses fewer devloped similes to distinguish his style from that of Oppian, who makes such extended and effective use of such similes that a similar pattern of use in the Cynegetica would appear tritely imitative. Similes can, however, have many functions beyond the imitative and persuasive. In heroic epic, similes are commonly used to increase dramatic tension by highlighting particular aspects of the narrative action. In didactic epic, and in the Halieutica in particular, they create interest in technical points that might not otherwise lend themselves well to verbal description by creating dramatic interest for the reader who might potentially participate in the craft or activity upon which the work is based. In narrative episodes in either style of epic they can also increase tension by substantially delaying a critical point of plot development. Lastly, development of a simile allows the poet to introduce purely decorative details or to display his learning in unrelated matters, such as similar treatments in earlier literature.

19 Aristotle, Rhetorica, 3.l1.1413a3-8, as quoted by McCa1l, 46-47. 20 Also explicitly praised by Aristotle, Poetica 21, l457bl-3.

6

1.3 Similies in heroic and didactic epic

This last point merits further discussion. As noted by McCa1121 , the terminology for figures of comparison used by ancient authors is not precisely analogous to its modern equivalent. The common term for similes used by rhetoricians such as Theramenes22 , ELKWV, is more suggestive of a free standing illustrative image which exists in a work for its own artistic sake. The self-contained quality of many of the images used by Oppian and the fact that there are several similes that are not introduced by traditional terms of comparison such as WC; and WOTE suggest that Oppian understood figures of comparison in a more flexible way than is implied by the modern term simile. This is strongly suggestive of the understanding of figures of comparison seen in the extant works by both the pre-Aristotleian rhetoricians and Aristotle himself.23 The desire to display a particular religious or philosophic ethic may also have been influential on the use of these figures. As will be discussed later, the Halieutica has a number of details which are suggestive of the precepts of Stoic philosophy. In view of these and the explicit dedication to Marcus Aurelius, himself sympathetic to Stoic beliefs, the comments about Cato by Cicer024 at de Finibus 4.23.64 that illustrative comparisons were strongly favoured by Stoic philosophers suggest that the frequent use of developed similes by Oppian may have been intended to reflect a style of discourse similar to that popular with Stoic philosophers. Further influence from specific philosophical schools is also suggested by the association of anthropomorphic images with Epicurean philosophers by Cicero at de Natura Deorum 2.8.2225 , as the majority of Oppian's similes are anthropomorphic in nature. It is impossible to be certain of the extent of these influences, but if Oppian' s style reflects the influence of a number of philosophical schools, it may be that features of style and of philosophical discourse suggestive of Stoic philosophy6 were included in the Halieutica to appeal to the philosophical tastes of the imperial audience. One might expect that, if the apparent influence from Stoic philosophy reflected Oppian's personal beliefs, it would be more directly expressed than is actually the case. Michael Roberts27 regards the use of highly decorative 21 McCall, 7-17. 22 For the uncertain dating of Theramenes see Stegemann RE H.l 0 (1934) 2317. 23 McCall, 31-52. 24 McCall, 123. 25 McCall, 125. 26 See for example Hal. 2.35-37 ad n. 27 Roberts, 57-58.

7

Introduction

similes in later Latin poetry as characteristic of a later 'jeweled' style and reflecting the influence of factors such as later developments in rhetorical teaching. It is tempting to regard the distinctive use of similes in the Halieutica as part of the developmental trend towards the style discussed by Roberts, but giving the comparable use of similes by poets such as Lucretius it seems more likely that there was some earlier exemplar for this style influential on both poets now lost to us. Setting aside the rhetorical aspects of figures of comparison, it is interesting to note that within the epic genre the greatest variety of similes is seen in heroic epic, both Greek and Roman. The extant earlier Greek didactic epics make a much smaller use of developed similes than heroic epic. For example, there are no genuine similes in the Opera et Dies of Hesiod, a striking deficiency when compared with the twelve similes in the second book of the Iliad, almost all of which show some development beyond the essential point of comparison. Aratus of Soli makes limited use of developed similes in his Phaenomena, with 10 comparisons, of which only two are developed beyond the fundamental point of comparison28 and none are more extensive than 3 lines length. Similarly, in the Theriaca and Alexipharmaca of Nicander there are 229 and 4 30 genuine similes respectively, along with several basic comparisons. A range of factors, not least of which is the extensive use of comparisons in contemporary rhetoric, have influenced the way that similes are used with greater frequency and more extended development in Roman didactic epic. In the third book of the DRN of Lucretius there are 19 similes, many of which are developed beyond the essential point of comparison to enforce the author's philosophical points31, and the third book of the Georgics of Virgil has 5 substantially developed similes in 566 lines32 • The more widespread use of such similes may seem to be an unusual departure from their limited use in Greek didactic epic, but the extant fragments of the works of Empedocles include some similes developed on a substantial scale, such as the comparison of the blending of the elements of existence with paints blended by a mural painter in 11 lines atfr.23. While it is not possible to be :finn on this point, it may be that elaborate use of similes in 28 Aratus, Phaen., 393-4, 656-7 29 Nicander, Ther., 175-6, 268-70 30 Nicander, Alex., 30-4, 215-20, 358-9, 472-5 31 See esp. Lucretius, DRN, 3.87-93, 221-223, 403-7 32 Virgil, Georg., 3.89-91, 92-5, 196-8, 237-41, 346-51

8

1.4 Digressions

the works of Empedocles has had a part to play in the growing popularity of developed similes reflected in the style of Lucretius, and thence the other Roman didactic poets and Oppian. 1.4 Digressions The Little Oxford Dictionary (4th edition, 1969) defines the verb "to digress" as " ... diverge temporarily from main track, especially in discourse ... " If we apply the dictionary definition to a digression in didactic epic, any departure from the technical discourse of the poem can be regarded as a digression. The ostensible aim of didactic poetry should, in any case, be regarded as to provide instruction in some technical skill or other area of specialised knowledge. For the purpose of this work I have used the term 'digression' to refer to any self-contained passage within the text that does not contribute to this technical instruction. Although I am aware of the disfavour into which this term has fallen33 , I have continued to make use of it here as in didactic epic, as opposed to, for example, heroic epic, it is possible to separate material which contributes to didactic goals from that which does not with some confidence. In fact, problems can arise not in the attempt to distinguish technical from non-technical material but rather in the decision not to include the more developed similes, which make sometimes quite lengthy digressions from the technical discourse. In an effort to provide a clear organisation to this work I have treated any figures which involve a comparison with the technical discourse as similes, fully aware that this distinction should not be applied too strictly. The digressions of these poems usually take the form of decorative description, commonly of a mythological or religious nature. When considering whether all decorative description should be considered digressive James 34 notes that frequently decorative material in didactic epic does not detract from the impact of technical information, but can clarify or add to the technical material. To be truly digressive, which is " ... to depart from the main track ... ", decorative material should not closely interact with the technical discourse, as similes and metaphors frequently do, but should 33 As a recent example, Toohey in Epic Lessons, 2 has avoided the term entirely, referring to such passages as 'decorative panels'. Some passages that I have considered here, such as addresses to Emperors, would surely fall outside the scope of this definition while not contributing to the didactic purpose of the Halieutica or Cynegetica. 34 James, '''The honey on the cup' in Oppian and others" in PCPh 192, 1966,32

9

Introduction

connect lightly, such as when a mini-epic is included in a didactic work. In considering 'digressions' here, the test has been applied that, where the didactic goals of these works could be met without the inclusion of a passage, that passage has been regarded as digressive regardless of whether it adds something to the technical discourse through its own merit35 • 1.5 Digressions in heroic and didactic epic In heroic epic what are commonly regarded as 'digressions' usually take

the form either of digressions within dialogue to tell a developed story not directly related to the current direction of the plot, or of extended descriptions of action or places where action is taking place, often as moral paradigms. There is a wide range of debate concerning the role of these digressions. Austin36, when examining the role of digressions in the Iliad, highlights the fact that digressions forming part of dialogue are almost never involved with providing background integral to the understanding of the plot, but are used to emphasise aspects of a person's character or mood. Lynn-George37 also draws attention to the temporal aspects of the digression, highlighting the apparent contradiction between the normally fast-paced and continuous flow of the story in the Iliad and the temporally disruptive influence of the digression. Lynn-George effectively highlights the effect that these digressions have on the building of tension for the reader and the control that their placement exerts on the rate at which action within the Iliad and Odyssey flows. In didactic epic the temporal impact of digressions is less important, as the discourse often has no narrative flow. Similarly, in later didactic epic a direct and personal form of address by the poet creates a characterisation that would be emphasised by the inclusion of a digression at a critical point, such as the description of a lion purportedly seen by the poet in a

35 Rebuffat, 160, uses the label 'excursus', to refer to those passages based solely on mythological themes. Given the wide range of themes and topics within the Halieutica it seems unlikely that this is the only material that could be regarded as excursive from the theme of saltwater fishing. 36 Austin, "Functions of Digressions in the Iliad', in GRBS, 7, 1966,275-312 37 Lynn-George, 9-11,13-15,20-1.

10

1.6 Digressions and similes in the Halieutica and Cynegetica

procession at Cyn. 3.46-47. Toohey38 notes the fact that in earlier didactic epic there is a stronger presence of the personal voice, and it can be argued that, for example, there are aspects of characterisation involved in digressions such as in the ode to Hecate in Theogony 414-52. 39 In addition to aspects of characterisation, Toohey40, when referring to "decorative panels" within didactic epic, emphasises the way that these passages can exist as works or art in their own right within the technical discourse - a function not dissimilar to that implied by the use of ELKW'V to describe highly descriptive figures of comparison by Theramenes. While the apparent function of digressions can be purely decorative, Schiesar041 notes that the overall structure of a poem can be suggestive of its topic material, as is the case with the De Rernm Natura, so that even the most apparently decorative of digressions may also reflect some deeper structural aspect of a work.

1.6 Digressions and similes in the Halieutica and Cynegetica It is worth observing how the digressions and developed similes within the

Halieutica and Cynegetica comply with the norms of didactic epic. Fishing and hunting lends itself to presentation as a series of brief narrative episodes describing either the conflicts between fish or animals or how they are captured by men. In longer narrative episodes, such as the hunting of the whale at Hal. 5.109-357, there is scope for developing dramatic tension, and similes and digressions are used to do this in a manner we might expect to see in narrative epic. In particular, in these longer episodes similes can become so developed that they are difficult to distinguish in their function from genuine digressions. This more dramatic usage of developed similes is reflected in the wealth of anthropomorphic similes in the Halieutica, which are used sensitively and innovatively to draw on a wide range of human experience, creating and holding a reader's interest in the behaviour of fish, otherwise a potentially dry topic42 . The fact that 38 Toohey, Epic Lessons, 15. 39 There are occasional exceptions to this, such as the aetia at Hal. 3.1-28 and Cyn. 2.109-58 mentioned above. There is, however, only very limited personal expression in the technical discourse of either work. 40 Toohey, Epic Lessons, 2, inter alia. 41 Schiesaro, 88. 42 James, PCPh 192, 32 describes this extended use of similes in the Halieutica as a straightforward and positive response to the example set in the Homeric epics and their successors.

11

Introduction

similes are not used in such a manner in the Cynegetica, which may mainly be a reflection of the different topic material of the two poems, is examined in further detail later (see Similes). Another point to consider is whether the greater preponderance of digressions in the Cynegetica does not reflect the time in which it was composed. Roberts43 convincingly argues that strongly stylised digressions not dissimilar to those in the Cynegetica were a distinctive feature of Latin poetry in late antiquity. It is tempting to ascribe this aspect of style in the Cynegetica to a similar development in Greek verse over the approximately 40 years between the composition of the Halieutica and the Cynegetica. However, in view of how strongly the influence of the Halieutica is felt in the style of the Cynegetica, it seems more reasonable to treat this 'innovation' as a response to the Halieutica rather than a more general historical development. The mixture of narrative and 'pure' technical instruction in these works partly explains the very wide range of topics in digressions. In addition to aetia concerning the discovery of fishing and hunting techniques, there are a range of digressions in both works on dedicatory, encomiastic and philosophical themes. The large amount of encomiastic praise in both works reflects the epoch in which they were written. By comparison, while the Theriaca and Alexipharmaca of Nicander both start with brief dedications44 , there is no other example of encomiastic praise in earlier Greek didactic verse on the same scale. Inspiration for the encomiastic praise may, however, have come from a range of other sources. The existence of god-cults of the Roman emperors has probably inspired addresses resembling those to Zeus at the opening of the Phaenomena of Aratus and to the Muses at the opening of the Theogony of Hesiod. In addition encomiastic praise such as that of Ptolemy Soter in Theocritus Idyll XVII may have been influential. Oppian may also have been aware of the greater role of encomiastic praise in Roman epic verse, such as the praise of Augustus in Virgils's Georgics and Ovid's Metamorphoses, inter alia. Rebuffat, op. cit., 243, regards them more as an innovation intended to distinguish Oppian's work from that of his predecessors. Certainly the latter motive appears to have been a strong influence on their use, although the desire to enliven the topic material was probably at least as influential as any reaction to generic fashion. 43 Roberts, 36-37. 44 The dedication of Theriaca 1-7 is to Hermesianax, possibly the poet of the same name. That of the Alexipharmaca at 1-11 is to a certain Protagoras.

12

1.6 Digressions and similes in the Halieutica and Cynegetica

The philosophical and religious digressions of the Halieutica sometimes reflect the precepts of Stoicism, including the belief in a single omnipresent god with different aspects. The question is frequently raised as to whether the Phaenomena of Aratus is fundamentally a Stoic work45 , like the verse of Cleanthes, but it is not clear in the H alieutica the extent to which this apparent Stoicism is a reflection of Oppian's own beliefs, influence from Aratus or the popularity of Stoicism with the emperor to whom it is dedicated. The approach to religious material by the poet of the Cynegetica is quite different, with a more traditional approach to Greek religion and a particular focus on those gods whose cults were most popular in the eastern empire, including that of Artemis, Dionysus and the Cretan worship of Zeus. 46 As suits this approach, less attention is given to the nature of the universe and the gods than in the Halieutica. A further point to be considered for both works is that these digressions allow the poets to display their familiarity with religious and philosophical themes in earlier didactic works and, on occasions, to attempt to show greater learning than their predecessors.47 Careful reading of the Halieutica and Cynegetica suggests that both poets were familiar with at least parts of the works of the pre-Socratic philosopher-poets. The descriptions of the gods and the nature of existence has allowed both poets to draw on a wider range of features from these works than if the poets only digressed on matters closely related to fishing and hunting. Awareness of the works of the pre-Socratic philosophical poets is indicated by the way that the extant fragments 48 suggest that Empedocles used developed similes in a manner that may have been influential on Oppian. More generally a spirit of competition with other poets in the Hellenistic tradition is apparent in both works (cf. e.g. the description of 45 Cf. e.g. E. J. Kenney, 71-3, where he dissents from the view of Bemd Effe that the Phaenomena is a fundamentally Stoic treatise. As it is otherwise a highly developed work (cf. James, "The Zeus Hymns of Cleanthes and Aratus", 28-38), it seems difficult to credit Aratus with the production of a Stoic manifesto on the basis of these opening lines. It seems, however, that his later popularity is acknowledged by Oppian in digressions such as the description of the relationship between land, air and sea at Hal. 1.409-20. 46 Engelhofer, 162-4 notes that the religious standpoint depicted in the Cynegetica is close to that of Greek tragedy in that folly comes from the neglect of particular gods. It is not clear whether the use of this motif is a literary pose or a reflection of the poet's own concepts. 47 For an example of this Callimachean ethic of competition with earlier poets see Cyn. 1.21, where the poet states that his work covers ground previously untrodden, "n,v f.lEpOmllv oi.l1rw Tl-e; Efle; rn6:TTlaev 6:oLba'Cc;." 48 Cf. esp. fr. 5.5, 15 and 87 (Wright).

13

Introduction

the defeat of Typhaon by Pan and Zeus near Corycus at Hal. 3.15-25, a story otherwise preserved only in Apollodorus, as a possibly deliberate display oflearning on a level with Apollonius or Callimachus) but this spirit of competition is felt more strongly in the Cynegetica. The Halieutica frequently influences both the digressions and the developed similes of the Cynegetica. It is not, however, always clear to what extent this way of looking back to the Halieutica within the Cynegetica is as homage or as a display of superiority to the earlier work, although the much greater rhetorical styling in the Cynegetica suggests that possibly the poet was attempting to 'improve' on the style of the Halieutica. A final point to consider is the possibility that there was an Ixeutica, no longer extant, that may have been composed by Oppian49 and as a result the Cynegetica may have been in part composed to complete 'the set' of didactic poems. 1.7 Why examine the digressions and developed similes? A little considered aspect of these two works is how the difference in authorship is reflected not only on the small scale in matters such as the differing use of rhetorical styling by the poet of the Cynegetica or Oppian's greater skill with the hexameter fonn 50, but also in the differing works that have influenced their composition and the different ways that they interact with them. As there are no extant Greek verse works on hunting and fishing with which they might be usefully compared, and works in Latin such as the Halieutica attributed to Ovid51 and the Cynegetica of Grattius52 are preserved in only a fragmentary manner, it is those aspects common to the whole Greek and Roman verse tradition, namely the digressions and similes, that provide the soundest basis for understanding the position of these works within that tradition. Aspects that will be examined in closer detail in the following discussion include 49 James, Studies in the Language of Oppian of Cilicia, 3 notes that there is no reason that the Ixeutica of which a prose summary by Euctenius exists, normally attributed to Dionysius, could not actually have been a distinct work from one composed by Oppian. 50 See Wifstrand, 41-44. 51 A comparison with the Cynegetica of Neme sianus may also throw some light on common influences on both works, but is beyond the scope of this work. 52 The greater scope of the the fragments of Grattius (some 523 lines) would make this a useful work to consider in comparison with these poems. Unfortunately such a study is also beyond the scope of this work.

14

1.7 Why examine the digressions and developed similes?

the differing extent to which either author looks outside the hexameter tradition for inspiration, the similarities between the treatment of similar themes in Roman poetry and the influence on either poet by differing groups not only among the Hellenistic poets but also among the Classical poets. Lastly, the genre of epic verse evolved continuously in antiquity, and examination of the digressions and similes allows us to see the evolution that has taken place between the Hellenistic period and the Imperial period in which these works were composed. In particular, both works were composed in Near East a time when it was playing an ever more central role in the function of the empire and it is interesting to consider how the distinctive treatments of popular themes by these poets reflects their composition outside the centres of creative output in the Classical and Hellenistic periods.

15

2. Digressions 2.1 Overview The Halieutica is noticeably less digressive when compared with the Cynegetica. Ornamentation of the technical discourse is mostly achieved by extended similes (see Similes). There are, however, a number of extensive digressions within the Halieutica. These digressions are mainly mythological or religious/philosophical in nature, with a notable exception being the description of an unusual Aeolian story of a boy and a dolphin in book 5 (448-518). There are a number of differences between the style of the poets within the digressions. In the Halieutica the thematic link between the digressions and the technical discourse is often less forced than in the Cynegetica, c£ the somewhat forced rationalisation for the inclusion of the Herac1es aition at Cyn. 2.109-158. While Oppian's language is not bland he does not make as extensive a use of rhetorical styling as does the poet of the Cynegetica. Devices such as anaphora, chiasmus, lines mainly composed of descriptive epithets are all less frequent in the Halieutica, although they are by no means unknown. Instead extra impact in some passages is derived from the use of rare terms or newly coined compound terms and of striking and sometimes multi-layered allusions. Lastly, while there are some aspects of the Cynegetica that suggest at least the strong possibility that the poet may have been familiar with the Roman epic tradition, there is only limited evidence within the Halieutica to suggest familiarity with themes or expression particular to Roman epic53 • The Cynegetica is characterised by its richness and quantity of genuine digressions. None of the books of the Cynegetica lacks a large, genuinely digressive passage, and there are a range of other passages which drift far enough from the technical discourse to be considered digressive, for example the practice of marking doves and Laconian children in a passage devoted to describing eugenics in horses for hunting at Cyn. 1.326-367. 53 Of particular interest within the Halieutica are the digression on the departure of Justice from the earth at 2.664-688 and the address to the Emperor and his son at 4.4-10. Within the Cynegetica the aition of the opening of the Orontes at 2.109-158 and the invocation of the emperor Caracalla at 4.10-24 are worthy of note.

16

2.2 Summary of Digressions

Many of the digressions are mythological or religious/philosophical in nature, but there are also a few which reflect either direct experience of the poet, or hearsay accounts, reminiscent of, for example, the stories of religious customs among the Egyptians in Herodotus at Hist. 11 passim. Digressions in the Cynegetica are generally highly allusive and make extensive use of the standard topoi of epic literature. Both authors frequently make very concise or indirect allusions to passages in other works, much in the manner of the allusions of Vergil in the Georgics 54, and appear to be very familiar with the earlier Greek corpus, both heroic and didactic, along with related works such as the Homeric hymns, the Callimachean hymns, Greek bucolic poetry and epigrammatic verse. In contrast to the Halieutica the author of the Cynegetica directs his creativity more strongly into the use of allusive material in the digressions and extended similes, compared with Oppian's stronger focus on novel themes and expression, including the unusual use of material from Greek drama. The poet of the Cynegetica also makes greater use of new compounds as a form of very concise allusion. 2.2 Summary of digressions Book I of the Halieutica contains four digressions: the pleasures of hunting, 1-79, the love that Poseidon holds for dolphins at 385-393; digressions on the relationship between land, sea and air and the denizens of each of those domains at 409-420, and at 702-733 describing the love between humans and their young as well as animals and their young, a topic which is eventually extended back to a description of the relationship between dolphins and their young. The second book of the Halieutica contains another four digressions: a lengthy description of various gods with a focus on their spheres of influence, 1-42; a brief moralising digression on the perils of gluttony for men, 217-24; a brief aetiological digression describing the way in which the magic point of the spear of Telegonus became that of the stingray, 497-505; a long digression on the nature of Justice and her departure from the earth, 664-688. Book 3 of the Halieutica has three genuine digressions: lines 1-28, an address to 54 Farrell, 8-9, makes the point very strongly that Homer is not the exemplar for Vergil in all instances, as in the analyses of Conte and Knauer, but that in the Georgics the range of influences is very broad, and though individual passages will usually have a single dominant exemplar, there are a wide range of secondary influences at work on different levels to create an allusive framework.

17

2. Digressions

Hennes as the inventor of the skills of fishing and an aetiological description of the staining of the Cilician shores red by the battle between Zeus, Pan and Typhon; lines 402-8 a brief moralising digression describing the incest of Smyrna, the daughter of Theias, and her transformation into a myrrh tree; lines 486-97, an unusual aetiological description of the creation of mint, attributing it to the transformation of the nymph Menthe by Demeter. Book 4 also has only two digressions: a brief address to the Emperor and his son at lines 4-10; the evils of polygamy following a description of a male fish with multiple mates at lines 203-15. Book 5 again contains four genuine digressions: an opening invocation to the emperor, a description of the creation of man, and his conflicts with 'sea monsters' at 1-45, an extended prayer to Earth for protection from the terrors of the sea at 336-349, the story of a boy and a dolphin at 448-518 and a closing prayer to Poseidon at 675-680. Book 1 of the Cynegetica establishes the tone and character of the poem, beginning with a dedication of the poem to the emperor of the time, a hymn to and dialogue with Artemis, 1-46, and a comparison of hunting, fishing and fowling 46-80. The discourse is further punctuated by digressive passages on famous horses 198-268, eugenics in horses, doves and men 326-367, and the time when animals breed 378-392. Book 2 has 8 digressive passages: the opening address to Artemis and discussion of who discovered the pleasures of hunting, 1-30, an extended description of the pleasures of hunting, 30-42, an aition of the opening of the Orontes to the sea by Heracles, 109-158, a prayer by young goats to Zeus to ask for the release of a parent from a hunter, 360-376, a description of the unnatural passions between animals, 386-444, with a hymnlike address to Eros nested within the story of the Subus' swimming habits, 410-425, an aition of how moles are sprung from king Phineus, 614-628. Book 3 of the Cynegetica contains four genuine digressions in a variety of styles, including a mythological aition of how lions were created from the Curetes at 8-19, a brief and seemingly autobiographical description of a lion seen in a procession at 46-47, a mythological description of the link between leopards and Bacchus at 78-83, and a story in the style of the Halieutica on how octopods devour their own limbs for food in lean times at 176-82. Book 4 of the Cynegetica contains only two genuine digressions: an invocation to the "son of Divine Severus", i.e. the emperor Caracalla, and Artemis at 10-24, and an extended digression on how the Bacchantes were 18

2.3 Quantity of digressions

turned into leopards by Dionysus at 233-319, which deserves the title 'epyllion' by virtue of its size and stylised nature.

2.3 Quantity of digressions The first difference to be noted in the use of digressions in the Halieutica and Cynegetica is that while both works have a large number of genuinely digressive passages, they form a much larger proportion of the Cynegetica as a whole and also dominate the artistic ornamentation of that poem. The Halieutica contains 17 genuine digressions in 3506 lines of verse. These passages total 413 lines of text, a little more than a tenth of the total text. The Cynegetica contains 19 genuine digressions in 2144 lines of verse. These passages total 523 lines of text, or a little over a quarter of the text. As there are fewer developed similes in the Cynegetica, and few of them are anthropomorphic, it may be that the poet has focussed his attention so strongly on digressions to make his style distinctive compared with that of Oppian. As will be discussed further below, there is such a variety of wellexecuted similes in the Halieutica that it was important for the poet of the Cynegetica to branch out in a different direction to try and avoid producing a pale imitation of the earlier work. The distribution and topic material of these passages is as follows.

2.4 Scope of digressions While there is a significant difference in the amount of digressive material, both the Halieutica and the Cynegetica show a similar variety of individual passages. Both works include digressions so large as to be suggestive of Hellenistic epyUia and their adaptation into longer works such as the 'Aristaeus epyllion' at Virgil Geor. 4.315-566. The extended digression on the love between a boy and a dolphin at Hal. 5.448-518 and the story of the birth, childhood and trials of Bacchus at Cyn. 4.233-319 provide dramatic centrepieces to the closing books of their poems. While the adaptation epyllion-like disgressions into a longer work may suggest familiarity with at least the broad outline of the Georgics, it is possible that there was some now lost Greek model that has influenced both the Roman 19

2. Digressions

and the Greek poets in this respect. 55 There are a large number of digressions of approximately 20-40 lines' length in both works, and these make up the majority of the digressions on topics of a philosophical or religious nature, or aitia explaining matters related to hunting or fishing. Another common type of digression in both poems is the address to the imperial family or to certain gods, and these range in length between 10 and 30 lines. Unusually the poet of the Cynegetica also includes one very brief digression describing a lion which the poet himself claims to have seen in a procession, of only two lines' length at Cyn. 3.46-7. It is open to question whether this last should be regarded as genuinely digressive, but it is included here as its implication of personal knowledge stands out sharply from the technical discourse in which the poet does not strongly express a personal voice and, while it provides colour to the description of lions, it does not actually add technical information.

2.5 Placement The issues of scope and placement of digressions are closely related. As has been pointed out, the largest digressions in both poems form a dramatic centrepiece in the last book56 • More generally the digressions of both works are either placed in an emphatic position such as at the opening and the close of a book and are not closely integrated with the technical discourse, or when integrated with the discourse, with some thematic link, they are generally smaller in scope. Digressions on the nature of hunting, fishing and fowling, found at Hal. 1.1-79 and Cyn. 1.46-80, addresses to the imperial family or to certain gods, or passages of broader philosophical or religious nature fall into the former category. Aetiological passages, which generally have a close link with the discourse which they explainS?, 55 For a useful discussion of the influences on the Aristaeus epyllion see Conte, The Rhetoric ofImitation: Genre and Poetic Memory in Virgi/ and Other Latin Poets. For a dissenting view on Conte's sometimes dogmatically negative approach to the concept of authorial intention see Hinds, 19-23. 56 This is one of the points suggesting that the Cynegetica is complete as we have it. The extended digression on Bacchus in that book is suggestive of the inclusion of the long digression on the boy and the dolphin in the fifth book of the Halieutica. 57 This link with the technical discourse can, however, become quite forced. In the aition on the opening of the river Orontes to the sea by Heracles at Cyn. 2.100-158 a convoluted link is drawn from the technical discourse on bulls, to the task ofHeracles involving the cattle of Geryon and then to the task involving the opening of the river. It is possible that it is included as

20

2.6 Classification of digressions

fall into the latter category. The poet of the Cynegetica varies his placement rather more than Oppian, as the third book of the Cyn. does not have a substantial opening digression, but has a brief aetiological digression on the creation oflions from the Curetes at 8-19. 2.6 Classification of digressions It has been mentioned previously that the digressions in both works fall

into three broad categories, those that address and praise either the emperors or the gods, those that are concerned with philosophical or religious matters and those which are primarily intended to interact with the discourse, whether to give character to more mundane descriptions or to emphasise some aspect of the discourse. When the number and details of the digressions that fall into each category are examined, considerable differences emerge in the approaches of the two works that are also suggestive of the differing influences on each poet that will be discussed in detail below. 2.6.1 EncomiasticlHymnic Digressions The following digressions in the Halieutica involve either encomiastic praise or addresses to gods: a brief hymn to Zeus and an unnamed goddess for the protection of the emperor and his son at 1.73-9; a long digression on the nature of Justice and her departure from the earth at 2.664-688, which leads to praise of the Emperor for his restoration of justice to the empire; lines 1-28 of book 3, an address to Hermes as the inventor of the skills of fishing and an aetiological description of the staining of the Cilician shores red by the battle between Zeus, Pan and Typhon, with a closing request that Hermes, as inventor of the skills of fishing, give heed to this poem; Book 4, a brief address to the Emperor and his son at lines 4-10; Book 5, an invocation to the emperor, a description of the creation of man, and his conflicts with 'sea monsters' at 1-45. The following digressions in the Cynegetica involve either encomiastic praise or addresses to gods: a declaration to the emperor of the time, a hymn to and dialogue with Artemis at 1.1-46, another address to Artemis encomiastic praise of the canalisation of the river Orontes by the Emperor Caraca1la, which would help to explain the forcing of such a tenuous link with the discourse.

21

2. Digressions

and discussion of who discovered the pleasures of hunting at 2.1-30; a hymnlike address to Eros at 2.410-425; Book 4, an invocation directed to the emperor Caracalla, and Artemis at 10-24. From this brief summary several differences in the approach of the two poets emerge. Oppian has dedicated 111 lines of his work to encomiastic or hymnic material, as opposed to 105 lines in the Cynegetica, but there is a noticeable difference in quality between the two. The poet of the Cynegetica directly addresses only either the emperor and his family or Artemis, with a brief address to Eros mirroring a similar description of the impact ofEros at Hal. 4.10-39. Oppian, however, addresses a range of gods directly, Zeus, Poseidon and Hennes, and by comparing the emperor Marcus Aurelius with the goddess Justice returned to the world praises him more fulsomely than the poet of the Cynegetica does the emperor Caracalla. While there is some possibility that the description of the opening of the river Orontes to the sea is intended as encomiastic praise of Caracalla, nowhere in the Cynegetica is such strong use made of encomiastic praise. Conversely, there is no consistent focus on one god within the Halieutica which might have served as a model for the focus on Artemis in the Cynegetica . The most likely model in extant epic for the striking dialogue between the poet and the goddess at 1.1-46 is the introductory dialogue between the poet and the god Apollo at Call. Aitia fr. 1.1-4 and 22-30 (pfeiffer). It is not clear, however, whether the unusual change of addressee to Artemis is a reflection of genuine reverence on the part of the poet, as is suggested by Engelhofeii8 , or a literary device to obliquely evoke both the model from Callimachus and the identification of Caracalla with the god Apoll059. A final point to note is that the digressions often cannot be assigned solely to one or another of the categories used here. For example, the hymn to Eros at Cyn. 2.410-25 is in part also concerned with the nature of Eros and his influence and could be usefully included among the philosophical digressions.

58 Engelhofer, l66ff. Engelhofer does, however, point out elsewhere the difficulty in separating the poet's own religious beliefs from those that he includes for literary reasons. 59 Grant, The Climax ofRome, 177.

22

2.6 Classification of digressions

2.6.2 Philosophical and Religious Digressions Another striking difference in approach is in regards to material of a philosophical or religious nature. The are 6 digressions of this sort in the Halieutica discussing matters closely related to the technical discourse, such as the creation of man and how he came into conflict with the 'monsters' of the sea, and less closely related matters such as the perils of gluttony for all creatures. There are only three digressions of this sort in the Cynegetica. A brief summary of these digressions follows. The following digressions in the Halieutica discuss philosophical or religious themes: book 1, digressions on the relationship between land sea and air and the denizens of each of those domains at 409-420, and on the love between humans and their young as well as animals and their young at 702-733; Book 2, a lengthy description of various gods with a focus on their spheres of influence at 1-42; a brief moralising digression on the perils of gluttony for men 217-24;60 a digression on the evils of polygamy following a description of a male fish with multiple mates at 4.203-15; Book 5, a digression describing the creation of man and his conflicts with 'sea monsters' at 1-45. The following digressions in the Cynegetica discuss philosophical or religious themes: a comparison of hunting, fishing and fowling at 1.46-80; Book 2, an address to Artemis and a discussion of who invented the skills of hunting at 1-30 and an extended description of the pleasures of hunting 30-42. It is not clear why Oppian gives such a strong focus to philosophical and religious matters when compared with the poet of the Cynegetica, whether out of personal interest, to provide material that would be interesting to an emperor himself interested in philosophical matters, or as an opportunity to allude to and borrow from similar material in earlier epic literature. The answer likely lies somewhere between these possibilities.

2.6.3 Digressions integrated with the technical discourse Within the Halieutica and the Cynegetica there are a wealth of digressions with a strong thematic link with the technical discourse. These 60 The digression on the departure of Justice from the world and her return 2.664-688 could also have been included here, but has fallen under the previous category as it is fundamentally concerned with praise of the emperor.

23

2. Digressions

digressions are either concerned mainly with explaining matters peripheral to the discourse, as is the case with aitia, or more generally highlight and add colour to the technical material. The digressions of this sort within the Halieutica are as follows: in book 1 of the Halieutica, a description of the love that Poseidon holds for dolphins at 385-393; in the second book of the Halieutica, a brief mythological digression describing how the magic point of the spear of Telegonus became that of the stingray, 497-505; Book 3 of the Halieutica, a brief moralising digression describing the incest of Smyma, the daughter of Theias, and her transformation into a myrrh tree, 402-8; 486-97 an unusual aetiological description of the creation of mint, attributing it to the transformation of the nymph Menthe by Demeter; Book 4, digression on fish that bury their heads to escape notice at lines 624-31; Book 5, the story of a boy and a dolphin at 448-518. Book 1 of the Cynegetica is punctuated by digressive passages on famous horses 198-268, eugenics in horses, doves and men 326-367, and the time when animals breed 378-392. Book 2 has an aition of the opening of the Orontes to the sea by Herades, 109-158, a description of the war between snakes and stags, 233-90, a prayer by young goats to Zeus to ask for the release of a parent from a hunter, 360-376, a description of the unnatural passions between animals, 386-444, and an aition of how moles are sprung from king Phineus, 614-628. Book 3 has a mythological aition of how lions were created from the Curetes at 8-19, a brief and seemingly autobiographical description of a lion seen in a procession at 46-47, a mythological description of the link between leopards and Bacchus at 7883, and a story in the style of the Halieutica on how octopods devour their own limbs for food in lean times at 176-82. Book 4 contains an extended digression on how the Bacchantes were turned into leopards by Dionysus at 233-319. Within the Cynegetica the digressions of this sort make up a greater proportion of the total digressions, 13 out of 19, than do those in the Halieutica, 6 out of 18. As digressions are the primary way the poet of the Cynegetica ornaments his technical discourse it is to be expected that more digressions within the Cynegetica show a close thematic link with the discourse. The closer integration with the technical discourse is reflected by their reduced frequency at the open and close of their relevant books, being instead distributed throughout the discourse. The much 24

2.7 Aspects of the digressions to be examined

greater emphasis on aitiological digressions within the Cynegetica is also suggestive of a stronger influence by the style of the Hellenistic poets, particularly Callimachus, a factor also apparent when the influences on language and themes of these digressions are examined in detail. 2.7 Aspects ofthe digressions to be examined The detailed examination of the digressions will look at each of the categories detailed above with particular focus on the following issues. 2.7.1 Themes and images The range of influences on these two works is most strongly reflected by the range of themes and images. In addition to the vocabulary of these digressions, the extent of the influence by the epic tradition on the themes and images depicted in the digressions and the extent to which their composition appears to innovate is distinctive. Both poets make considerable use of material from earlier works, but are distinguished by the range of material they use, the amount they incorporate and how they adapt and innovate on this material. While examination of this material illustrates the differing approach of the poets to the epic tradition, it also gives strong insight into the influence of the Halieutica on the style of the Cynegetica. The approach that will be taken to the question of influence on the language and themes of the digressions will be conducted on a similar basis to the examination by Hinds 61 of allusion in the Roman epic poets, that is that use of innovative and borrowed material will at times stem from a deliberate intention of the poet, whether for allusive or other purposes, and at other times will more strongly reflect the broad impact of external forces such as the poet's place within the evolving epic genre and the society and epoch in which the poems are written. It will often not be possible to separate these influences in a meaningful way, particularly as in the case of these poets we have only limited familiarity with their milieu.

61 Hinds, 8-45. Hinds particularly notes the problems ansmg from the fragmentary preservation of the Roman tradition for interpreting what a poet may be attempting to achieve by allusion, and given the amount of Hellenistic and later Greek didactic epic that has not survived, similar limitations must be admitted here.

25

2. Digressions

2.7.2 Language

The range of authors that influenced these poems is strongly reflected in the language used. The Halieutica and the Cynegetica are characterised by a mixture of language characteristic of Greco-Roman epic and language that is innovative and introduced :from other genres. Expressions are generally borrowed :from earlier works in a modified fonn to suit the new context in which they are being used. Borrowed language takes the fonn of individual words that in their context have resonance with usage by earlier poets, through to an entire lin or several lines in a given passage. Similarly, it is instructive to look at the ways in which both poets introduce language from outside the epic genre, as this reflects the different preferences of the poets and to a certain extent the language of the epoch in which they wrote. When considering larger borrowings, issues that will be examined include the choice of words, their position, metrical anomalies and how these borrowings fit into the structure of the digression as a whole. 2.7.3 Rhetorical and Other Forms of Styling

The distinctive features of style of the two poets will also be examined in some detail. As noted previously, the poet of the Cynegetica makes greater use of rhetorical features such as features of repetition than does Oppian, although there are several digressions within the Halieutica which use a wide range of rhetorical features. Other features of the style of the Cynegetica suggest the possible influence of works such as the Orphic hymns. It is not, however, the intention of this work to make an exhaustive examination of the influence of rhetoric on these two poets, and so only those features relevant to the broader argument will be examined in detail.

2.8 Digressions modelled predominantly on a single passage Digressions of this sort are comparatively rare within both works, reflecting the fact that these poets follow the practice of the Hellenistic poets in taking an eclectic and learned approach towards earlier works when looking for inspiration. It is worth noting that the poet of the Cynegetica twice takes aspects of the technical discourse :from the Halieutica, namely the description of the impact of Eros and the story of the octopus eating its 26

2.8.1 The pleasures of hunting, fishing and fowling, Hal. 1.1-79

limbs, and uses that as the basis for digressions within his own work. It is possible that this was partly done to establish the Cynegetica as a fitting member of the canon consisting of the Halieutica and possibly the no longer extant Ixeutica. Each of these digressions will now be examined in detail.

2.8.1 The pleasures afforded by hunting, fishing and fowling, Hal. 1.1-

79 The inclusion of this digression here may appear unusual, as there is no extant Greek epic model for the tripartite comparison of hunting, fishing and fowling which makes up the bulk of this digression. This comparison may, however, reflect the influence of the popular sub-genre of epigrams which discuss the archetypal hunter, Damis, fowler, Pigres, and fisherman, Clitor, and invoke Pan as their instructor in these skills at AP 6.11-16 and 6.l79-187. Ofthese, those by Antipater Sidonius, at 6.l4 and Leonidas at 6.l3 would certainly predate Oppian, as would most likely those at 6.l6 and 6.179-181 attributed to Archias. The presence of a threefold mention of hunting, fishing and fowling at Virgil Gear. 1.139-42 suggests that these poems may have had broad appeal in the Hellenistic and early Imperial periods. The Halieutica opens with a comparison of hunting, fowling and fishing, 1-55, a discourse on the pleasures of fishing, 56-72, and a prayer to Poseidon for divine help with the poem, 73-79, including a brief naming of the Emperor Marcus Aurelius, 3, resumed and developed at 66-70. The form of the opening to the Halieutica is far more conventional than that of the Cynegetica with its dramatic dialogue between the poet and Artemis, as Oppian uses a more conventional monologue form of address and description. Unlike the opening of the Cynegetica the address is almost entirely directed at the Emperor Marcus Aurelius and his son, with the exception of the final prayer to the gods at 73-9. However, as in the opening of the Cynegetica the poet has focus sed on a tripartite comparison of hunting, fowling and fishing. This is not as strongly reflected in the structure of the passage and in the use of rhetorical figuring as is the case at Cyn. 1.47-90, see n. infra. The passage is composed as follows: Oppian declares that he will tell of fishing in an address to the emperor Marcus Aurelius, 1-3, and of the types 27

2. Digressions

fishermen sailing the sea, thereby specifying that the fishing to be described is saltwater fishing, 9-12. Oppian then examines the nature of hunting, with an emphasis on the hunter being able to see his prey, 12-14, that he hunts on dry land, 15, and has the help of hounds, 16-18. The amenities of dry land are enumerated, including the mild effects of the seasons, 19-20, natural shelter, 20-22, streams to drink from, 22-4, grassy banks to lie on, 24-6, and seasonable fruit to eat, 26-7. Concluding that hunting is more about pleasure than work Oppian then turns to fowling, emphasising its ease, 28-30. Fowling techniques are enumerated, including collection of birds from nests, 31-2, using limed reeds, 32, and using nets, 33-4. Oppian emphasises the superiority of fishing by highlighting the lack of ease for fishermen, including the overall lack of certainty, 35-6, the movement of the sea compared with the land, 37-40, the vulnerability of the sailors to conditions at sea, 41-44, and the vulnerability to the heat of summer and the cold of winter, 45-6. The fishermen fear sea-monsters which, unlike those on land, they cannot see, 47-49, and have no hounds to guide them, 50-1. The fish are not seen until their capture as they travel any way they please, 51-3, and the fishing equipment is quite feeble, 54-5. Oppian then discusses the pleasures available for fisherman, emphasising it as a royal sport (anticipating the resumed address to the emperor at 66), 56-7, the pleasures of a good ship and crew, 58-62, and the abundance and variety of fish to be caught, 63-66. Addressing the emperor directly as well as his son, Oppian describes the ease with which fish may be caught by him, 67-70, and the pleasures of seeing a fish fight on the line, 71-2. The passage closes with a prayer to Poseidon, 73-4, the sea itself and the other sea gods, 74-7, and to a muse, 77-9, the latter including a prayer that the poem may be pleasing to the emperor and his son. One notable factor missing from this passage is a reference to the work of other poets and other classes of poetry within epic such as that at Cyn. 1.20-34, see n. infra, a significant difference in the approach of the two poets to digressions as a whole, as Oppian avoids conscious reference to earlier poets. That is not to say that Oppian has written without readily identifiable inspiration from earlier authors , cf. the digression on the nature of justice at 2.664-688 inspired by Hesiod Op. 213-85 and Aratus Phaen. 98-136, but rather Oppian does not explicitly refer to the relationship between the Halieutica and earlier epic works. Possibly this reflects a difference in approach by both authors to their earlier models, as the poet 28

2.8.1 The pleasures of hunting, fishing and fowling, Hal. 1.1-79

of the Cynegetica styles his work more after the Hellenistic poets, and possibly the Augustan poets, with their open and learned acknowledgment of earlier models, whereas the poet of the Halieutica may be trying to model himself on poets such as Hesiod and Aratus both in terms of their didactic style and in terms of their lack of explicit acknowledgment of any influence on their work. 62 The language of this passage is distinctive for the wide range of influences from earlier works. This range of possible sources may have been knowingly employed to suggest a high degree of learning and expertise appropriate for a technical treatise. The majority of the influences on the language in this passage are Homeric or Hesiodic, with particular influence from Homeric depictions of Odysseus at sea. The dramatic impact of this opening passage is also emphasised by the frequent use of strongly stylised expression, in particular of rhyme and anaphora. Oppian does not generally make use of such strongly stylised language in the other digressions, and possibly this is not his preferred style of ornamentation, as compared with the poet of the Cynegetica. 11"E-&vEcl TOI. 1TOVTOI.O This opening description of the object of the Halieutica may have influenced Cynegetica 3.1 ... E-&VEa 1l-TJPwv/. 1 1TOAuo1TEpeaq TE rpclAayyaq/ This phrase is notable for the rhyme in ac;, and the epithet 1TOAU01T., which also occurs at Hes. Th. 365, where it describes the Oceanid nymphs. Given the similarly maritime references it may at first seem that the Hesiodic usage has been more influential than the two Homeric usages where the same word is used with ci:v1l-pw1Twv (-OUC;), It. 2.804 and Od. 9.365. However, as the fish are described anthropomorphically as "E1l-vEa it seems likely that this reference recalls both the Theogony and the Iliad, as the use of 1TOAUO"1T. in the latter describes the Trojan allies in the 'catalogue of ships', a passage in which the word E1l-V. appears 4x. Most importantly E-&v. is used in a simile comparing the variety of the Greek forces to different flocks of birds on a migratory path at It. 2.459 1TETETJVWV E-&vEa 1TOMaJ, and it seems likely that it is this relationship between nations of men and species of animals that has inspired Oppian here. The alternate Homeric meaning of 'swarms' is unlikely to be intended as this is not well suited to the catalogue of fish 62 An important exception to this statement is the story of the boy and dolphin at 5.448-518, with its direct mention of other stories that Oppian passes over at 448-57, which seems to have influenced the poet of the Cynegetica at several places, cf. the recusatio of Cyn. 1.20-34.

29

2. Digressions

species in the Hal. This line is remarkable for its succinct and striking introduction to the focus of the book, as well as for the depths of influence and allusion implicit in its language. 2 hravToLwv VE'lT6owv VE'IT. to indicate fish in general is used 23x by Oppian. It is a characteristic tenn in epic, occurring first at Od. 4.404 to describe seals, thence elsewhere throughout epic literature, with the prior didactic occurrences at Nic. Al. 468, 485, in both of which the poet uses the term to mean fish without any need for qualification. The rhyme of -wv follows on from that in -ac;' in the opening line to maintain a striking sound in the opening sentence. 3 E~Epew ... U'lTaTOV KPO:TOc;', •AVTWV'CVE One significant difference between this opening and that of the Cynegetica is that in the latter the poet and the object of his dedication are introduced immediately, whereas Oppian delays their mention, emphasising the subject matter of his work. This reflects a difference in the approach of the poets, with Oppian placing more emphasis on the artistic merit of his technical material. The epithet U'IT. is not unusual in itself, but it is interesting that all of its five occurrences in the lliacf3 describe Zeus, and that coupled with the description of the emperor as yaLTlc;' ... KPCiTOc;' emphasise his duality as temporal and divine ruler. This double meaning is further intensified by the common use of the noun U'lTaToc;' to mean 'consul'. Mair notes that the identification of the emperor as .A VTWV'CVE is not in itself sufficient to confirm that Marcus Aurelius is intended, but that rather other evidence such as mentions of the emperor's son as at 4.4ffhelp to confirm that this emperor is intended, in the period of joint rule enjoyed by Marcus Aurelius and Commodus. 4 KUjJ.aToEooav ... xuow The epithet KUiJ.. otherwise occurs only at Arist. fr. 640.18, and it is possible that its use here in verse is an innovation by the poet based on the regular epic formation of adjectives in -6ELc;'. 50I.EPOUc;' TE YO:jJ.ouc;' OI.EPO:c;' TE YEve-&Aac;' The use of bLEp. to mean 'watery' is a common post-Homeric usage, e.g. A.R. 1.184 bLEP0c;' KEAEU-&oc;', while its two Homeric occurrences, Od. 6.201 and 9.43, still carry the sense of 'nimble' or 'active'. The rhyme in the endings of the nouns and epithets in -OUc;' and -ac;', together with the repetition of bLEPTE y- creates a striking effect as the poet begins to outline in short, bold strokes the scope of his work.

63 Homer, 11. 5.756, 8.22, 17.339, 19.258 and 23.43

30

2.8.1 The pleasures of hunting, fishing and fowling, Hal. 1.1-79

6-7 !Kat ~Lov .. ./Kat ~ouAac; The rapid progression of nouns describing the scope of the technical material is very striking with its fourfold repetition of Kat, and the rhyme of -a and -at;'. All of the nouns and epithets used in this phrase relate to the habits and behaviour of the fish, which contrasts effectively with the change in expression that follows to describe the technique of the fisherman. These lines bear comparison with the lines made up of descriptive epithets favoured by the poet of the Cynegetica, 1.217-8 n. 7 TTOA(>TpOTTa oflvea The epithet TTOAUTp. has an interesting semantic range in epic, being used twice as either 'much wandering' or 'of many wiles' ofOdysseus at Od. 1.1 and 10.3064, and as 'many-wiled' ofHermes atH.h. Hermes 439. It seems likely that in using something that appears in the first line of the Odyssey and which sums up its subject matter so succinctly Oppian is attributing to his fishermen a level of cunning similar to that for which Odysseus was legendary. 8-9 !KepoaAETlC; .. ./ d cppaOTOI.C;. .. Oppian creates contrast by starting two lines with an epithet to describe the cleverness of the fishermen followed by one to describe the mysterious nature of the fish. The epithet KEpt>. appears once in the Iliad at 10.44, and three times in the Odyssey at 6.148,8.548 and 13.291. All three appearances in the Odyssey relate to the cunning and wile of Odysseus and it is likely, given also the usage of TTOAUTPOTTO at 7, cf. n. supra, that the poet is striving to imply a similar 'heroic' cunning for fishermen. 10 TOA~TlPt1 KpaoLTJ The epithet TO~. is unusual in verse, though common in prose. The verse form TO~f]ELC;' occurs twice in the Hal. (1.356, 3.44). The form used here does, however, appear once before in hexameter verse at [Bion] 1.60. 10-11 OUK ETTLoTTTa / ~Ev-&ea The epithet E. is previously attested at Aratus Phaen. 25, where it is also used in the negative to indicate a pole of the sky that may not be observed. It is interesting to note a similarity of sense here, as for a northern hemisphere observer the southern celestial pole would lie below the sea. As this epithet is otherwise unattested it seems likely that Aratus has been influential.

64 Stanford, Odyssey I-XII, 206 Stanford notes the difficulty in establishing a definitive etymology for this term and suggests 'of many moves', which deals with the ambiguity well in its use in the Odyssey, but is less appropriate here.

31

2. Digressions

11-12 OaaaVTO / OaL.jJ.6vl.ol. The description of the men who chart the seas' as om.l-!. concurs with the superhuman staus implied by the use of terms applied notably to Odysseus, cf. 7 and 8-9 n. supra, and is emphasised by the alliteration in OL'cX ... oaaaVTo / omvovLoL. This is an important point for Oppian to make with respect to the comparison with hunting and fowling that follows, as he goes on to assert that it is the relative ease and certainty of hunting that makes fishing superior, with the implication that hunters would have no use for the remarkable intellect that he implies for the fishermen in these lines. 12 XAo6vTJV jJ.EV OpLTP0tpOV The noun XA. is used on its own to indicate a wild boar in Nicander at fr. 74.6 and later in Oppian at 5.35. This use is probably based on its Homeric occurrence at Il. 9.539, as well as at [Hes.] Se. 177 and Alexander Aetolus fr. 5.765, as an epithet ofaue;' with the popular etymology of 'couching in the green wood'. The epithet opeTp. occurs only here and at Soph. Ichn. 151 and 0PELTPEcpf]e;' occurs at A.R. 2.34, which is essentially the same word. The combination of two rare words emphatically marks the new turn in the discourse, the comparison of hunting, fishing and fowling. 13 /-&TJPTJTTJP It is interesting to note that, as at 1-3, cf. n. supra, Oppian has delayed discussing the hunter and his skill, focussing initially on the prey. 14 EKa-&ev TE !3aAE'Cv aXE06-&Ev TE oajJ.aaaal./ Here the poet emphasises one of the critical differences between the hunter and the fisherman, namely the range of options available to a hunter in catching his prey compared with the fisherman, by the striking symmetry of this phrase. The duality of options for the hunter is emphasised on several levels, with repetition of adverb and verb, as well as alliterative repetition of --&ev TE. 15 cxjJ.tpCIJ ... -&f)p TE Kat dVTJp/ The theme of duality is re-enforced by this line, with its opening of CXl-!tpCIJ and the rhyme in -Tlp. 16 aK6AaKEc;' ... rlYEjJ.ovflEc;' An anthropomorphising tone is created for the hunting dogs here. Its effect is to emphasise both the quality of assistance received by the hunter from the hounds and the ease which the hunter enjoys with his near human helpers. 17 Kvc1loaAa ... cXvaKTac;' This line features chiasmus and rhyme in ouaL(v). The verbs describing the help of the hounds are more commonly

65 Powell, 125.

32

2.8.1 The pleasures of hunting, fishing and fowling, Hal. 1.1-79

associated with human endeavour and as such maintain the identification of the hounds with human assistants. 19-20ou xe"Clla ... ou IlEV chrwPll / cpAeYlla cpepel. Oppian emphasises the difference between the heat encountered at sea and that to which the land hunters are subject by CPAEWO, its sole use in either the Hal. or the Cyn. CPAEyf.l.O only occurs once in Homer at 11.21.337, describing the heat that Hera intends to stir up to stop the river Xanthos from attacking Achilles, but there is little to suggest a close link between these descriptions. The anaphora here draws the reader's attention to the weather conditions which the hunter may disregard more easily. 20 E'lTOKT-rlPWV It is interesting to note that this is the only occurrence of this word in the Hal., although it appears 7x in the Cynegetica. Previously it is used twice in Homer at 11. 17.135 and Od. 19.435, and at A.R. 1.625. There is an interesting ambiguity, as in A.R. it usually denotes fishermen rather than hunters, although its use here after -ttT)PT)TTJP 13 is explicit in meaning. Oppian has possibly played deliberately on the possible meanings in using a term for a hunter in the opening of a book on fishing that can also mean 'fisherman'. 20-2 dAewpat / AOXllal. .. ./ allTOpocpOu These lines swiftly enunciate the geographical features on hand to protect the hunter, ending strikingly with the epithet 00. which otherwise occurs at Cyn. 2.588, Aelian NA. 16.17.20 and Dion. Hal. A.R. 1.79.3 and in Nonnus at Dion. 14.67 and 15.192, inter alia. Its use in verse here is likely an innovation by Oppian, as well as a deliberate display of learning. Oppian may have been inspired to apply it here by the use oflnjJopocpoc;' in Homer, e.g fl. 3.423, 24.192 and 317. 22-3 'lTOAAOL be Tl. Tal. VOlleVOI. .. .I apy6peol. 'lToTaIlOC. . . . The combination O:PyUPEO\., 'lTOTOI.lOC may recall the description of the river Xanthos at 11. 21.8 / Ec;' 'lTOTOf.l.OV ... O:pyupo6CvT)v. Metaphorical descriptions of a river in terms of the sheen of silver are rare, with the example from the Iliad being unique within that work. Similarly, the description of the river here as T\.,T. may recall the description of a horse running over a plain at /1.22.21-2; Wc;' -tt' L'IT'ITOc;' O:E-ttAOCPOP0c;' ouv OXmcp\.,v / Qc;' pO: TE PELO -&Eno\., T\.,TOW0f.l.EVOc;' 'lTE6Cow' and 23.518. There are no similar metaphorical descriptions of rivers in the Cynegetica, although on several occasions rivers are described by rare or previously unseen compound epithets, c£ e.g. 'lTOAUppO-tto:you TTOTOf.l.OLO 3.21. This line

33

2. Digressions

continues the description of the physical comforts of hunting and is notable as the alliteration and the rhyme in -OL give a strong sense of the swift tumbling motion of mountain-side streams. 23-4 1ToTalloG•... / aevaol. TallLal. Possibly the poet has been influenced here by the description of the formation of rain at Hes. Gp. 550 1ToTaIlWV a'lTC) aLEvaoVTwvl and of a spring at Hes.Gp. 595 IKpTlvT]c;' 6' aEvaou. The description of the rivers as TallLaL is anthropomorphic, likening them to a human who distributes or dispenses things, c£ other extended uses of Tall. in LSJ. 24-7 1Tapa xAOaOUal. pEe"6-p0l.l; ... 1ToAAa cpuoVTal.. Here the poet expounds at considerable length the physical ease of hunting, highlighting its likeness to a feast, with these lines outlining the naturally occurring couch and food. By comparison Cyn. 1.53-5 answers these lines very briefly, emphasising that, although there is hard work for the fisher and fowler, there is little physical danger. Oppian highlights fishing as being more worthy in view of its physical discomfort and mystery, whereas the poet of the Cynegetica acknowledges the toil involved in fishing, but claims primacy for hunting in view of sheer physical risk. These passages together act as a dialogue between the two poets on the relative merits of the leisure pastimes. 27 UAT]I; aYPovoll0l.O The epithet aypov. carrying the meaning of 'having open fields' only appears here and at Soph. Ged. Tyr. 1103 and Ant. 785, both lyric passages. 28 TEP1TWATJ ... t6pWI;. This reference to the comfort of hunting compared with fishing appears to have inspired the poet of the Cynegetica to respond in reference to fishing and fowling at 1.54-5 1TOV4l 6' olla TEptjJL«; 61TT]6EL I IlOUVT], Kat CPOVOc;' OUTL«;. This is not, however the only example of conscious-seeming dialogue between the two poets, c£ the addresses to Eros by both poets, see Cyn. 2.410-425 n. 30 U1TotjJl.Ol; aypT] The epithet t)1T. only occurs previously in epic verse at 11. 3.42, where there is doubt as to whether it should instead be read as E1TotjJl.OV, which Wesfi6 adopts, although Kirk67 regards this as unlikely. The meaning in the Iliad is however different, with a sense of 'viewed askance' rather than 'visible' as here. It is likely that Oppian has been inspired by the hapax in the Iliad, but has here reflected the Homeric crux

oe

66 West, Homer: flias, loco cit. 67 Kirk, The fliad: A Commentary, vol. I, 271

34

2.8.1 The pleasures of hunting, fishing and fowling, Hal. 1.1-79

by applying to 00. the meaning proper to E1T. Use of Homeric hapax legomena such as this in the manner of the Hellenistic poets was popular both with the poet of the Cynegetica and Oppian, providing a hint of how these poets regard their part in the tradition of epic poetry. 31-2 TOUc;' !-lEV yap ... / KPUj30TlV MaJ.ti8 points out that it is worth comparing these lines with Cyn. 1.64ff. In both instances the poets are attempting to portray fowling as a fonn of hunting of less value, however the poet of the Cynegetica focuses on the difference between the equipment used by hunters and fowlers, whereas here Oppian implies that there is little work involved in catching birds. 32 06va~l.V ... ~~OcpOpOl,Ol.v This is the only occurrence in epic of the epithet (1;. with the meaning 'bearing lime'. Other occurrences include at Soph. Fr. 403, where is is used to mean 'bearing mistletoe', as was read by Agathocles (FGrH 472 F 10) at 11. 14.39869 • Given that the possible occurrence in the Iliad would have been in the same sedes, it may be that Oppian was aware of the alternative reading and uses the same epithet in a different sense here as a display of learning. The poet of the Cynegetica, perhaps consciously, avoids the compound epithet and instead talks of uypoC; TE IlEALxpOOC; L~OC; / ot TE ... 66vaKEC; at 1.65-6. 33 Tavu1TAEKTOl,Ol.V EV epKeOl,V The epithet T. is only otherwise used by Aristodicus AP 7.473 and later at Nonnus Dion. 9.263 and 38.257, and its use here by the poet is strongly innovative, as the previous use is to describe women's headbands. The epithet may be modelled on the Homeric EU1TAEKTOC; which is used, inter alia, of the ropes that woodsman use to drag timber atIl. 23.115. By comparison the poet of the Cynegetica does not make mention of trapping birds by nets. 34 cXTep1TEa 0' aOAl,V EKupoav./ This description may recall the description of the underworld at Od. 11.94 vEKuac; KaL eXTEp1TEa xwpov/. 35 TATl0l,1TOVOl,c;' ... eXe-&AOl, The repetition of the epithet-noun pattern and the rhyme in -OL in this line strikingly marks the shift to the main focus of the comparison, namely the skill demanded by fishing. Oppian changes topic here, describing the discomforts of the fishennan. The epithet TA. appears in epic only here, at Cyn. 4.4, where it is used to describe the patience of hunters as they lie in wait for prey, and at Nonnus Dion. 9.301. It is likely that this is an innovation by Oppian, and possibly its use in the 68 Mair, 202 69 West, Homer: Ilias, reads instead Ul/ll-KOj.lOl-Ol-v.

35

2. Digressions

Cynegetica is a reply to Oppian concerning the ease he attributes to hunting, particularly as Oppian seems to imply that hunters spend much time lying around at their ease, whereas the poet of the Cynegetica implies that the lying in wait is a difficult part of the hunt. The epithet dTEKJ.lapTOI. is uncommon in verse prior before the Halieutica. Oppian, however, uses the word 6x. It is possible that the poet has been influenced by the epithet OUO"TEKflaPTOe;' of tragedy. Particularly suggestive is the use OUOTEKflO:PTOe;' TEXVTl of [Aeschylus] Prom. Vin.497. 37 aKl.v"'ToU yatTle;' Here Oppian picks up the point made at 10, cf. n. ad lac. supra, of the essential variability and mystery of the sea. This provides a ring composition to round off the description of hunting and fowling and marks the introduction of the extended description of the dangers of fishing that continues until 55. 40-1 IOE'CJ.la cpEPEI. .. .looupaol. O· EV ~al.o'Col.v dEAAO:c.oV -&EPO:1TOVTEe;' These lines recall in content, if not in style the description of the shipwrecking of Odysseus near the land of the Phaeacians at Od. 5.282-332, particularly the progression of the rising of the storm OpO-&UVEV oEUae;' / 1TaVToLwv OVEflWV 292-3 and the fear that it caused AUTO yo6vaTa KaL CPLAov ~TOP 297. OEMO:WV -8-EPO:1TOVTEe;' is a notable anthropomorphic metaphor emphasising the control of the winds over the outcome of the fishing trip. The simile comparing the Greeks awaiting Hector's charge to men on a ship dreading the sorm about to assail their ship at 11. 15.624-8 may also have been influential here, although it is not explicitly recalled by the language used by Oppian. 43-4 /a~EL J.lEV .. ./a~Et oe The poet emphasises the constant fears of the sailors by the anaphora and chiasmus of these two lines. 43 VECPEAT)V ~OEl.oea This is an effective variation on Il. 11.298, Od. 11.107 or Hes. Theog. 844 of LoEI,OEa 1TOVTOV, or 'TTOVTOU ... LOEI,OEOe;' of Od. 5.56. In particular, the foreboding that follows the applications of LOELO. in the Odyssey, occurring at the point of Hermes going ashore at the island of the Calypso to arrange for Odysseus to make a perilous sea voyage to the land of the Phaeacians on a raft and in the prophecy of the disastrous visit to the island of Thrinacie, is also seen in the application of the synonym 44 J.lEAal.VOJ.lEVOV to 1TOPOV aAJ.lTle;'. Given the identification of the fishermen with Odysseus in intellect, possibly it is the occurrence of Od. 5.56 that is alluded to, as it marks the beginning of the episode that includes Odysseus' perilous sea voyage on a raft and shipwrecking at he 36

2.8.1 The pleasures of hunting, fishing and fowling, Hal. 1.1-79

land of the Phaeacians at 282-332, and possibly Oppian is implying a similar disaster lies at hand for the fishermen. The epithet may also allude to the description of the dark night in which Medea alone is restless at A.R. 3.750 OLYT] OE f-lEAOLVOf-lEvT)V EXEV oPCPVT)v. Although there is foreboding in the restless sleep of Medea in that description and the potential allusion thereto, it seems a less vital link as that darkness is turbulent for Medea alone, whereas here it presages strong wind and a storm for everyone at sea. 44 1TOPOV eXAf-lT)c;'/ This is a variation on Od. 12.259 'ITOpouc;' aAOc;', which forms part of the description of the snatching of Odysseus' companions by Scylla. Again this use of language from scenes of disaster at sea in the Odyssey highlights the tension of the sailors when confronted with the unknown qualities of the sea. 45 ouOe Tl. ... avef-lwv ... ouM TW' Of-l~PWV The repetition within this line draws attention to the points made at 19-28, in conscious contrast to 20 'IToUoL. .. O:AEWpoL, namely that the fisherman suffers from a degree of physical discomfort from the elements that the hunter and fowler do not. 46 1TUpOc;' ... 01TWPl.VO'Co cpepoVTOl.'/ Here Oppian is explicit in talking of the heat that is brought by the rising of Sirius, when compared with such descriptions of its impact as Od. 5.328, O'ITWPLVOc;' BOPET)c;' CPOPETlOLV O:KO:V-&Oc;', cf. also 19-20 O'Tf(.lJPT) CPAEWO cpEPEL. It is likely that Oppian has been influenced by 11. 5.4-6 'ITUP, /O:OTEP' O'ITWPLVqJ EVOALYKLOV, oc;', .. ./ AOf-l'ITPOV 'IT0f-lCPOLVTlOL AEAOUf-lEVOc;' ·OKEaVOLo. It is not clear whether the poet has deliberately created a multi-level allusion that recalls two Homeric models, or was affected in some other way by both sources. 47 ouooepKeo OeLf-lOTO The epithet 6000. does not occur previously, although Oppian uses it at 5.320 and 667, and it appears 4x in the Cynegetiea. Suspense is created by the elaborate appositional phrase in anticipation of KTJTEa. 49 u1To~puXLTlc;' ... -&oAaOOTlc;' Although the sense of the epithet &rro~., here 'under the sea', differs from its use to describe a ship beset by wind and waves at H.h. Diose. 33.11-12 TT]V 0' OVEf-lOc;' TE f-lEYOc;' KOL KUf-lO fuAo:ooT)c;' / -&fjKOV U'ITO~pUXLT)V· oL 6' E~aTTLVT)c;' ECPO:vT)Oav, it is possible that the language here was influenced by that of the hymn. It is interesting to note that Oppian uses the epithet 9x in total, possibly in conscious reference to its use here, particularly in the description of the hunting of the whale in which it appears 3x at 5.159, 171 and 208. 37

2. Digressions

49 Ci.OUTov Although this word is not in itself unusual, it is interesting to note that its only uses in Homer at n. 5.448, 512 refer to the sanctuary of Apollo in which Aeneas takes refuge, and serves here as a metaphor for the part of the sea into which the sea-monsters can retreat as a refuge, carrying some anthropomorphic force. 50 tiyelloVeUel. The hounds are depicted in much the same way as would be human guides. The poet draws our mind back effectively to the fact that the hounds make the hunters' lives easy by echoing the expression of 16 O'KuAaKEc;'... l'jYEIlOVTlEc;'/ with the O'KUAO:KWV... l'j.i here. This self reference of language within passages is quite uncommon in the Cynegetica. 51 ~ X'SU[36AOI.c;' This formal variation is required by metre on the more normal ~x&U~OAE6c;-, which occurs previously in epic at Nic. Th. 793 and Callimachus H. Del. 15, and is also used by Leonidas Alex. atAP 7.925 and Bianor atAP 9.227, the latter vividly describing the capture of an octopus, a subject covered by Oppian at 4.264-307. 51 i:XVTl ... deLoEAa The epithet O:EL., a formal variant on d:COT]Aa - cf. 9, appears 5x in the Halieutica and twice in the Cynegetica but is otherwise quite rare, appearing at Hes. Fr. 112, 67a.5, 67b.l and Nicander Th. 20. 54-5 'SPI.~t ... KO:PTOc;' The poet here strongly emphasises his list of equipment used by fishermen by using two combinations of noun and predicate/adjective followed by two unqualified nouns to striking effect. The placement of K. at the end of the description strongly emphasises its role in fishing, even though it might more normally be associated with hunting, which Oppian seems aware is the skill most likely to appeal to the reader rather than fishing. The emperor is also described in terms of his KPO:TOc;' at 3, and it is possible that Oppian is identifying the 'heroic' nature of his fishermen with that of the emperor. There is also effective contrast between K. and l'j1TEoavoLO'I.., with the striking contrast of strength being held by weak hairs. 56-7 Tep1fWA Tlc;' ... lTep1feo'Sal. The repetitive emphasis on pleasure draws attention to the shift in topic matter from the description of the superior challenge of fishing to the superior pleasure of the fishermen. It is perhaps in answer to this description that the opening of the Cynegetica does not address the concept of pleasure in any significant manner except to say of fishing and fowling 1TOVQl 0' af,la TEPl\1Lc;' 61TT]OEL / f,lOUVT] 1.54. 57 [3aOI.A1ll.oc;' Ci.YPTl The mention here of fishing as a royal sport recalls the opening lines of the poem in which Oppian addresses his work directly 38

2.8.1 The pleasures of hunting, fishing and fowling, Hal. 1.1-79

to the emperor and foreshadows the resumption of the address at 66-70, maintaining a closer relationship with his addressee than does the poet of the Cynegetica, who limits mention of the emperor in his opening to the specific addresses at 1.1-15 and 43-6. 58 euyolJ.cpwTOV, EU~uyov, e~oxa KOUCPTlV Brief evocative descriptions composed using unusual vocabulary and striking sound effects are exploited to a far larger extent in the Cynegetica, cf. inter alia 1.217-8n., than in the Halieutica, although it is possible that usages such as this have inspired the poet of the Cynegetica. The rhyme ofEu-... EU-, followed by Et;oxa emphasises effectively the excellence of the ship that would be used by the emperor to fish for sport. The epithet eUY0f,lcpwTOV is otherwise unattested, but seems likely to be a conscious variation on euyof,lcpoc;' seen at Eur. l T. 1286. On the other hand EU;,UYOV appears at Od. 13.116 and 17.288, as well as at A.R. 1.4., and far from recalling any of these uses in particular it seems likely that the poet has used it here to imply heroic qualities for those fishermen that sail them. 60 VWTOV eXAoc;' -&ECVOVTEc;' This description of the surface of the sea may be a conscious variation on vG'na -B-a:A.oaaT]c;' common in earlier epic appearing 3x in the Iliad, in the Odyssey at 2.l42 inter alia, and in Hesiod at Th. 762. In this way Oppian has recalled the description of the sea from earlier epic in which v. has become a dead metaphor and introduces variety in language and style by placing it in the first feet of the line rather than the final feet used universally by Homer and Hesiod. 61 ~ -&UVTllP This tenn for navigator, a distinctively epic synonym of Ku!3epV1lTrlc;', appears previously in epic at A.R. 4.209, 1260, both describing Ancaeus the son of Poseidon. Given the previous use in extant epic relating solely to the son of Poseidon it is possible that it foreshadows the address to the sea god at 73 -7. 62 xwpov Ec;' EupuaAov The epithet eupua:A.ov is not previously attested and occurs only here in the Hal. and Cyn. There is an egregious error in LSJ from confusion with eupuo:A.wc;', -w0c;', from a:A.wc;'. 63 Oat.TUlJ.6vwv ... cpuAal The rhyme in -wv and -a draw the readers attention to this line. The fish are described both as diners at a banquet, cf. bal,T. of fish 3x later in the Hal., and as tribes, cf. 1 "E-B-veo TOl, 'lTOVTOLO. It is notable that when Oppian introduces an anthropomorphic tenn he continues to use it or like terms in a systematic manner. cpD:A.a appears 21x

39

2. Digressions

and E-&VOc;' 7x. Other similar uses include frequent application of terms for human passions to those of fish in book 4. 64 -&EPO:1TOVTEc;' aEI. KOjJ.EoUaI.V This phrase continues the anthropomorphic comparison with banqueters with the fish depicted as having attendants bring them food. The suggestion of this image of easy life for the fish is that the ocean is overflowing with lazy fish waiting to be caught and that fishing should be a pleasant and easy pastime for the emperor. This is at odds with the pictures of physical danger at 9-12. There is also a double meaning to be considered here, as the -&E:p. belong to and serve the emperor. 64-5 eowofj / ... 1Tl.atVOVTEc;' This description of the outcome of the feasting of the fish emphasises the richness of the emperor's catch, a theme that is continued in the anthropomorphic 65 ETol.jJ.6TaTov xopov aYPTJc;'. The descriptions of the ease with which the emperor might catch fish anticipate a level of interest in fishing that is not anticipated for hunting by the poet of the Cynegetica and represents a distinct difference in the approach of the two poets. Oppian here seems to present his work under the pose that the emperor might be interested in a spot of fishing, whereas the emperor of the Cynegetica is depicted as a more remote figure who might take pleasure in the poem for its own sake, without any specific assumption of participation in the hunt, cf. Cyn. 1.45-6 6E~LTEPT]V 6rracroLo rrovLAoov 6A~066TELPOV / ... eU-&f]pOWLV cXoL6oLc;'. Although there are a range of uses of xopoc;' which suggest that its potency as a metaphor would have been waning, cf. LSJ s.v.II.2, it still seems likely that there is an implication that the fish form a happy company having been captured by one such as the emperor's son. 66 aot TE, jJ.O:Kap, Kat rral.Ot jJ.EyauxEI. This direct address to the emperor seems to have been emulated by the poet of the Cynegetica in 1.1 LOL, jJ.aKop, cXEC6w. No son of the emperor is mentioned in the opening of the Cynegetica, as here, although the use of a dual addressee here may have influenced the poet of the Cynegetica to make extended mention of the mother of the emperor Caracalla at Cyn. 1.4-7. The epithet j.lEy. otherwise appears in verse at Pindar Nem. 11.21, Aesch. Pers. 642, Antipater Sid. at AP 7.427.7, Meleager at AP 7.428.13, the anonymous AP16.102.5 and at Philo Judaeus Senior SH 681.3 as quoted by Eusebius at Praep. Ev. 9.20.1.5. It is the first of these, where it is being used in praise of the pancration in which Aristagoras excelled which is most likely to 40

2.8.1 The pleasures of hunting, fishing and fowling, Hal. 1.1-79

have influenced its encomiastic usage here, ayAaaL VLKaL 1TclTpav T' EUWVq.lOV / EOTEcp6:vwoav 1T6:AQ: KaL j.lEyauXEL 1TaYKpaTCc.p. 66 1TwEa 1hlPTlC;/ The comparison of the shoals of fish to flocks of land animals may only reflect the lack of a specific term for them in Greek, but it is interesting to note that unlike their description as "E13-vEa in I the poet may be implying that the emperor provides some level of pastoral care over the fish in his role as 3 yaCTjC; u1TaTov Kp6:TOC;. And it could be considered especially appropriate here because the fish are practically tamed. Cf. the synonym 76 ayeAac; infra. 67-70 1TEIl1TEI.c;/ ... ~aal.:A.1l0c;/. .. aEo ';TOp This description of the emperor fishing with hook and line implies personal involvement not expected by the poet of the Cynegetica. For other examples of the more extensive use of encomiastic mention of the emperor by Oppian cf. 2.664688 with its encomiastic adaptation of the story of Justice leaving the world. 700PXallE yaCTlC;/ This phrase is clearly an adaptation of Opxaj.lE Aawv/ which appears 4x in the Iliad and 7x in the Odyssey in the same sedes. 71-2 1TOAAf} yap ~:A.EcpapOI.Ol..... ~X-&6v. This description of the fish wriggling on the line as it is drawn up seems to have inspired the poet of the Cynegetica, who uses a similar image in describing the pleasures of fishing at Cyn. 1.59-61, TEP1TWAf} 0', aTE xaAKoD (maL YEVumoL TopTpac; / UljJL j.l6:Aa 13-pwoKoVTa ~u13-wv U1TEp a01TaCpoVTa / ELV6:ALOV cpopenOL OL' TlepOC; 0PXTjOT1lpa, although he does not echo Oppian's expression. The poet of the Cynegetica adds an element to his description that we would normally expect of Oppian by anthropomorphically describing the movements of the fish as the writhings of a dancer. 73-4 eX:A.oC; 1TOP"i> EIl~aal.:A.E6wv / EUPUIlEOWV KpovCOTlC; This description of Poseidon seems to be modelled on the description of Cronus at Hes. Op. 111 Kp6vou ... aT' oupavQ) Ej.l~aOCAEuEV/ and ofZeus at Hes. Th. 71-3 6 0' oupavQ) Ej.l~aOLAeuEL,I. .. vLKT]Oac; 1TaTepa Kp6vov. These lines form the beginning of the closing prayer to the gods before turning to the technical discourse. The use of the verb 73 L:A.T]KOI.C; in the optative for an address to the gods does not occur at all in Homer, with only one usage in the subjunctive at Od. 21.365. This form of address is, however, seen at Hh. Apollo 165 and A.R. 2.708, as well as more frequently by the poets of the Anthology

41

2. Digressions

including Rufmus atAP 5.72, Agathocles at AP 9.154 and Alciphro at AP 3.68.

74 SaAaaaal This personification of the sea is not mentioned by either Homer or Hesiod and amounts to an identification with 'AI-LCPLTPCTT!, wife of Poseidon. It is also used as a common noun by Oppian = -MAaooa, e.g. 84 infra. 76 UI-LETEpae; T' ciYEAae; Kat dAtTporpa rpuAa The assonance in o.yae; and aA-a in this line and the adjective-noun- adjective-noun

progression give the impression of a formal prayer, although unlike the more formal-seeming elements of the digression on Dionysus at Cyn. 4.233-319 there is little to indicate here that this may be a reflection of Oppian's familiarity with the rituals of worship of deities of the sea. The epithet O:ALTp. is not previously attested, although it later occurs 4x in Nonnus, and may be an innovation by the poet. 771T6Tva SEa This address also appears at Cyn. 4.21, cf. n. ad loco for models from the Odyssey, inter alia. The use of the language here implies that the goddess addressed, in this case more likely a Muse than 86:Aaooa in view of TEllc;' ... o.OLOllc;'./ 79, is to be an active helper but there is less implication of interaction between poet and goddess than in the Cynegetica. 78 1Tall/3aaI.ATlOe; The use of this term as a noun is common in prose, but does not occur previously in epic verse. Its introduction as a noun by Oppian is most likely inspired by its use as an adjective at A.R. 4.382 I-LT] TOYE 1Tal-L~aoCAELa 6.LOc;' TEAEOEl.EV aKOLTLc;'. Its other attested occurrence in verse is by Balbilla at Epigr. Gr. 990.3. It maintains the strong encomiastic focus on the emperor throughout the passage noted elsewhere. 79 TETle; ... ciol.Ofle;./ This recognition of the poem as the Muse's art differs from the emphasis seen in the Cynegetica on the ownership of the poem by the poet, cf. Cyn. 3.485 El-LaL .. o.OLOaC/ in the same sedes. Given the recollections of the Odyssey seen elsewhere in the Halieutica, it seems likely that his line is in part modelled on Od. 1.10 TWV o.l-Lo-&Ev yE -t1E6:, -&6yaTEP 6.LOc;', ELiTE Kat TJI-Ll:V.

42

2.8.2 The departure of Justice from the earth, Hal. 2.664-88

2.8.2 The nature oJ Justice and her departureJrom the earth, Hal. 2.664688

Although the description of the ages of man and the departure of Justice from the earth had been used by a range of poets before Oppian, including Hesiod and Aratus and Virgil, it has been included here as the depiction in Hesiod's Theogony has provided a model from which later authors have departed to only a limited degree. This digression is clearly modelled on the digressions of Hesiod and Aratus, popular with Roman poets as seen at Virgil Gear. 2.474, the return of the figure 'Virgo' at Eel. 4.6-7, and Ovid, Met. 1.149-50. Oppian adds an unusual twist, however, by adding that Justice has now returned to the earth under the reign of Marcus Aurelius and his son Commodus and adds a prayer for their long reign. The encomiastic tone of this digression is not seen in earlier didactic epic, but is perhaps inspired by the more encomiastic of Theocritus' Idylls, see particularly 17.77-l35, and Call. Hymn 4.165-170, with its praise of Ptolemy 11 as a provider of peace on two continents. Similarly, this passage marks a significant difference between the approach of Oppian and the poet of the Cynegetica to encomiastic praise, as there are no digressions within the Cynegetica which are so intrinsically focussed on direct praise of the emperor. Oppian not only innovates considerably in his approach to encomiastic praise. Oppian does not explicitly mention the successive ages of men as do Hesiod and Aratus, nor the original presence of Justice on earth, but passes directly to the description of the violent men that lead to her absence from the world. Oppian provides a brief summary of the peoples with whom Rome conducted wars over time as an indication of the significance of the peace of Marcus Aurelius, a type of praise not seen in other extant Greek epic poets. 70 Another notable aspect is that this is the only digression in the Halieutica clearly suggestive of a Roman model, possibly recalling the description of Rome's mission at Virgil Aen. 6.847-53 by suggesting that the Romans were specifically put on the earth to provide law and order to other races. It is also worth noting that this digression marks a shift in the focus of the Halieutica, as beyond this point 70 Wardman, 10-18, notes that although there is frequent encomiastic seeming praise in Plutarchs, citing the example of Ages. 8.6, he notes that this praise is often tempered, as in Plutarch's comments on the treatment of Lysander by Agesilaus. That said, the language of praise used by Plutarch may have potentially influenced that of Oppian.

43

2. Digressions

there is a marked decrease in the frequency of genuine digressions, with the bulk of the ornamentation taking the fOlm of developed similes. In addition, beyond this point there is a decrease in the number of digressions which, like this one, act in homage of earlier didactic epic, although there are exceptions such as that concerning the battle of the gods and Typhon at 3.1-28 which recalls the description of that battle in Hesiod's Theogony. The digression proceeds as follows: Justice dwells apart from the sea, just as she has not even dwelt among men because until recently War and Strife were there, which consumed the 'race ofa day', 664-669. Men were no different from beasts in their evil and decadent practices, 669-73. Zeus took pity on men and gave the Romans to the world, 674-5. The Romans still had to conduct war with a wide range of tribes, 676-80. Now Justice dwells among men again under the reign of the emperor and his son, which creates a safe environment for the poet, 680-4. Then a closing prayer to Zeus and his attendants to give a long and happy rule to both of them, 685-8. As will be seen from the more detailed discussion that follows, Oppian draws on the style of expression of the Greek passages covering the same theme and other similar passages, giving a distinctive feel to his treatment of this traditional story. The wide range of sources for his language also displays his learning. Unlike the previous digression discussed, the existence of a number of similar treatments of the same topic means that Oppian has a range of language influences to draw on other than Hesiodic and Homeric ones. When compared with 1.1-79 this passage contains far fewer distinctive features of style. This may reflect the link with a famous model passage, which limits the scope for innovative expression. Oppian has been able to innovate in his adaptation of the traditional theme to an encomiastic role and, as a result, may not have seen the need to be as striking in his expression as in the digression described above. 664-5 Qu IJ.EV IJ.Ol. TOOE -&aulJ.a ~CKTlV d'lJ'CXTEp1k .. Val.ETO:El.V In this opening sentence Oppian anthropomorphically links the day-to-day conflicts of fish and those of men. In addition, he recalls the critical parts of the description of the 'ages' of men by going straight to the description of the absence of justice from the world; cf. the departure of Aidos and Nemesis in the prophecy of the end of men at Hes. Op. 199-200 6:{)-avaTwv iJ.ETO: CPUAOV'eTOV 'lJ'poAl.'IJ'6\7T' 6:wP(~)1J'ouc;' / A. Kat N., or the departure of

44

2.8.2 The departure of Justice from the earth, Hal. 2.664-88

Justice from men at Aratus. Phaen. 133-4, J-ltmloaoa .6.LKTl KELVWV YEVOC; av6pwv I. .. TaUTTlV 6' expa vooomo XWPTlv. 665-6 Oll yop Tl. 'JI'OAal. 'JI'pEoj3El.pa -Seowv

I. .. Exe -Sp6vov This description of Justice sitting on a throne among men in the manner of a magistrate may be modelled on her description at Hes. Op. 259 '!TOp .6.1.1 '!TaTpL Ka-&Es0J-lEvTl KPOVLWVL, although the differences in language suggest that this may have been nothing more than a commonplace image. 666-8 KOOOl.J-l0t! ... " Apllc; ... ClTllC;/ ... "Epl.c; ... It is possible that Mair should have capitalised Ku6. and aT. in this instance as the personification Ku6oLJ-lOC; occurs twice in the Iliad at fl. 5.593 and 18.535 in conjunction with 'Evuw and "EpLc;, and at Emped. fr.128.1 (Diels-Kranz) with Ares "ApTlC; -&eac; ou6e Ku6oLJ-lOC;, suggesting that Oppian has innovated on the Homeric standard grouping along lines similar to those of Empedoc1es. Similarly "ATTl is personified by Homer atIf. 9.500, 508 and 19.91,129. 667 oooKEAaOOl. Oppian seems to be innovating on the sole use of this epithet in the Iliad at If. 16.357 to describe the flight of the Trojans where it occurs in the same sedes, oL 6E CPO~OLO / 600KEA06ou J-lvTjoaVTo. The epithet also appears in the fragment of A.R. fr. 8.2 (powell) ITOJ-l'!TLAE, 600KEA06ou 6E6awc; -6-0a ~Ev-&Ea '!TOVTOU. The application of the epithet to the sea in that instance, while creating an attrctive image, suggests no direct thematic link to its current use. 667 -SoOpOC; "ApllC; cp-Sl.oTjvopoc; clTllC; -&. is the stock Homeric epithet of Ares, occurring 10x in the Iliad, and only in that application. The epithet cp1ko. is, however, used 5x in the Iliad, always as a description of war as an abstract concept rather than as a personification, as well as by Hesiod at Theogony 431, and so its use here by Oppian of Ares is mildly innovative. 668 J-la'Ca T' epl.KAauoTCJJv 'JI'OAEJ-lWV The use of J-l. here is metaphorical, ironically likening Strife to a nourishing nurse. The epithet EPLKA. is possibly used previously of grief at !conium Epigr. Gr. 406.8 but in view of difficulties of dating this fragment it is possibly a new coining by Oppian. Inspiration may have come from the epithet '!TOAUKA. which is common in drama, e.g. Aesch. Ag. 1526, but also occurs in the active at Aratus Phaen. 360: '!TOAUKAaUTOU, which may have influenced later Nonnus 11.206: EpLKAaUTOLO, Empedoc1es fr. 62 and Moschus 3.73. The popularity of compounds in EPL- when referring to divine figures can be seen in the use of EpL~oac; to refer to Hermes by Simias at 26.7 (powell), of

45

2. Digressions

epL~p6fJ.OU

to refer to Zeus in the anonymous Paean Delph. fr. i.l (Powell), and ofepl.:8-aATl in Limenius' Paean Delph. ii.6 (powell), inter alia. 7 ! 668 "Epl.c;' aAYEoLoCJJp0c;' The epithet r:fAy. is previously used by Sappho at fr. 125 of Eras and is almost certainly a conscious recollection by Oppian. 669 f1fJ.EpLCJJv OEl.AOV YEVOc;' The description of the race of men as 1lfJ.. is characteristic of tragedy, e.g. Soph. Aj. 398 YEVOr; ou{3-' clfJ.EpC.W\? .. cX\?{3-purrrw\?, but although it is not extant in earlier epic verse a similar use is made by Aratus to describe mice at Phaen. 1140 fJ.UEc;' llfJ.EPLOL. Its use here more strongly suggest familiarity with the tragic poets. 669-73 ouO€. Tl. -&TlPOOV / KEKPl.IlEVOl. 'lTOAEEc;' ... 'HcpaLoTOl.O These lines swiftly describe the evils of men before the Romans imposed order. This is a notable passage in the Halieutica for the familiarity with the works of Roman poets that it suggests. The description of the impact of wars at 665-9 and this description of a decadent and lawless lifestyle for the non-Roman peoples in these four lines is reminiscent of the description of the horrors of the civil wars at Virgil Geor. 1.466-514, in particular the description of dark omens and disorder in Roman cities at 483-6. 670-1 AeovTCJJv a~VOTepOl. As has been noted elsewhere Oppian at times mirrors his anthropomorphic similes describing animals with descriptions of men in animal terms as here. 671-2 'lT1JPYouc;' T' ... Euwoeac;' In these lines Oppian does not stress a lawless quality for non-Romans, but instead depicts their pursuit of uncivilised religious practices, cf. Virgil Aen. 6.847-50 with its more positive depiction of the non-Roman peoples excelling in the arts, compared with the Roman law-makers, as opposed to the strong negative association in aLfJ.aTL CPWTW\? 673 KaTELvuov The verb KaT. is used notably in the active at 11. 23.135 describing the adorning of the body of Patroc1us by the Greek soldiers with locks of their own hair. Its use here by Oppian is also metaphorical, describing ritual practice, but with far darker implications. 674 pal.0fJ.EVTlV YEVEilv Although PaLOfJ.. has a broad semantic range, this phrase may have been influenced by the description of Odysseus as paLOfJ.EVOU at Od. 6.326 with his shipwrecking and eventual rescue serving as a live metaphor for the fate of the peoples to whom Zeus sends the Romans as saviours. 71 For further adjectives of this sort see Supplementum Hellenisticum, index s.v.

46

2.8.2 The departure of Justice from the earth, Hal. 2.664-88

675 UIJ'Cv O· A~VE6:01J0I.V The use of the epithet AL. to describe the Romans may have influenced its use at Cyn. 1.2, although in both instances it is tempting to speculate that the use of the epithet at Lucretius DRN 1.1 has been influential. The likelihood that these lines have influenced the opening of the Cynegetica is further suggested by the fact that 676 AuoovLwv j3aOI.AEOOI. seems to have been echoed by AuoovLou ZTlvoc;' at Cyn. 1.3. Although the epithet Aoo. is used regularly of Roman masters in Greek Imperial poetry, if we accept that these lines have influenced the poet of the Cynegetica it is clear that he has 'upped the ante' on Oppian in implying that the emperor Caracalla is a descendant of Zeus himself, whereas Marcus Aurelius is depicted here in the tenus conventional since Augustan times. 677-9 KEAT06c;' ... EUcppf}TTlV In these lines Oppian has effectively given a very brief description of the expanse of the Empire in listing its northernmost and southernmost peoples by K.... I\L[3UTlc;', and its eastern and western extremities by "1[3TlPoc;' ... EUcppf]TTlV, varying his usage effectively in referring to the rivers that make up the Empire's borders. The description is an interesting reflection of the period in which the work was composed, as there is a far greater emphasis on the lands of continental Europe than would be seen in the works of poets of the Classical or Hellenistic period. 681 ~LKTl -&pe1TTELpa 1TOAf}wv This metaphorical use of -&po is not previously attested, cf. lJo'Co 668. The tenu is previously attested Eur. Tro. 195, Marcus Argentarius at AP 5.105, the anonymous AP 6.51, and at Lycophron A lex. 1258, inter alia. Its rarity together and the unusual metaphorical usage create emphasis in this line. The emphasis of the role of justice in the administration of cities is, perhaps, a reflection of Oppian' s Greek background as to a Roman author it would be Rome or the whole empire that stands to benefit from the emperor's good rule. 681 OUVeOTI.OV r;oe 06VOl.KOV The juxtaposition of these near synonyms with the rhyme of ouv-... ouv- gives strong emphasis to the pervasive nature of the influence of Justice and, by inference, of the emperor. 682-3 E~ 00 1J0t.... cpaLol.lJoc;' CS P1TTl~· / The delayed introduction of the emperor and son to this encomiastic passage gives strong emphasis to the praise of them. The dependence of the presence of Justice on their rule is

47

2. Digressions

highlighted by 8; oU. The brevity of the mention of the emperor and son may be intended to suggest that they are a strong remedy to the problem besetting the world that has been described at length in the preceding 17 lines; cf. the brief address to the Emperor Augustus by Ovid at the close of the Metamorphoses. 683 OP1TT]S The noun Op1T. is used as a live metaphor here, as it only appears previously in epic in a literal sense, as at 11. 21.38, AR. 4.1425 and Theoc. 7.146, and as a cattle goad at Hes. Op. 468. 684opiJ.oc; o:vaKTOpLT]C; OpiJ.. is used metaphorically here, comparing the rule of the emperor to that of a safe harbour, recalling the many descriptions of the dangers that men face within the Hal. The term cXVQKT. is previously used to mean 'rule' at AR. 1.839, referring to the rule of Hypsipyle at Lemnos, by Callimachus at fr. 184 (Pfeiffer) in the Aetia of Peleus' rule over the Phthians and by Parthenius fr. 28.1 (Lightfoot) of rule over the Cilicians. Its metaphorical use here is, therefore, a clever adaptation of what was apparently the Hellenistic ban mat and may recall descriptions of famous rulers in Hellenistic verse, although fragmentary preservation makes this uncertain. 687 oupaVLOal. It is interesting to compare the vague meaning of this usage with its literal meaning of 'sons of Ouranos' at Hes. Th. 486, 502 and Pind. Pyth. 3.4. The more generic meaning implied here is also seen at Call. h. Zeus 3. 688 TEAEOCPOPOV OA[30V The use of T. reflects post-Homeric practice, as this epithet always appears with EVLQUT6v in Homer and Hesiod. 2.8.3 Address to Eras, Cyn. 2.410-425

Although there are a wide range of influences on this passage in both language and theme, it appears to be a deliberate innovation on and answer to the address to Eros by Oppian at Hal. 4.11-39. This is emphasised by the way this passage is nested within the description of how 'alien' passions between different species of animals occur, whereas the address in the Hal. acts as an opening to a book devoted to how fish are caught by the exploitation of their passions, with a special focus on bizarre and unnatural behaviour. There are several references to the power of Eros in previous Greek and Roman literature, including Oppian's invocation to LXETAL: "Epws ('Cruel Eros') at Hal. 4.11-39, which is 48

2.8.3 Address to Eros, Cyn. 2.410-25

nearly twice as long as that here. Theognis makes such an address at 12314, as does Apollonius, also to LXETAL' "Epwc;', at Arg. 4.445-9. Eros is addressed as "Epwc;' QVLaPE at Theocritus 2.55. The addresses of Theocritus and Apollonius to Eros are made in the context of the suffering caused by a differing level of infatuation between two people. Similar addresses to Eros referring to his cruel nature are also made by Sophocles, Ant. 791, and by Euripides, Hipp. 538-41, "EpwTa 6E TOV Tupawov Qv6pwv, ... , OU OE~LsOf-lEV, iTEpfuVTa KaL 6t1x iTCxoac;' LovTa OUf-lcpopo:c;' -&vaToLc;', (hav E:A..-&n. In a similar vein is Meleager AP 5.177. Similar too though positive in its tone is De Rerum Natura 1.1-49, in which Lucretius shares the physical

pervasiveness and the positive tone of Empedocles' description of Aphrodite, such as 'nec sine te quicquam ... exoritur neque fit laetum neque amabile quicquam' .72Virgil, Aen. 4.412, "improbe Amor, quid non mortalia pectora cogis?", seems modelled on these earlier references to Eros. The counterpart of this negatively expressed tradition in Greek and Roman in the present passage is the marked shift from a positive to a negative image of Eros with TOLOUc;', aypLE 6aLf-lOv ... at 422ff. It is also interesting to compare Empedocles fr. 17, in which Aphrodite's pervasive power throughout the universe is described without the sense of dread at Eros' power seen in the addresses here and in the Halieutica. As will be seen below, the possible influence of Empedocles distinguishes the address here from that of the Hal. The address to Eros here differs from that of the Hellenistic poets and of the Halieutica by focussing less on the suffering that is caused and more on the pervasive nature of Eros in creation. After a brief introductory address, 410-11, the poet describes the influence of Eros throughout all the world, 412-13, and throughout Olympus above and the underworld below, 414-18. The penetrating nature of Eros is then described73, 419-21, followed by the effect of Eros on those he assails, 422-5. It is interesting to note that the poet then sets out a list of animals that are attracted to those of a different species including francolins, 426-7, partridges, 428-30, the bustard, 431-2, the sargue, 433, and the subus, 433-444. The description of the subus examines in particular its habit of devouring the other fish which accompany it in an extended manner. Though on a smaller scale, this 72 Lucretius, DRN 1. 22-3. 73 The penetrating nature of Eras is reminiscent of the description of Aphrodite moving unseen through all men at Emp. fr. 17 .21-6.

49

2. Digressions

material reflects the substance of book 4 of the Halieutica, devoted to the capture of fish by the use of their passionate desires. The address to Eros at Hal. 4.11-39 does not explicitly refer to the parts of the world and the divine realms, nor does it focus at all on individual species affected by Eros. Instead Oppian has focussed on the cruel and irresistible nature of Eros and on his genealogy. At 34-39 in particular Oppian describes where Eros' influence may be felt by a series of generalised references to the creatures of each sphere, not describing his influence on the underworld as is the case in this passage. The approach taken by the two poets to an address to Eros is, therefore, quite different, with the passage in the Cynegetica encompassing by shorthand many of the concepts of book 4 of the Halieutica, such as the remarkable description of the strange interactions of different creatures at Hal. 4.264403, while avoiding primary focus on the cruel nature of Eros. It is unusual that the poet of the Cyn. diverges further from his Hellenistic models than Oppian, given the influences on language and theme seen in other digressions in the Cynegetica, but in striving for originality with a well established theme the poet shares a creative ethic with Callimachus and Apollonius. The language of this passage is influenced by a very wide range of material, reflecting the range of similar addresses to Eros in earlier literature. There is, however, very little that directly reflects Oppian's address to Eros, suggesting that although there is an aspect of homage, the poet has made strong efforts to innovate and display his own learning. As would be expected from a passage of this sort the expression is of a type commonly seen in other epic hymnlike addresses to the gods. More notable, however, is the poet's inclusion of some striking rhetorical features and another striking feature seen also in the Orphic hymns, the use of lines consisting entirely of descriptive epithets. The use of such features of style serves to distance the expression of this passage from its model in the Halieutica. 410/o!3pl.jJ.' "Epwc;, ... This epithet is not otherwise seen in conjunction with Eros. As noted above, earlier poets have tended to choose a term more in keeping with a perception of Eros as a cruel god, like aypLE at 422 below. The epithet does, however, appear 4x in the Iliad as an epithet of Ares and 4x of Hector and once of Achilles. Similarly it is used adverbially of the thunder of Zeus at Hesiod Th. 839. Its use here suggests a more 50

2.8.3 Address to Eros, Cyn. 2.410-25

reverent position towards the god than that of earlier poets. Engelhofer14 proposes that the poet deliberately avoids a negative portrayal of any of the gods, possibly to avoid a hubristic folly towards them. If this is accepted then it may explain something of the poet's shift away from the negative position of earlier poets towards Eros. 410-11 11'0001;' ... 11'0011 ... hroooa .. . 1I'ooa ... 1I'ooa As noted elsewhere above, such striking rhetorical stylisations as the repetition in these two lines are far more common in the Cynegetica than in the Halieutica, and are virtually a hallmark of the Cyn. 410 ChAETOI;' aAKfI'/ The epithet o. is only otherwise seen in Greek epic at Emp. fr. 17.18, andAR. 1.573f. LX-MEc;' OLoOOVTEc;' o1TEp-B-' OAOc;', Ol-ll-lLya 1TOUpOLc;' / 01TAETOL... , though common elsewhere, to imply the scope of the heavens. Its use by Empedocles comes in a passage focussed on the pervasive influence of Aphrodite as a fundamental force throughout the universe and it is possible that the work of Empedocles has been influential here. Its use in the Argonautica, however, has no clear contextual link with its use her, other than perhaps to broadly recall the cntent of the Halieutica as a model for this passage. The description of Eros' power as fufl, used in the Iliad 57x, generally to describe the might of men in battle, is appropriate to the more reverent depiction of the god. 411 KOI.POVEEI.I;' ... a-&upEI.I;'I These two verbs create an interesting image ofEros, with the verb KOLp. usually appearing in the context of a physical domination as of the Nemean lion at Res. Theog. 331, or of ruling in general, as at AR. 2.990. The verb 013-. is more generally associated with gentle play, as of a ball being thrown by girls at AR. 4.950 and the ball presented to Eros for his play at AR. 3.132, and the combined image of a powerful god engaged in gentle play is quite at odds with his more hostile depiction in earlier authors, particularly given that the ball presented to Eros in the Argonautica acts to appease the as a distraction from chikdish play and as an inducement to help in the seduction of Medea. 412 !3EAEEOOI. ... OOVE'CTOV / OOV. recalls the semantic range of Sappho 40, where it is used of the disturbance caused by love. 412-3 ya'Ca 1I'EAEI. oTa-&Epfl ... aOTOTOI;' E1I'AETO 1I'OVTOI;' The use of the epithet OT. to indicate the steady land is otherwise unattested. It is interesting to contrast it with its use of calm sea by Antiphil. at AP 10.17, as 74 Engelhofer, 164. Although the thinking of the poet must ultimately remain unknowable, Engelhofer fmds a clear enough pattern in the poet's approach to the gods that it is fair to say at the least that the poet either genuinely fears hubris or adopts the pose of fearing it consistently.

51

2. Digressions

the sea is described as aOTaTOt;' at 413. The combination gives a juxtaposition of two paradoxes with a neat reversal of terms and (in the first halves of both lines), word order. 414 eOOEI.O'Ev ... llaKpoc;' "OAUIl'll"Oc;"/ Mair prefers this reading from one MS to the more common ot6EV... read by Boudreaux, who reads the beginnning of the verse differently, TlAU-&Et;' ELt;' aL-&flp' ... , which is metrical. Mair may possibly have chosen his reading on the grounds of the similarity to the description of Hera's fear of Zeus at n. 1.568. The poet of the Cynegetica is not immune to errors of metre, and by recalling the description of Zeus in the Iliad the poet has again raised Eros from being a fickle god to being one worthy of reverent awe. 75 415 /oEl.llal.VEI. This verb of fearing is rare in earlier epic, appearing only at A.R. 4.796, but occurs 3x in the Hal. and 4x in the Cyn. Its occurrence at Hal. 5.348 in the same sedes in an address to the sea has possibly influenced its placement here, particularly given the similar mixture of awe and reverence expressed by the speaker at Hal. 5.336-349, more resembling the expression here than at Hal. 4.11-39. 415-18 Kat oupaVOt;' ... 'll"ECPPl.KaO'I.. This statement of the scope of the influence of Eros recognises three parts of the universe: Olympus, the earth and the underworld, which has most emphasis. By comparison, at Hal. 4.34-9 Oppian sets out a descending hierarchy influenced by Eros including the Olympian race, men, land creatures, birds and lastly the creatures of the ocean. The description ofOppian is, perhaps, influenced by Empedocles fr.21.9-12 (Diels-Kranz), which lists all the creatures that reproduce by coming together in love, including the creatures mentioned by Oppian but also mentioning trees. 415 Kat oupavoc;' EUpUc;' 6'll"EP'SE/ This recalls the oath by Hera to Zeus at 11. 15.36-38, in particular on 36 Kat oupavot;' EUpUt;' UTI'EP-&EI. It is likely that this was the dominant model for these lines, as Hera also swears by the earth and the water of the Styx, whereas as at 416-7 there is /yal.T)c;' .. ./oC /\f)'ST)c;' ... , with the replacement of the Styx by the Lethe possibly influenced by the description of the Lethe affecting the soul of Aithalides at A.R. 1.645. The paradox of not forgetting Eros after drinking from the Lethe is similar to A.R. 1.644-5, where the shade of the herald 75 eOOElAJEV oe is also syntactically parallel with ~A.~t;' in tense and with OEl-l-laLVEl- bE rhetorically. It is also worth noting that the resulting form at.-&fjp' that would precede otOEv would be unusual.

52

2.8.3 Address to Eros, Cyn. 2.410-25

does not forget even after going to Acheron. 1bis allusion enhances the reverent image of Eras, rather than his cruelty. 417 VTl'rra-&e~ uooop/ The epithet VT]1T. is otherwise unattested, but is a straightforward modification of cX1Ta-t}Ec;-, as the placement of the latter in this sedes would require lengthening of the first syllable metri gratia. 4180e O· E~OeTl. 1TEcppLKaOl./. The primary influence on the line is Hal. 4.31-32 1TO:VTD 6E OE... 1TEcpPLKaoLv, which indicates a shift to the negative tone of that passage. This half line may also be influenced by the speech of Paris to Diomedes at fl. 11.383 lot TE OE 1TECPPLKaoL, which compares hidden fear with that of goats for a lion. If this is a deliberate allusion it is a powerful simile to associate with a description of Eros. 419-2104'1 be jJ.eVEl.... KEpauvoL. These depict Eras' position among the powers of the world, focussing on physical phenomena such as light and thunder and the heat from the sun. There is no similar demonstration of Eros' power in the Halieutica, but his position among the older powers is described at Hesiod Th. 120-122, although that passage does not seem to have affected the language here. 76 420 Tie:Al.o~ cpae-&oov Although ri. appears 10x in the Cyn. and 4x in the Hal., the conjunction with cp. only occurs here, and previously at 11. 11.734, at Od. 5.479 and 11.16 and Hesiod Th. 760. Wese 7 notes that the concept of the sun being able to see everything that happens on earth is common in epic literature. The epithet cp. introduces a statement about cpo:o~ later in the same line-another paradox, with the literal fire of the sun yielding to the metaphorical fire of Eros. 421!OEl.jJ.a'Cvov ... See note on 415 above for the implications of the use of this unusual verb of fearing. 422 aypl.E oa'CjJ.ov This is the closest that this passage comes to the more negative depictions of Oppian and the Hellenistic authors, with aypLE carrying a similar meaning to OXETALE, and the following 7 epithets of arrows are all more or less negative. 422-4 1Tup6EvTa~ ... , dva:A-&ea~,. .. This striking collection of epithets for the arrows of Eros shows some similarity in style to the list of epithets for shields at 1.217-18, see n. infra, but fulfils a function similar to its use at Hal. 4.11-18, where Oppian describes the qualities of the influence of Eras. 76 West, Hesiod: Theogony, 196. Here West notes the similarity to the concept of the pervasive influence of Aphrodite at Emp. fr. 17 .20-4 (Diels-Kranz). 77 West, Hesiod: Theogony~ 369.

53

2. Digressions

For a similar use of a long list of unusual epithets in a hymnic context c£ e.g. [Orph.] Hymn 40.3 1TAOUTo66TELpa -BEn, OTCl)(UOTpOCPE, 1TavTo66TELpa. While the dating of the Orphic hymns is a very difficult issue78 it is possible that this style of hymnic expression should be regarded as a distinct feature oflater hexameter poetry. In scope this description of the effect of Eros is similar to that of A.R. 4.445-7, although in that instance the focus is on the physical symptoms in men. 423 11TEuKEoavout;' This is a popular epithet with both Oppian and the poet of the Cynegetica, appearing 4x in the Hal. (1.561,2.33,2.510,5.280) and twice elsewhere in the Cyn (2.451, 3.448). Most of the uses in the Halieutica refer either to a poison or the sting that delivers it, with the exception of2.33 that refers to the bitter saltiness of the sea. Similarly Cyn. 3.448 refers to the qualities of a poison, but 2.451 refers to the physical piercing from a goat's horns. While the poet could be referring to suffering of a physical sort as implied by the uses outlined above, possibly the reference is to mental anguish, implied by its sole use in the Iliad at 10.8, where it is an epithet of war in a simile comparing the worries assailing Agamemnon to those caused by the approach of a storm or blizzard or war. Possibly here it is intended to connect the anxiety caused by Eros with the restless anxiety suffered by Agamemnon. 423 lJ.aAEpout;' This epithet is used twice in the Halieutica (1.300 and 2.368) and 4x in the Cynegetica (3.380, 3.400 and 4.190, as well as here). The uses in the Halieutica refer to things that devour flesh, whereas the other uses within the Cynegetica imply a more general sort of deadliness, referring to things such as arrows or a boar's tusks. It is interesting to note that the three occurrences in the Iliad are in the context of consuming fire, with those of20.316 and 21.375 being references to the consumption of Troy by fire. This recollection creates a double layer of meaning, namely that not only is the fire 'consuming', but also connected with an irresistible fate. 423 cpih,oocppovat;' This epithet is otherwise unattested and may be a new coining by the poet, capturing effectively the irresistible nature of Eros. 423 O~OTpt1EVTat;' Although not previously attested (it appears 8x in Nonnus), possibly it is intended to recall the gathering of the mullet at Hal. 4.142-3 KELVWV oLoTpT]60v ... /ELAOI-lEVWV, or the passions of Polyphemus at Theocritus 6.28 OLOTPEL 1Ta1TTaLvoLoa... , as he longs for Galateia. 78 Hopkinson, Greek Poetry of the Imperial Period (henceforth 'Greek Poetry'), 207-8.

54

2.8.4 How octopods devour their limbs, Cyn. 3.176-82

424 ITTlKEMva lI'VdOvTac;- The affliction TTlK. resulting from Eros' arrows is unusual, appearing in Homer at Od. 11.201 I TllKE66vL OTUYEPTl, and at AR. 4.902 TllKE66vL cp-Bwu-&ouaaL. In the Odyssey the ghost of Anticleia is stating that it was not by a wasting disease she passed away from laMa IJ.E aoe; TE lI'o-&oe; ... -&UIJ.OV aiTllUpa.f9, with the implication here that the arrows of Eros can have similarly deadly results. This image is enforced by the application by AR. to the effects of the song of the Sirens. 424 civa:A:&eae; The use of this epithet here is innovative, possibly based on Bion l3.4. 425 dVElI'TotTlOac;- This verb, which also occurs at 1.107 in the same phrase and is used llx by Nonnus, previously only occurs in Greek hexameter verse at Moschus 2.23, in the Europa, as part of Europa's speech shortly prior to her abduction. Its use here is a likely recollection of the earlier work, given its context. Hopkinson80 notes that the verb iTTOEW is frequently used to indicate sexual excitement. 425 ci~E6KTOI.OI. This epithet is otherwise unattested, but its occurrence in the scholium to AR. 4.897 suggests that it may have appeared in Hellenistic literature no longer extant. 2.8.4 How octopods devour their limbs for food, eyn. 3.176-82

This brief and unusual digression is linked with the description of how bears live by licking their own limbs at 170-5, and fills the function of a simile without the normal phrasing and construction associated with similes in the Cyn. The practice is originally described by Hesiod at Op. 524, but is given full treatment by Oppian at Hal. 2.241-6. It is this latter which was clearly most influential here, as it is followed by a description of the bears licking their own feet at Hal. 2.247-52, with the poet giving us a thematic reversal of the narrative and simile of the Hal. The mirroring of a combination of discourse and digression by making the digression part of the discourse in the later work and turning the prior discourse into digression is a typically Alexandrian piece of composition. The overall effect of this is to make homage to Oppian and his work in a manner that would be striking for readers familiar with the Halieutica. In both this

79 Homer, Odyssey 11.202-3. 80 Hopkinson, A Hellenistic Anthology, 204.

55

2. Digressions

passage and the address to Eros allusion to Oppian appears to be the strongest influence on composition. The digression is arranged as follows: The octopods contrive this device among the waves, 176-7, it is winter that drives them to eat their tentacles, 178-9, the octopods grow new tentacles in spring, 180-2. In comparison the passage in the Halieutica is structured as follows: The octopods stay in for fear of winter storms, 241-2, the octopods eat their tentacles while hiding in hollow rocks, 243-4, the octopods grow new feet due to a gift by Poseidon, 24S-6. In structure the two passages are similar, being composed of two units of two lines, followed by a two or three line conclusion on the regrowth of the feet. There is, however, no mention of Poseidon in the Cynegetica, possibly as Poseidon is not a god otherwise important to hunting, but also perhaps as deliberate innovation. The digression on the bears in the Halieutica then follows straight on in lines 247-S2, the same length as the description of the practice that precedes the description of the octopods in the Cynegetica from 170-S. It can be seen from the following examination that the poet of the Cynegetica has based the expression of this digression closely enough on the equivalent passage in the Halieutica to show his awareness of it, but has innovated by elaborating on Oppian's expression and introducing elements from elsewhere as suits the context. This serves as a homage to Oppian's description of the octopus and may be a deliberate effort by the poet to show greater knowledge and skill. The digression is not strongly characterised by rhetorical expression, possibly reflecting the fact that, unlike some of the more ornate passages described above, the poet has a clear model to imitate and innovate on. The constraint of a previous model on language has been noted above in digressions which closely follow the narrative style of heroic epic; however it is unusual to see the poet's expression so constrained in a passage influenced by didactic epic and is perhaps a reflection of how closely the poet follows the content of one particular passage in this instance, rather than a range of similar passages as is more normally the case. 176-7 [3ev-&eool.v EV eUpU'lr6pol.o -&aA6:ooTl~/ ... KUlJ.aOI. This is a grander description of the sea than Hal. 2.241 OAOr:; uowp/, and is likely modelled on 11. lS.38l KUlJ.a i}a"A.aooT]r:; EupmropoLO/,in which the attack of the Trojans is compared with that of a large wave against a ship on the 56

2.8.4 How octopods devour their limbs, Cyn. 3.176-82

open sea, and the similar Od. 4.432 and 12.2. The epithet EUPl.YrT. occurs twice in the Hal., both times of the sea below being ranged by sea creatures, sea-monsters in one instance and tuna in the other. Its use here with ~. creates a similar sense of an unknowable depth in which the octopus lives, rather than recalling the open sea that is implied by its use in the Iliad and Odyssey. 177 hrouAu1ToOEC; OKOAI.OL This is identical and in the same sedes as Hal. 1.306. It is interesting to note that the poet imitates the usage of Oppian, but innovates by drawing on a description of the octopus from a part of the Halieutica different from that on which the majority of the passage is modelled. 178 XECjJ.aToc; oC ... EVI.1TfJvl This is a considerable elaboration on Hal. 2.241 IXELjJ.aTL.... , as is the case with 176-7, see note supra. Elaborations of this sort are a common device in Hellenistic poetry. 179/KEu-&ovTal. 1TAaTajJ.wOl.v ... The poet is here more concise than Oppian, who describes the octopods as yAacpuPD0L.V EVL.S-0jJ.EVOL. ooAO:jJ.Tl0L.I at 2.243. The noun 'TTA. usually indicates shallowly placed ledges of rock or 'reefs', as at Hal. 1.121 and 2.167, Cyn. 4.224 and Aratus Phaen. 993. The sense of a ledge at the bottom of the sea implied here seems modelled on Hal. 5.650 IEv VEO:TOL.c;' 'TTAaTaj.lWOL.V... 179 1TAoKajJ.LOac; This term for the tentacles is more ornate than EOuc;' 'TTo6ac;' of Hal. 2.244 and QV 'TTo6a of 2.250, although Oppian uses it to mean the tentacles of the cuttle-fish at 2.125, which may have inspired the poet here. 181 aKpEjJ.ovEC; ... 1TtIAI.V aAof!oKouowl This is an elaboration on the simple OL. .. cpuoVTaL. of Hal. 2.245-6. The verb o. is not used at all by Oppian, whereas it appears twice in the Cyn. 181 aKpEjJ.ovEC; The use of this noun to mean the tentacles of the octopus is most likely modelled on its use to mean the tentacles of the cuttle-fish by Oppian at Hal. 2.122. Its uses in Hellenistic hexameter verse at Theocr. 16.96 and A.R. 2.1101 (it is used in different contexts a further 3x by A.R.) both refer to the branch of a tree. 182 EU1TAoKajJ.OI. This epithet is used twice in the Cyn., but seven times of women in the Iliad. Its anthropomorphic use to describe the octopus seems to be an innovation by the poet, as it is not used at all in the Halieutica, making a neat play on 'TTAOKaj.ll:oac;' 179.

57

2. Digressions

182 OOAI.XllV 1TAOOOUOI. f}o.Aaooavl This description of the octopus may be intended to pay homage to the striking description in the Halieutica of the cuttle-fish sailing along by means of its legs at Hal. l.338-59.

2.9 Digressions modelled on a range of passages While all of the digressions discussed above dominantly draw their theme from a single model passage, the following passages draw their inspiration from a wider range of sources, so that several strong influences on their theme can be identified. 2.9.1 Relationship between sky, air, water and earth and their denizens, Hal. 1.409-20

This digression provides a brief cosmology tailored towards the book's focus on man's interaction with the animal kingdom. By including a brief cosmology in his work Oppian. follows a tradition in didactic epic established by Hesiod in the Theogony, Aratus' Phaenomena, the fragments of Empedocles and the De Rerum Natura of Lucretius, inter alia. Although there are specific recollections of these earlier cosmologies within this passage (cf. infra), rather than recalling one passage specifically, Oppian seems to acknowledge the tradition of cosmologies in didactic epic, although there are several instances which suggest a closer affinity with the passage in Aratus on the nature of Zeus. In arranging his cosmology Oppian seems to acknowledge the description of an omnipresent Zeus in Aratus' Phaenomena 1-14, although no light is shed on the question of whether the Phaenomena is a genuinely Stoic work,8! as Oppian merely states that it is possible that what Aratus says is true. The passage is composed as follows: The digression opens with an address to Zeus as the root of the whole universe, questioning whether he dwells everywhere or in Olympus, 409-11. Zeus is credited with the separation of each part of the world from the other as an act of kindness, 412-14. Zeus ensures that all the parts of existence 'hang together' in a 81 As noted elsewhere (see Digressions and similes in the Halieutica and Cynegetica) it seems difficult to credit Aratus with the production of a Stoic manifesto on the basis of these opening lines. It seems, however, that his later popularity is being acknowledged by Oppian in this digression.

58

2.9.1 Relationship between air, water and earth, Hal. l.409-20

bond of friendship, 415-17. Oppian closes by pointing out that none of the elements are totally separated from the other but that they move through time together, mixed with each other to lesser and greater degrees, 417-20. This last point brings Oppian back to the technical discourse by talking of amphibians, flying fish, sea birds and the like that belong partly to the sea and partly to the air or land. The language of this digression blends that of philosophical descriptions in didactic epic and expression reminiscent of more religious sources such as the Homeric Hymns. There is little language that is truly innovative, but instead the use of strongly allusive language helps lend this digression an air of formal philosophy. As might be expected in a digression with a strongly philosophical tone the expression here is strongly stylised, creating the impression that this cosmology is examined along the lines of formal philosophical discussion. 409 lIeu 1l00Kap This opening address to Zeus is characteristic of epic in general, rather than one recalling a specific use by one of the didactic poets. This combination of name and epithet does not occur in Homer, with the alternative reading iT The conclusion of the preparations for journey is emphasised by the inclusion of two unusual words in one line. The verb cp. does not occur previously and may be an innovation by the poet, who also uses it of fanners at 1.122. Possibly it has been inspired by Oppian's employment of the epithet CPUTllK0IJ.LnaL at Hal. 1.309 to describe vine branches laden with fruit. The epithet AOOL'IT. occurs previously at Hal. 4.201 of the cries that accompany birth, at Melager AP. 12.127.7, where it refers to a union oflovers, at Pindar Pyth. 4.41 of attendants or of death at fr. 131.1 [SchrOder] and later at Pau1us Si1entiarius AP. 5.221.4, in reference to sleep. Its use here of Dionysus is innovative. Cf. though AUaLIJ.EpLIJ.VO~ of Dionysus at AP. 9.524.12, an anonymous hymn to Dionysus, and at Orph. Hymn. 28.6, 36.5, 85.5 and AOOL'lTrlIJ.OVE~ at Orph. Hymn. 2.11 and 59.20. This use of a positive epithet not applied to Dionysus elsewhere may be an argument in favour of Bnge1hofer's213 contention that the poet has a particular interest in and reverence towards the god. 255 XTlAOV O· dppfJTTlV This description of the box containing the god, a conscious variation on KEU{]qJ.EVn .. AO:pvaKL 249, possibly recalls Theoc. 16.10 KEVEa~ EV 'ITU-fJjJ.EVL XllAoG, describing a box containing the Graces, but the epithet opp. is commonly used elsewhere of the unspeakable mystery cults, such as the mention of Persephone as the app1lTo~ KOPll at Bur. fr. 37. Hopkinson214 notes on 245-9 (see n. above) that such vocabulary should be regarded as an attempt to provide an aetiology of Dionysian practices. 255 deLpaaal. Hopkinson215 notes that the poet is unique here in lengthening the initial a- in this word, which"" oELpaaa/ 1.347, cited by LSJ for this scansion. While it is possible that there is a now lost precedent for this usage, it may perhaps reflect the poet's constant efforts to be innovative in his usage, cf. 248n. for other metrical 'innovations' by the poet. 257 EupL'lTou ... Tjoval;' It is interesting to compare the way that mention of represents a shift in the action of the narrative, namely the commencement of travel at sea and the 'flowering' of the ship at 255-265, and its use in Homer at places like ll. 24.13 where the arrival of Dawn on

n.

213 Engelhofer, 163. 214 Hopkinson, Greek Poetry, 200. 215 ibid.

136

2.9.14 Story of Dionysus and Pentheus, Cyn. 4.233-319

Achilles as he mourns on the shore initiates the final reconciliation of Achilles to his fate and to his fellow-men. 258 dAL'lTAaVOV This epithet is otherwise unattested and may be an innovation by the poet, based perhaps on the use OAL1TAaVT]c;' in epigrammatic poetry in Lucillius at AP 11.390, Antipater of Sidon AP 6.223.l, eXAL1TAaVLT]c;' by Philippus AP 6.38.8 or perhaps more remotely may be intended to recall eXAL1TAOOL of A.R. 3.l329, Call. Hymn Del. 15,52 or eXAL1TAaYKToc;' at Soph. Ai. 695, A.R. 2.l1, Leonid. AP. 6.4.4 and 3x in the Halieutica .. 259 ypl.cpea!;' Hopkinson216 notes that this is identical to ypL1TEac;' for 'fishermen', which is used, at Theocritus 1.39 in the bowl ecphrasis to describe a fisherman who is YEpwv, and at Thocritus 3.26 in a description of the place where a lover may leap to his doom c1l1TEp TWc;' -&uwoc;' aKo1TLO:sETaL "OA1TLc;' 6 YPL1TEUc;', cf. 1TpEa~uv ... eXAL1TAavov at 258. The use ofYPL1T. with a name is also a feature of Hellenistic dedicatory epigramm, being used twice by Leonidas at AP 6.4.7 and 7.504.l2, with the names Diophantos and Gripon respectively, and by Philippus at AP 6.5.7 with the name Peison. Of these AP 6.4 and 6.5, epigramms dedicating fishing equipment to Hennes, resonate closely with the Halieutica in view of the address to Hermes as instructor of fishermen at Hal. 3.9-28. It may be that Theocritus has directly influenced the poet here, but he may also be displaying his knowledge of the learned references used by Oppian. 259 d KeXTOI.!;, It is interesting to note that this word for 'boat' is used in the sense of a ritual vessel for mysteries at IG 1.225c, and possibly here it should carry a double meaning, cf. on XTJAOV at 255n. 260 a~oea-&et!;' tepa!;' ... yuva'CKa!;' This respectful treatment of the attendants of the god by the old fisherman and his subsequent escape from transformation suffered by sailors in other versions of this story, (cf. Ovid Met. 3.582-691 or H.h. Dion. (7) 51-3) is argued by Engelhofer 17 as evidence of a reverent attitude towards the god on the part of the poet, but given the relentless innovation by the poet in both language and content elsewhere in the Cyn., it is difficult to state definitively whether the differences from the traditional story reflect personal attitude or a striving for variation. For similar variations on a 'standard' story, cf. the slaying of the Harpies by the sons of Boreas at 2.624. 216 ibid. 217 Engelhofer, 168

137

2. Digressions

261 XAOEpTJ ... j..l'CAa~/ This vine is not mentioned in Hh. Dion. (7), but is mentioned at Eur. Race. 108 and 703. Of these the former with XAOfjPEL / j..lLAOKL suggests either that it may have influenced the poet directly or that by the time of the composition of the Cyn. it may have formed some standard part of Dionysian worship the details of which, as Engelhofer 18 notes, the poet seems to be well acquainted with. 262 ~Al.VOc;' The 'vine tendril', too, is not mentioned in the description of the sprouting of the boat at Hh. Dion. (7), and has been corrected by Brodaeus from OEALVOc;', perhaps on analogy from Nicander Al. 181, and certainly making more sense than for celery to be sprouting from the boat. It is likely that this is an innovation by the poet on E~ETOV6oi1-T] / exj..l TrEAOc;' of Hh.Dion. (7) 38-9. 262 KI.OOOc;' epETrTov/ The wreathing of the boat with ivy does seem to be a traditional aspect of the story, cf. ELALooETo KLOOOc;'/ Hh.Dion. (7) 40. 263-4 Ka£. KEV uTrep TrOVTOI.O ... TrETrTT)OTEc;' This is a very concise treatment of the fear of the fisherman and their desire to jump overboard compared with Hh.Dion. (7) 48-53. As in other digressions, it is a notable habit of the poet to borrow from a traditional story or one from earlier literature in a very concise fashion. Cf. also that the wreathing of the ship is described here in two lines as opposed to Hh.Dion. (7) 35-41. 263 u'lrep TrOVTOI.O KU~£.OTEOV This description of the leap of the fisherman differs from Hh.Dion. (7) 52 TrfjOT]oov ... ELt;' O:AO O'COV. It seems likely that this description is modelled on the taunt of Patroclus at Il. 16 745-6 Wc;' PE'CO KU~LOTC;X/ ... TrOVTtp EV LX-&UOE\lTL. 264oEl.j..laTI. Oal.j..lovl.tp 'lrE'lrTT)OTEc;' This is a considerable variation on Hh.Dion. (7) 48-50 oL 6' ELt;' TrpUj..lVT]V EcpO~T]-&EV,I. . ./ eCJTav exp' EKTrAT]YEVTEc;' and given its rapid alliteration it incorporates a standard element of the existing tradition while showing innovation by the poet. 265 Ec;' ya'Cav 06pu KEAOE This description the landing of a ship is similar to phrases using KEMW in the Odyssey and the Argonautica, and it is used as a general epic idiom, rather than as an allusion to any particular landing scene. Engeihofer 19 notes that this is a considerable deviation from the existing tradition that the sailors jump overboard and are turned into dolphins220, and goes on to argue that this is proof of a desire by the poet

218 ibid. 169 219 ibid. 170 220 H.h. Dion. (7) 51-3

138

2.9.14 Story of Dionysus and Pentheus, Cyn. 4.233-319

to present the god in a more positive light. It is difficult, however, to state conclusively whether this change was done for innovation or from reverence. 265 'll'pOC; Euj3otT'lv Most likely the influence here is the story of the raising of Dionysus by Aristaeus in brief at AR. 4.ll31-8, where he receives the young god EU~OLT'lc;' EvToa-&Ev 'A~avTL6oc;'J 4.ll35. 266 'Apl.OTatOl.O Mentions of Aristaeus are rare in Greek literature. At Hesiod Theogony 977 he is recorded as the husband of Autonoe, but the most extensive Greek tradition is at AR. 2.506-30 and 4.ll31-8. In AR. book 2 he is celebrated by the Haemonians at 506f. as 'AYPEa Kat N6f-lLOV, which, in addition to the tradition based around his worship, may have inspired his mention here as the teacher of rural skills to men, see 268-272. The depiction of Aristaeus as teacher of men is traditional and further emphasised by the fact that Apollonius seems to have been influenced by similar, possibly ritual, language as Pindar Pyth. 9.65 I'AYPEa KaL N6f-lLOV, TOLc;' 6' 'ApLaTa'Cov KaAELv. He is mentioned more specifically, in AR. book 4 as the discoverer of some of the rural skills at 1132-3, cf. 269-272n. below. As Aristaeus and Autonoe are the parents of Actaeon221 , possibly this parentage influenced the poet to include him in a book devoted to the sort of hunting which was eventually Actaeon's bane. However, it is also worth considering whether the poet was influenced to some extent by Roman authors, (cf. 3.18n. above), in particular by the Aristaeus epyllion at Virgil Georg. 4. The fact that, like the epyllion of Virgil, this is the final digression in a four book didactic epic devoted to a skill popular with country men suggests that the poet may have had the Georgics in mind when composing the Cynegetica, although that is not in itself conclusive proof of such awareness. When viewed together with the range of possible influences from Roman literature noted elsewhere, there is at least a strong suggestion of possible influence from Roman didactic epic. 267 Kapuuol.v U'II" aVTpt\l Mair notes the considerable variety of models available in extant texts for these words. These are difficult to reconcile, but given the poet's marked preference for obscure aetiologies noted elsewhere (cf. 2. 11 On.), Mair's proposal based on a reading of Caryae = Carystus is reasonable, particularly given the naming of Carystus as Aristaeus' father at schol. A.R. 2.498. As noted on lines 265 and 266 supra the description of Aristaeus in AR. book 2 would appear to have 221 West, Hesiod: Theogony, 425

139

2. Digressions

influenced the poet several times in this digression and it is reasonable that this would continue to be the case here. 268 lJ.upLa ... EOl.oeX~aTo The role of Aristaeus as a teacher of the skills of fanning to mankind is also described at A.R. 4.1132-3 IJ.EJ...wOEWV EPYO... aveUpaTO ... , although the range of skills he is said to have discovered is set out in the following lines in much greater detail than in the Argonautica, and the taking of an earlier author's motif or passage and elaborating in greater detail in a learned manner is a typically Alexandrian piece of composition. Also, for the numerical exaggeration of the range of skills taught by Aristaeus to IJ.DpLa, cf. Farre1l222 on the changes wrought over time to the 'hundred tongues and heart of iron' motif of n. 2.488-493 to imply great learning by subsequent poets. The conception of Aristaeus as inventor as well as teacher is picked up by 269/1TpWTOC;;-.. . 1TpWTOC;;-, where the repetition emphasises this traditional aspect of his character. 269 1TPWTOC;;- 1TOI.IJ.EVI.OV Here the poet is drawing on a range of passages within one description by switching to the depiction of Aristaeus as NolJ.l.OV at A.R. 2.507. Mair adopts the reading 1TOLIJ.EVI.OV of Schneider, where the manuscripts read 1TOLIJ.EVLWV. Metre requires that the last syllable is long, but the sense is much better served by Schneider's reading with metrical lengthening of -LOV understood. 270 Kap1Touc;;- aypl.eXooc;;-... EAaLTlc;;-1 This description of the skill of pressing olives seems to have been based on the description of A.R. 4.1133 1TOAUKIJ.TJTOLO T' cXvEUPOTO 1T'C0P EAOLTlr:;I. It is worth noting that the emphasis here is on the discovery of the pressing of olives, whereas that of the Argonautica is on the discovery of the fruit per se. The poet varies his emphasis both here and at 269 to distinguish his description from his model. 271 TaIJ.Loc.p ... YeXAa 1Tl1~aTO This description of the making of cheese may have been based on Theocr. 11.66 TUPOV 1TO£;OL TO:IJ.LOOV. Dover223 , however, notes that by the time of Theocritus the story of Polyphemus and Galatea, which is told in Idyll XI, was a well-worn one, and it may be that there are other stories of divine farmers which may have influenced the inclusion of cheese-making here.

222 Farrell, 232. 223 Dover, 174.

140

2.9.14 Story of Dionysus and Pentheus, Cyn. 4.233-319

271-2 Kat 'ITOTt OLjJ.I3AOUc;'I ... jJ.EALooac;'. As at 270 above, this is a considerable elaboration on A.R. 4.1132-3 I-lEAI..OOEWV / Epya... 00VEUPaTO. More normally in Greek literature bees are depicted as coming from hollow rocks rather than oak trees, cf. 11. 2.88, A.R. 1.880, but the poet here is perhaps looking to Hesiod Op. 232-3 6pOe;- / aKPlll-lEV TE CPEpEL ~aAavoue;-, I-lEOOTJ 6E I-lEAc.aoae;-. Wesf24 notes that Vergil Eel. 4.30 and Georg. 1.131 also talk of bee hives in trees. Of these in particular Eel. 4.30 'et durae quercus sudabunt roscida mella' is most evocative of the line here, although there is nothing to clearly suggest influence by the Roman poet. 273 ~l.ovuoov .•. VEOYl.AOV The epithet VEOy. is used in earlier Greek epic of animals and men, of a hunting hound compared to Scylla at Od. 12.86 oKuAaKoe;- VEOYLAf]e;- and of Ptolemy as a babe at Theocr. 17.58 ~PECPOe;- VEOYLMOV E6vTa. It otherwise occurs at 1.199 of 'milk' teeth VEOYLAOV ... 666\?Ta. Given that the reference from Theocritus is to an infant, as here, and the strong encomiastic tone of Idyll XVIII it is possible that that poem has influenced the poet's language here. 275-6 I ~pu6:ol.V .. '/Eul3otol.V ... yuval.~Lv This rapid descriptive couplet outlining the attendants of the young god has the sound of ritual, with the rhyme in the dative plural endings and the alternation of epithet and noun in 276. In 276 in particular there is a striking combination of the alternation of epithet and noun and the enclosing of two endings in -1101. by two endings in -OLV. As has been noted elsewhere lines composed of epithets or nouns and epithets only, such as 276, commonly highlight a shift in the action or subject matter of a digression. In this case the line marks the transition from the description of the arrival of the god to a narrative of his youth and the miracles of the young god. 275 ~pu6:01.V For the rarity of references to Dryads by this title cf. 1.78 n. 275 jJ.EAl.OOOKOjJ.Ol.oL TE NUjJ.cpal.c;' The epithet I-lEA. previously occurs at A.R. 2.131 in a simile comparing the Bebryces to angry bees disturbed by a shepherd. 277 ETepal.c;' ... 'ITal.otv a-&upE This description of the play of the young god with his companions is similar to Pindar Nem. 3.44 1Ta'Ce;- EWV a-&upE I-lEy6:Aa Epya describing the childhood play of the young Achilles. Similar to is the simile describing a child playing by the seaside at n. 15.362-4 and a similar image at Rh. Herrn. 151-3 fjUTE TEKVOV / VT]1TLOV EV 1TaAal-l110L 1TEP' i.yWOl.. Aa'Ccpoe;- d:-&upwv. Given the similarity in topic material, with 224 West, Hesiod: Works and Days, 215.

141

2. Digressions

foreboding of the adult to come implied, it is possible that the ode was most influential here. N.B. also that ETEp. is a feminine fonn, with ET6:Pal"c;' read by Boudreaux. Boudreaux's suggestion is attractive given the range of possible models for its use in epic verse. In particular, its use to refer to Eris as the comrade of Ares in battle at fl. 4.441 and personified Flight as the comrade of Apollo at fl 9.2 suggest contextual links with women who would eventually become 'comrades in arms' to Dionysus. 278-9 veXp-&TlKa 1I"pOTaIJ.Wv... UlTEI.AeXWV. Hopkinson225 notes that the story of the spontaneous creation of liquids is also recorded in the messenger's speech at Eur. Bacch. 704-11. 279 lJ.e-&u Aapov dve~Auaav The poet here gives a characteristically much compressed version of the conventional motif of magical springs such as those of wine, water and milk, as at Eur. Bacch . 704-11, of wine at H.h. 7.35, water milk and honey at Plut. Is. et Os. 35 (365b) and honey at Ov. Fasti 3.736ff. Given that the verb cXva~A.. is used in the Argonautica to describe the production of four springs by Hephaestus at A.R. 3.223-5, where there is also one that produces oil, possibly this has influenced the poet towards greater conciseness than in the depiction of the Euripidean drama. 280-2 aUoTE o· dPVEI.OUI;' ... auVe~aA.A.EV The description of the dismemberment and re-making of rams here by the god is unusual, although Hopkinson226 notes that the god appears in his own dismemberment and resurrection in the Orphic hymns, fr. Orph 211,213. It is possible, however, that the dismemberment here is a response by the poet to the traditional destruction of Pentheus by dismemberment at the hands of his mother and aunts, foreshadowing the poet's innovation of Pentheus being destroyed by his mother and aunts who have been transformed into leopards at 315. By including some aspect of dismemberment in the digression the poet acknowledges the traditional version of the story before innovating at a later stage. 281IJ.EAEr.aTL TeXlJ.EV This combination of adverb and verb occurs 3x in Homer, at 11.24.409, Od. 9.291 and 18.339. Of these the first seems most likely to have influenced the poet, as it refers to insults to Hector's body by Achilles that are imagined by Priam and possibly the poet is identifying the young god with the exploits of the young Achilles, c£ 277n. supra. If 225 Hopkinson, Greek Poetry, 20l. 226 ibid.

142

2.9.14 Story of Dionysus and Pentheus, Cyn. 4.233-319

this is the case, it is worth noting that the poet draws on a range of sources to highlight the similarity between hero and god, rather than alluding consistently to anyone description in a previous author's work. 282 EuoTaAEw~ This adverb only appears previously at Cyn. 1.97 and Hippocrates Off. 3, and it is possible that the poet was aware of the medical usage of the word and uses it to give the 'experiments' of the young god an air scientific sophistication. 284 EIJ.EIJ.I3AETO Hopkinson227 notes that this is a distinctively Homeric fonn of the pluperfect with imperfect meaning, although there is no temporal augment in the Homeric uses. Of its two uses in the Iliad that of It. 19.343 describes the care that should be felt by Athene for Achilles, and 21.516 describes the pre-occupation of Apollo as he realises that he needs to distract Achilles from the wall. 1bis is suggestive of conscious identification of Dionysus with Achilles, but is not conclusive. The present fonn of the verb is used at Hal. 4.77. 285 et)wva~ot) D.l.ov6oot). Mair notes that Semele is referred to as 8uwvT] at Pind. Pyth. 3.99 and Rh.Dion. (1) 21, although the epithet, patronymic in character, is unique to this usage. 2861J'WAEOKETO This is another characteristically epic verb fonn, cf. 285n. In particular the imperfect in -OKETO occurs at 11. 1.490 and 5.788 and at Od. 11.240, suggesting a heroic quality for the journeys of the god among his worshippers, reinforced by apETllv ... cpaCvwv. 287 1Tt)p~ 1Ta1.0 I. Cf. other compounds of iTUpL - e.g. of -YEVT]t;' at Strabo 13.4.11 and -OiTOpOt;' 304 infra and of -iTaLt;' (e.g. ~ou- of the young Phoebus Apollo at A.R. 1.760. 1bis tenn for the god is otherwise unattested and may be a new compound coined by the poet. 288 1Texoal.... KaOIJ.T]toE~ Here the poet introduces what are, in tenns of the neighbouring technical discourse, the most important figures of the story, that is the daughters of Cadmus who are to be turned into leopards. Emphasis on the daughters of Cadmus is created by the emphatic iTOOaL. 288-9 6 lJ.6:pyo~ / TTEV-&EU~ This introduces the other main figure of this story in the same line as his eventual slayers. It is interesting to see the slant put on the character of Pentheus by j.lOPY., a common epithet which refers to madness inspired by a god for Antinous at Od. 16.421. Engelhofer28 reads a negative depiction of Pentheus to justify the god's actions, but 227 ibid. 202. 228 Engelhofer, 173.

143

2. Digressions

given the external agency implicit in the Homeric usage it is possible that the poet is implying helplessness in Pentheus as opposed to the malignant depiction of Antinous in the Odyssey. 289 OUXt OeTac: 'ITaAalJ,ac: ... eoeev N.B. the rhetorical emphasis given by the oxymoron of 'binding unbindable hands'. The epithet 6. referring to the hands of the god is not otherwise attested. 290 athocp6vol.cn,v ... xepat There is direct counterpoint here between the hands of the god and those of Pentheus in 289 and 290. Maif229 translates atJTocp. as 'murderous', but this is insufficient if we accept that the poet is trying to imply a similar degree of impiety here as for those who slay their own kin, as does Engelhofer30, even though kin-slaying is not emphasised as part of this story. The other occurrences of this epithet in the Cyn. at 1.269 and 2.480 describe horses that slew themselves in shame at their incest and oryxes that are slain by their own folly in battle repectively, and possibly the poet implies that Pentheus will perish by his own folly, c£ also Opp. Hal. 2.322, where the epithet is used to describe the Muraena that attacks the crayfish and dies in the process, rather than that he has or will necessarily slay another. If the epithet is translated as 'leading to his own slaughter', some of the emphasis on the wickedness of Pentheus read by Engelhofer is removed. 2910u TupCou KaolJ,ou ... TpCXa AEUKllV The poet's expression is quite different from the model for this line in epic literature, the description of Priam at 11. 24.516, although the sentiment is quite similar. Implied in both cases is the strife caused by a lack of reverence to one's elders, although here there is no positive reconciliation for Pentheus as for Achilles and Priam in the Iliad. The foreboding begun with mhocp6voLaLV at 290 is continued by 293 a~voIJ,6pol.al.v, which is also used by Andromache at 11. 22.481 when talking of the doom that hung over her from an early time, at Od. 9.53 of the companions of Odysseus doomed to die at the hands of the Cicones and at Od. 24.169 of the suitors about to die at Odysseus' hands. The uses in the Odyssey perhaps have stronger influence here, particularly as there it is used in the same gender, case and number. The poet previously uses the epithet at Cyn. 2.370 to when young goats are offering themselves in return for their mother who is trapped in a snare. Its use does not dwell on 229 Mair, 185. 230 Engelhofer, loe. eit.

144

2.9.14 Story of Dionysus and Pentheus, Cyn. 4.233-319

the doom of the companions that is implied by this epithet, leaving the tale untold in a typically Hellenistic touch of conciseness. 293-4ouPEI.V .. '/OUPEI.V TE KAECEl.V TE ... The anaphora of these two lines and the assonance and rhyme of the two verbs in 294 draw attention to the action of these two lines that will eventually lead to the downfall of Pentheus. It is also suggestive of repeated commands in a similar manner to the description of the cultivation of vines at Dionysus' command noted at 253 (see n. supra). 295 Bp6j..ll.oV Although this is a common alternative for Dionysus in drama and other literature, it does not appear previosuly in extant epic verse. It is frequently used subsequently by Nonnus, appears at Orph. Hym. 40.10 and in epigram at Meleager AP 9.331.3, 12.49.2, Anyte AP 9.745.1, Philipp. AP 1l.33.2 and Philodemus AP 1l.44.4. The potential influence from its use in epigram or the Orphic hymns could, however, be an argument in favour of Engelhofer's view that the poet has an interest in the god beyond the literary and is therefore familiar with a range of depictions of the god. 296-7 OEOj..lO'COI. v ... OEOj..lO: The repetition of the noun attractively encloses the brief telling of a traditional aspect of the story, namely the inability of the bonds to keep the god trapped. The rhyme in -O'COlV ... O'COlV in 296 and -Ol -Ol in 297 ensures that this description of a miracle is striking to the reader, and coupled with the sense of foreboding engendered at 290-4 it serves to build the sense of tension towards the confrontation between Pentheus and the god. 298 -&I.OOOOTI.OI. This term for the female followers of Bacchus is most likely an innovation by the poet on the masculine tl-WOCAlTTlc;' which appears at Aristophanes Ranae 327 and Vesp. 728, as well as at the anonymous Hymn to Dionysus at AP 9.524.9 and at the anonymous AP 16.156.3. 298 11"Oxvoo-3-Tl OE KEOP For this idiom compare Hesiod Gp. 360 E'TTO:XVWOEV cpCA..ov ~TOp/ and 11. 17.111-2 OAKliJ.OV ~TOp / 'TTOXVOlJTOl, and A.R. 4.1279 'TToxvootl-Tl Kpo6LTl. Although the use in the Argonautica has the closest linguistic resemblance, it is perhaps better to say that this had become a standard motif in epic literature for the poet to exploit. 23l 231 Cf. particularly Conte, 233-4 who talks about the evolution of the motif of an iron heart ... a thousand tongues ... ", which is used to indicate that the scope of the material described is so great that the poet cannot cover the material without divine aid. In that case, as here, the H •••

145

2. Digressions

299 p'C\jJav ... -&6o-&Aa The likely model for this line is 11. 6.134 -&6crB-Aa XCXjJ.aL KaTExEUov, which forms part of a brief anecdote of an attack on all of the nurses of Dionysus by Lycurgus. The poet has, however, been innovative in his language when compared to the Homeric original, having the striking rhyme of -W\1 ... -W\1 surrounding the rhyme of -a -a. 300 eOTeXAaov ... OeXKPU Trapel.aU This line is most likely modelled on A.R. 4.1064 OTaAOEl. 0' E'lTL MKPU 'lTapEl..Oc;/, describing Medea as she worries for her fate in the kingdom of Alcinous. 300 Bpoj...ll.olTl.OI. This epithet is only found here and at 340. Here it is used as a substantive for the female followers of Bacchus, and is likely to be an innovation by the poet. 301 l.W j...leXKap, W ~uS\1Uoe For the use of j...l. as a standard address when speaking to one god only, cf. e.g. H.h. Ares (8) 16. The call LW is used, inter alia, for calls to Dionysus or his followers, among others, cf. Eur. Bacchae 578 LW BOKxal.. and Catullus 61.4 'io Hymen Hymenaee io' in a traditional wedding song. 302-3 aTrTE oeAat;' ... wKa TUPeXvvou Hopkinson notes that the lightning and earth tremors are a traditional aspect of the story, as at Eur. Bacch. 585-603.232 304 TrUpCoTrope Cf. 'lTupC'lTal..c;' 287n. This epithet also occurs in magical papyri at PMag.Par. 1.56, and in the Orphic hymns 45.1 and 52.2. As the dates of the Orphic hymns are doubtful it is possible that this is the first literary use of this epithet, which would again support Engelhofer's view that the poet had direct personal knowledge of the Dionysian mystery rites233 • 304-5 ITEv-&ea Taupov / Taupov j...lEV ITev'6ila OUOOOVUj...lOV This striking repetition draws attention to the core of the digression, the transformation of Pentheus and his female relatives. In particular, the reversal of object and predicate is itself strongly evocative of the transformation between man and bull, cf. strikingly Ovid Ars. 2.24

descriptive tenus become more extravagant as the motif develops, whereas here the allusive expression alters while the scope of the expression remains static. 232 Overall Cyn. 4.287ff. could be profitably studied further as an example of growing influence from Greek drama in later epic, as all of the earlier phases of this digression have had a reasonably clear overall model in earlier literature, whether the youth of Achilles or the H. h. 7 or A.R. 2.506-530, but here the only obvious model is Eur. Bacch, and it could possibly be used as an argument for the poet having a close familiarity with at least that drama in particular. 233 Engelhofer, 167.

146

2.9.14 Story of Dionysus and Pentheus, Cyn. 4.233-319

'Semibovemque virum semivirumque bovem' of the Minotaur 34 , which hints at a possible Hellenistic source for both expressions. Semibovem is further used by Ovid at Tristia 4.7.18. The epithet 6uawv. has an explicative force as it is applied, inter alia, to Fate at 11. 12.116, perhaps suggesting that the transformation is Pentheus' doom, cf. Sophocles Ai. 914, 6uowVqlOc;' I\Coc;'. The emphasis on the transformation itself conforms with the poet's preference for it as a device in his digressions, cf. the transformation of king Phineus at 2.612-28 and of the Curetes at 3.7-19. At the least this suggests a similar response to Hellenistic sources as in the Metamorphoses ofOvid. 306 IcJlJ.o~6pouc;', CAOOtOI. KOpUOOOlJ.evoc;' CVUXEOCJI.. V, This line describing the beasts into which the women are transformed is strikingly composed entirely of noun, adjectives and participles. It is notable for the assonance of O-OL ... O-OOLV, and the enclosure of the participle K. describing the equipping of the women with claws. It is interesting to note that the verb KOp. occurs 10x in the Iliad, with all of its uses being concerned with the arming of heroes with the exception of 2l.306. The combination of the striking language and this verb gives the women an air of heroism. The use of wfl. here to refer to the BpOflLWTL6Ec;' seems almost certainly intended to recall A.R. 1.636 18uLaoLv wflO~OpOLc;' 'CKEAOL, used of the Lemnian women. 308 Nuol.O~ This epithet is otherwise found in hexameters at Rh. Dem. 17 of the homeland ofPersephone and later in Nonnus at 20.147 and 40.297. 309 nEv-6-eo IJ.EV 011 Taupov The transformation of Pentheus about to be described is highlighted by the verbal echo of its first mention at 304-5, see n. supra. 309-10 EOEL~aTo ... 1jwPT)OE... d:veTEI.AE The series of three aorist verbs depict swift progression of the transformation, and despite the brevity of the description gives a much clearer picture of the transformation than the similarly brief description of the transformation of king Phineus at 2.626-7. 311 yAaUKl.6CJJoav This verb also occurs at 3.70 and 71 in anaphora to describe the eyes of leopards, as it does here. It only occurs once in the Iliad as a participle at 20.172 of the glare ofa lion, and also ofa lion's glare at [Hes.] Scut. 430 yA.OUKLOCJJV 6' OOOOLc;' 6ELVQV in a simile comparing 234 The line also appears at Seneca Senior, Controversiae, 2.2.12.12 and Contr. excerpta 2.2.1.32. Seneca attributes the line to A1binovanus Pedo, a contemporary epigrammatist and friend ofOvid.

147

2. Digressions

Heracles with the angry lion ready to fight. Either of these may have influenced its use both here and in book 3, although the direct influence from Homer seems more likely. 312 KaTeypa\j1Ev The poet uses ypocpw or its compounds 5x in the description of the marking of the hides of foals, doves or men by eugenics at 1.326-367 and it would appear to be his favoured verb to indicate spotting or dappling with anthropomorphising effect, compared with the more conventional formations from OTLSW. 313 PI.VOV O'ITw«;, vE[3pO'COI. Hopkinson235 notes that this comparison of the skin of the leopards to that of fawns is meant to both recall the ritual fawn skins worn by the women, cf. 245 n. supra, as well as the spotted hides of the leopards. 314 dI-lEI.\j1O:I-lEVal. xpoa KaAov/ For this brief description of the transformation cf. the transformation of the Curetes into lions at 3.14 0f.lELljJ0f.lEVOc;' KOUPTlTac;' /.

316 TOI.0:6' ... 'ITI.OTEUOI.I-lEV·/ These final lines of the digression could almost be read as a direct answer to Theocritus 26.27-32, as the reference to singers who OUX OOLWc;' ljJEu6TlYOPEOUOLV at 319 may answer the gruesome mention of a ten year old boy being tom apart at Theocritus 26.29-30. It is not clear whether this response reflects a pious attitude of the poet or a desire to display greater learning than his predecessor. The poet has marked the shift from narrative to a closing address to the reader with a striking line that by its repetition of TOLa(6) ... -OLf.lEV, the spondaicism of 'ITLaTEUOLf.lEV and the use of the optative in an almost jussive sense gives a sense of the stages of a ritual. 317-8 oooa ... ~I.OVUOOU Here the poet tries to justify his departure from the other existing versions of the myth. Comparable is the story of the transformation of king Phineus, where the poet casts doubt on the version of the story he is about to tell at 2.614-6. 318 I-luoapo:«;, KELva«;, The epithet f.lUO. is relatively common in drama but rare in epic, occurring otherwise at Theocr. 2.20, where Simaitha is rebuking her maid ~ po yE -&T]V, f.looapa, Kat Ttv E1TLxapf.la TETUYf.laL;. Dover36 notes the frequent similarities between that Idyll and New Comedy, and it is possible that its use here and in Theocritus indicates influence from drama. 235 Hopkinson, Greek Poetry, 203. 236 Dover, 94-7.

148

2.10.1 Poseidon's love of dolphins, Hal. 1.385-93

3190uX 6oLwc;' ljJeu()"TlYOpeOUol.v The adverb 00. is previously seen in Empedocles fr. 3.2 where it forms part of an entreaty to the gods to let 'pure' things flow from the lips of the poets, and it is possible that the poet has turned this to a negative context, cf. its use to express scepticism at the judgement of Hades in letting an old woman outlive her daughter at Philipp. AP 7.187.2. The verb ljJEU6llY. is not otherwise seen in epic literature, and the combination of the two rare words creates a striking close to the digression.

2.10 Strongly innovative digressions In both the Halieutica and the Cynegetica a significant proportion of the digressions apparently show a high level of originality in their composition. Due to the fragmentary preservation of the didactic epic genre apparently novel material may be influenced by a model no longer extant. It is noteworthy that a substantial number of these digressions in both works are aetia. This reflects the stature of the aetia in Hellenistic literature as a fonn in which a poet could most fully display his learning of unusual stories and legends237. It is possible, therefore, that these either draw on local legends that have not been preserved in literary material elsewhere or are modelled on rare literary sources no longer extant.

2.10.1 Poseidon's love of dolphins, Hal. 1.385 - 393 This brief digression explains why dolphins prosper so greatly and are so widely found, stating that they are the favourites of Poseidon for assisting him in the abduction of Amphitrite. The digression is composed as follows: Dolphins rejoice in the sea and are seen everywhere because Poseidon loves them, 383-5, Amphitrite fled the attentions of Poseidon, but the dolphins revealed her whereabouts to Poseidon, 386-9. Poseidon then overpowered Amphitrite, married her, and made her 'queen of the sea', 389-91, and commended the dolphins and gave them much honour, 392-3. It is worth noting that there is a ring-composition, although not a strongly defined one in the opening and closing of the digression with a focus on the honour paid to dolphins at 385 and 393. 237 Hollis, "[OPPIAN], CYN. 2, 100-158 and the mythical past of Apamea-on-the- Orontes", 155ff.

149

2. Digressions

Unlike many of the brief mythological digressions in the Cynegetica, (cf 3.8-19n.), there is no element of transformation in this story and although Oppian does use the motif elsewhere, as when describing the creation of mint at 3.486-97, its apparent popularity with the poet of the Cynegetica is a striking difference between the approach of the two poets to aetiological digressions. Their approach also differs in the way that the entire story of Poseidon and Amphitrite is told here, albeit briefly, without any reliance on the familiarity of an educated reader with traditional mythological stories, while in e.g. Cyn. 3.12 it is assumed that the reader is familiar with the way in which Zeus is hidden by Rhea from other sources such as Hesiod. Theog. 453-491. This could, however, simply reflect that the story of Amphitrite's abduction is a rare myth-cf. infra 386n. While some unusual and innovative language is used in this digression, it is more notable that the 'rape' of Amphitrite is expressed in terms similar to those used in abduction scenes in Homer. The expression of this digression is not strongly stylised. This restraint on Oppian's side emphasises the unusual content of the digression, as it is this that is strikingly innovative. 383 dKTa'Cc; TE 'IToAlJppaiM:yol.ol. The epithet 'ITOAUpp. describing the shores of the sea as 'much echoing' appears twice in the Halieutica, here and at 5.652, and in the Cynegetica at 3.21. The epithet is not otherwise attested and it appears likely that its use in the Halieutica has inspired the poet of the Cynegetica, although there is nothing particular to indicate from either use in the Hal. The verb ouppa-&aYEw appears at Nic. Ther. 194, and possibly this usage inspired the poet to create a new compound here or, given the difference in context between the usages in the Halieutica and by Nicander, some earlier expression now lost has inspired both poets to compose new terms. If the former is the case, it seems possible that this use is an identification by Oppian with the learning displayed by Nicander. 385 dya'JT(X~EI./ It is interesting to note the semantic connotations of this verb in the Halieutica. Its present use and the other two, 1.749 and 3.224, all describe 'loving kindness'. Oppian makes use of a great variety of words to describe love and passion, and most of those used in book 4 are associated with a destructive and harmful infatuation as opposed to the friendship depicted here. 386 KOUPTlV KlJaVOO'ITl.oa NTlPTltvTlV This is a metonymy for Amphitrite, with the description of the daughter of Nereus as N. possibly coined on 150

2.10.1 Poseidon's love of dolphins, Hal. 1.385-93

analogy of 'OKEOVLV11, on which (and for other examples of fem. patronymic in -LV11) see Wesf38 on Theog. 364. It is quite likely, however, that it is modelled on a line quoted at Suidas v 333 N11P11"CV11· -&UYO:T11P TOU NrlPEUlc;', which Hollis239 suggests can be attributed to the Hecale of Callimachus and which may be echoed by Catullus at 64.28 "tene Thetis tenuit pulcerrima Nereine?". It seems likely that the expression as a whole is an innovation based on Od. 12.60, KUaVC!l1TLooc;' 'AI-1CPLTPLT11c;'/, which has the look of a Homeric fonnula but actually only occurs once in the Odyssey. Therefore, this provides an opportunity for the poet to display his learning by drawing on this singular usage in the Odyssey and telling a lesser-known story, which Mair40 notes is preserved elsewhere at Erastosthenes Catast. 31 and Hygin. Astr. ii.l7, although unlike those versions there is no transfonnation of the dolphins into a constellation mentioned here. 389 6 6' ... KuavoxaL TT)c;' Although the use of this epithet to describe Poseidon is not unusual, describing him 6x in that context in the Iliad and 3x in the Odyssey, it is used on its own in only one of those uses, at Od. 9.536. This is, however, a regular feature of divine epithets and there is little in the context of that usage, describing the prayer addressed by Polyphemus to Poseidon, to suggest allusion by Oppian. 391 'ITapaKOI.TIN, aAcc;' [3aaLAEl.av, /f-&T)KEV Although the idiom of 'TTapO:K. + TL-&111-11. for making someone his wife is not in itself unusual, it is only used once in the Iliad and twice in the Odyssey. Of these, the usage in the Iliad carries the strongest similarity to that here, following a description of how Brisels was abducted after her city was sacked by the Mynnidons. Similarly the two occurrences in the Odyssey at 2l.72, 316 concern marriages Penelope is apparently unwilling to make, so that the idiom has a strong sense of marriage initiated against a woman's will, although in the Homeric usages acceptance of the marriage at a later stage is implied, as for the marriage of Amphitrite and Poseidon here. 392 eVT)eat;' ... -&Epa'ITOVTac;' This description anthropomorphises the dolphins by likening them to companions of a hero or god, cf. the five occurrences of €v. in the Iliad, of which 17.204, 21.96 and 23.252 appear in conjunction with ETa'CpOc;'. That at 17.670 refers to Patroclus and that at 238 West, Hesiod: Theogony, 268. 239 Hollis, Callimachus: Hecale, 360. 240 Mair, 245 footnote.

151

2. Digressions

23.648 to Nestor. Several of the other uses in the Hal. carry the same metaphorical force as here, cf. esp. 5.425 OEACP'CVEc;' EV. Therefore this use with -8-. is both traditional and innovative. The epithet EVTlE- should be distinguished from the noun EVTlECTl, which occurs just once in the Iliad at 17.670 and not again in Greek literature until Hal. 5.519, suggesting that Oppian was particularly implying a similarity between the loyalty that heroes can show in the Iliad and the way in which some sea creatures, particularly dolphins, (although the epithet is also used of the Grey Mullet at 2.644), can relate to each other.

2.10.2 Moralising digression on the perils of gluttony for men, Ha!. 2.217 - 224 This brief moralising digression follows description of the bottom-feeding Day-sleeper, which shares its bottom-feeding habits and physical forms with creatures such as the ray family, or the Wobegong (Carpet shark). In describing how this fish can become disabled by the effects of overeating Oppian launches into a moralising digression on the perils of gluttony for men. It is possible that Oppian continues here the homage to earlier didactic and epic authors seen in other digressions in books 1 and 2, the possibility of which has been noted elsewhere, cf. 1.409-20 supra. There is a possible model for this passage in Hesiod's Opera et Dies. The moral instruction of that work, with its emphasis on conservative behaviour and prudent management of resources, is a likely influence for this digression; cf. Hesiod's advice against greed.241 It should be emphasised that this digression recalls Hesiod in style but not strictly in content, lacking an extended injunction focussed on ensuring that the reader works hard enough to have enough to eat rather than on consuming too much as in Op. 286-334. The digression proceeds as follows: The attention of gluttonous men is drawn to the perils of their folly, 217-8. Men are enjoined to drive pleasure in the pursuit of gluttony far from themselves, 219-21. Many men succumb to gluttony, 222-3. Let men look at the example of the day-sleeper and avoid it, 224. While there is some use of innovative language in this digression, it primarily serves to suggest a high degree of learning that is appropriate for 241 Hesiod, Op. et Dies., 323-334.

152

2.10.2 The perils of gluttony for men, Hal. 2.217-24

the provision of moral instruction. It can be argued in instances such as this that, rather than highlighting Oppian's skill and knowledge, his personality as such is submerged and the digression appears to be 'of a piece' with the generic norms. Oppian makes notable use of rhetorical styling in this digression, as is outlined in detail below. When viewed in conjunction with the topic material, its use here should be regarded as an attempt to suggest sententia and philosophical discourse. 217 KAUTe Wesf 42 notes that in archaic Greek the singular imperative form of this verb is only used in reverent addresses to gods, e.g. at Hes. Op. 9. The plural form that Oppian uses here is conventional to heroic epic, cf. e.g. 11. 2.56, as well as 4x in the Odyssey and 3x in A.R. 217 yovat jJ.epo1TC.llv While not in itself uncommon, yov. is not used in epic to refer to race or stock, more normally seen in drama, cf. Eur. Tr. 1290 Tae;' ~apoavou yovae;'. Its usage in epic verse may be an innovation by Oppian, or may have been influenced by its use in comedy, as in the title to Hermippus' play' A-&T]vae;' rOval. (1:224-27 K.)243. 217-8 dcppaotTlOl. / Aal.jJ.O:pyol.e;' This combination of noun and epithet is unique and may be an innovation. The noun acp. occurs mainly in verse, including in the fitfth line of the elegy of Solon quoted at Demosthenes de falsa legatione 255.13 (=Solon fr. 4.5 West), including 4x in the dat. pI. in the Iliad, whereas the epithet Aaq..l. occurs mainly in prose and inscriptions, and its use here may reflect that at Aristotle PA 3.14 (675a) 20, or its appearance at the anonymous AP 9.252.2. 218 aAYoe;' dOTJcpaytTlol.V chrTJoe'C' The noun aOT]cpayl.nOLV, meaning 'excessive eating', only previously occurs in verse at Call. h. Art. 160. Although the adjective aOT]cpayoe;' is used at 1.252 it is possible that Oppian is specifically alluding to Callimachus here, as in that instance it describes the gluttony of Herac1es who has been mocking Artemis for not hunting large dangerous beasts such as boars, OD yap f iTaOOaT' aOT]cpayl.T]e;'244. Possibly Oppian would be offering Herac1es' mockery to a learned reader as a divine example of the folly to which gluttony can lead. 219 depytTJv OUOTepiTea The noun aEpy. occurs twice previously in epic literature at Hes. Op. 311 and Od. 24.251. West notes that in both of those uses the iota is pronounced long metri gratia, as is the case here. It seems

o...

242 West, Hesiod: Theogony, 141. 243 Winkler, 138. 244 Callimachus, h. Art., 159-60.

153

2. Digressions

likely that it is Hesiod that has influenced Oppian here, as it occurs in the instruction of Perses on the benefits of hard work as opposed to idleness. Oppian may, however, be making a double allusion, as the use in the Odyssey refers to Laertes' hard work and it has been noted elsewhere that Oppian favours the Odyssey as a source for models of human behaviour, (cf. 1.7 n.) The adjective OOOT. is not previously attested in epic verse, appearing previously in Aes. Choeph. 277, and its use here, and three times subsequently in the Hal., is possibly a mild innovation. 219-20 OU1:lKOl. / Kat KpaOCT}1; Kat XEl.POI;, EX0l. ... The repetition of verbs in the present optative enclosing the four assonant words beginning with palatal consonants is a striking piece of styling, lending the advice the feel of religious doctrine. It is worth noting that Oppian makes far more use of optative verbs in this digression to give advice, 4x in 6 lines, than is found in the model from Hesiod; cf. e.g. Op. 347 EflflOpE... Qc;' T' EflflOpE... and 349 eO flEv flETpEw-&al.... , eO 6' O:1TooOOVal. to see the variation in Hesiod's expression for giving advice within a single passage. It is possible here that Oppian was influenced by the use of the optative as a mild command by Nicander in the Theriaca and Alexipharmaca; cf. e.g. in the opening of the Alexipharmaca 1TOpOLc;' at 49, 71 and 94, KopeoaLo at 63, 6pe~aLI; at 88 and KopeooaLc;' at 93 245 • 221 1Tav'fl-oCvol.Ol. ... Tpam~~al.l; The only occurrence of this epithet 1Tav-&. which would certainly predate Oppian is that of Philodemus at Poem. 2.49246 , although LSJ s.v. notes that this occurrence is doubtful. It does, however, suggest that possibly there was a comparatively recent influential occurrence in technical prose or verse no longer extant. If the occurrence in Philodemus is spurious, possibly Oppian has coined the epithet from the verb fuLVO:W, perhaps recalling its use as a Homeric hapax at Od. 4.36 to describe the feasting soon to take place at the table of Menelaus, an appropriate model for this context. 222-3 OrOl. AEAUVTal. / TivCa, yaoTpt... Kc:XAwal; These metaphors likening the controls on a man's appetite to the work of reins on a horse 245 The change in the use of the optative as a mild command in didactic epic could make a profitable study. In particular, it may be that use of the optative increases in teclmical verse as its use decreases in spoken Greek so as to make the expression appear more erudite. 246 At the time of writing the new editions being prepared of Philodemus by The Philodemus Project do not include the second book of IT ept ITOLTJJ.lClTC.llV. It is to be hoped that the occurrence of this epithet in the text can eventually be verified as it would be attractive to speculate that Oppian has drawn on the language of an Epicurean philosopher in a passage of the perils of gluttony.

154

2.10.3 Te1egonus and sting-ray spear, Hal. 2.497-505

and the slackening of the sheets of a sail before the wind may have been a commonplace in Greek literature by this point; for the former cf Menander Mon. 81 raoTpoc;' '!Tooav rlvCav ... KpaTE'Cv, and most likely the combination of human and animal experience appealed to Oppian. 224 aAAa Tl.l;' ... tpeuyol. TEAol;' 1lllePOKOLTOU. The term rliJ.Ep. occurs previously at Hes. Op. 605 to describe a thief but as an adjective with cXVTlP, as it is used at Hal. 2.408. The name of the fish used here is almost certainly taken from popular usage (see D' Arcy Thompson s.v.). In Alexandrian manner Oppian closes off a brief digression with a return to the technical discourse on which it was based.

2.10.3 Mythological digression on Telegonus and sting ray spear, Hal. 2.497 - 505 This brief aetiological digression tells of the slaying of Odysseus by his son Telegonus with a wondrous spear devised by his mother Circe. This story is not found elsewhere in extant epic verse although it was told in the Telegony of Eugammon of Cyrene, and is preserved in prose at Apollodorus epit. 7.36, as noted by Mair247. The story of Telegonus seems to have been inspired by the prophecy of Teiresias at Od. 11.134 ff. It is open to question whether Oppian was influenced specifically by a prose source or a verse source no longer extant like the Telegony, but most interesting is how the inclusion of this digression reflects the apparent importance of the Odyssey to Oppian. As noted elsewhere Oppian seems to favour the Odyssey as a source for examples of human behaviour, especially to imply heroic qualities in the fishermen, cf. e.g. 1.8-9 n. supra, and it is a notable homage to the Odyssey that the only digression within the Halieutica which tells a narrative story from earlier heroic epic concerns the death of Odysseus. Although the digression is told briefly no significant details are implied for the reader by allusion. As noted above for the digression concerning Poseidon's love of dolphins at 1.385-93, this is a significant feature of the aetiological digressions of the Cynegetica, though Oppian may have felt the need to provide more detail in view of the lack of an extant model in both this digression and that about Poseidon. Similarly there is no mention

247 Mair, 327 footnote.

155

2. Digressions

of transfonnation, a recurrent theme in the aetiological digressions of the Cynegetica. The digression proceeds as follows: Circe gives the sting of a sting-ray to Telegonus for his spear tip, 497-8. The spear is to provide "death from the sea", 499. Telegonus lands on the island that is rich in goats, 499-500. Telegonus does not know that this is his father's island, and Odysseus comes to protect the flocks, 500-2. Te1egonus slays Odysseus after he has survived many different adventures in life, 503-5. While the theme of this digression is apparently innovative, the language is drawn predominantly from two sources, the Odyssey and the Alexipharmaca and Theriaca of Nicander. The allusions to the Odyssey are closely related to the topic material, with recollections of both the main figures in this tale and the references to the fate of Odysseus in that work. The references to Nicander seem to be closely linked to the resemblance between the spear of Telegonus, and by extension the tail of the sting-ray, and the poisonous creatures described by Nicander. Here again the use of such language makes this story appear to fit naturally into the archaic epic tradition. The expression of this digression is not strongly stylised although, as has been noted above, the placement of several words does emphasise the allusion to earlier works. The relatively plain expression does, instead, focus the reader's attention on the content of the story and the impact of any allusions therein. 497 a~yavETl OOAl.x"pei: The description opens emphatically with an unusual pair of terms to describe the spear of Telegonus. The appeal to a learned reader is increased by the use of the epithet ooA. which occurs previously in epic only at Nicander Theriaca 183 to describe the fangs of the asp. It is likely that its use here compares the poisonous sting of the ray with the bite of the asp. 498 IKLpKTl ... 'lJ"OAucpapj.laKoc;' ... j.l"TTlP The epithet 1ToAu. is also used at 11. 16.28, Od. 10.276 and A.R. 3.27, inter alia. Of these, this usage is modelled on the description of the home ofCirce in the Odyssey, in which it occurs in the same sedes to describe Circe herself, IKCPKTlc;' ... 1ToAucpapj.laKou.... 499 aAl.OV j.lOpOV This phrase is probably modelled on the description of the fate of Odysseus at Od. 1.134 13-6:vOTOc;' OE TOL Ef, OAOc;', but in

compressing the phrase Oppian has obtained a second layer of meaning as 156

2.10.3 Telegonus and sting-ray spear, Hal. 2.497-505

the context obviously uses the meaning of ClA. as 'from the sea' but also suggests its homonym meaning 'fruitless'. 499-500 viloc.p / a~YI./36Tc.p The epithet aLy. is otherwise used in epic only at Od. 4.606 and 13.246 to describe the island ofIthaca, and here it is a typical piece of Alexandrian indirect expression. It is possible that Oppian specifically recalls 13.246, where Athene describes Ithaca to Odysseus in disguise, being the first person to meet him on his return. 500 1Twea The usage of this term absolutely to refer to flocks without any qualification is not Homeric, but reflects common later practice, as at Hes. Op.516. 501 yepap41 oE /3oTlOp0jJ.eoVTI. TOKT11. This is another indirect reference using a Homeric allusion like that at 499-500. The epithet yEp. occurs twice in the Iliad, and here it seems to allude to its use in the comparative of Odysseus at 11. 3.211. The verb f30Tlop. is not Homeric but is first found in drama, cf. Eur. Orestes 1356. 502 TOV jJ.aoTeue The use of this verb is a mild innovation by Oppian as a variation on the normal epic form jJ.(XT-. This form appears previously in epic at Hes. Fr. 209,4, A.R. 1.1353, 3.1289, 4.303, 4.1394. This form is commonly used in later epic and likely reflects little more than linguistic development of the Hellenistic and post-Hellenistic period. 502 KaKT)V EvejJ.6:~aTo KT1pa. The verb E!.tjJ.. only occurs previously in epic, at Callim. h. Art. 124, Nic. Theriaca 767 and Nicander fr. 50,2. It is possible that each occurrence has been influential, for that of Callimachus concerns the anger of Artemis brought against mortals generally, much like the doom brought against Odysseus here, whereas that of Nicander in the Theriaca concerns the sting of the moth and may suggest sting of the sting ray, whereas its use preserved in Fr. 50 refers to the carving of a name on an apple to bind a lover. Theriaca 767 appears the more likely influence as it is in the same number, voice, tense and sedes, and describes a KEVTPOV at 766, a term also used of the sting-ray's sting by Oppian at 471. 503 a~oA6jJ.TlTI.V 'Oouooea The epithet aLoA. is previously used at Hes. Th. 511, inter alia, of Prometheus and at Fr. 10,2 (= lOa.26) ofSisyphus. Its use here is a variation on the more conventional epithet 1TOAUjJ.TlTLc;' of Odysseus from, inter alia, 11. 1.311 and Od. 21.274. There is strong dramatic emphasis in the delay of direct mention of Odysseus until this point, emphasising the inevitability of his fate by delaying his mention until the point when his fate is sealed. 157

2. Digressions

504 lI'OAUKIJ.i]TOl.Ol.V ae-&AOl.c;' The epithet TTOAUKfJ.. has the active meaning of 'involving much work' here rather than the normal Homeric use to mean 'much worked', of iron, denoting the greater labour required in its working compared with bronze. This may recall its application to the construction of the bedchamber by Odysseus at Od. 4.718 in the same sedes. 505 TPUYOOV aAYI.VOeooa ... KaTevi]paTo Pl.lI'fj/ The description of the slayer of Odysseus as the sting-ray rather than Telegonus foreshadows the return to technical discourse and, perhaps, emphasises that it is from the sea that Odysseus' death was to come, according to the prophecy of Teiresias. The verb KOTEV. only previously appears in epic at Od. 11.519 and at Nic. Al. 401. The occurrence in the Odyssey is in the same tense, voice, mood, number and sedes, being part of the dialogue in which Odysseus tells the shade of Achilles how his son Neoptolemus slew Eurypylus, ... KaTEvf]POTO XOAK41 /. There may, therefore, be ironic reminiscence at the close of the digression as Oppian recalls the deeds of another son of a hero. The occurrence in Nicander also occurs in the same sedes, ... KOTEVOLPETOL Qv6po. /, though in the present tense, and describes the way in which a man is slain by the poison spikenard. Due to the venomous nature of the sting it is possible that this recalls both contexts here in a highly learned manner. But in view of the other links to Nicander at 497 and 502, it is likely that an allusion to Nicander should be understood as well as one to the Odyssey, with a conscious reminiscence of the descriptions of poisons and poisonous animals in Nicander throughout the digression. 2.10.4 Opening dedication with prayer to Hermes and mythological digression on Pan, Zeus and Typhon, Hal. 3.1 - 28 This digression has an unusual mixture of features. It is composed of an

address to the emperor and an invocation to a particular god or gods for help such as is found in the openings of the other books of the Halieutica, but it also incorporates an aetiology of how the shores of Cilicia were stained red. This is based on the tale of the battle of Zeus (and Pan) against Typhon, a story told previously (although without Pan) at Hesiod Theog. 821-80. This aetiological myth concerning the poet's homeland based on a standard story or figure from mythology may have influenced the poet of the Cynegetica to include a previously unattested aetiology concerning 158

2.10.4 Pan, Zeus and Typhon, Hal. 3.1-28

the tasks ofHeracles at Cyn. 2.109-58. The choice of the story of the battle of Typhon would probably have been influenced by his association with Cilicia in earlier literature, cf. 11. 2.783-5. The mention of Pan in connection with this story is not otherwise attested and may reflect a source that is no longer extant. The consistent addresses to Pan in the poems concerning hunting, fishing and fowling at AP 6.11-16 and 6.179-187, including poets as early as Leonidas of Tarentum at 6.14 and as late as Julianus, Prefect of Egypt, at 6.186, suggests that Pan has been included as a learned reference to poems within that sub-genre composed both before and after the floruit of Oppian. The digression proceeds as follows: The emperor is asked to pay heed to Oppian's description of the skills in which the fisherman takes pleasure, 14. All things under the sea are subject to the emperor, as are all works done among men, 4-6. The gods have made Oppian a poet to please the emperor in Cilicia beside the shrine ofHermes, 7-8. Oppian calls on Hermes as a god of cunning devices to instruct him in what he is to tell, 9-12. Hermes developed the skills for fishing and entrusted them to his son Pan for safe keeping, 12-16. They say that Pan saved Zeus and destroyed Typhon, 1617. Pan tricked Typhon into the range of Zeus' lightning, 18-22. As Typhon died his blood stained the Cilician shores red, 22-25. Oppian then asks Hermes for aid as he is especially worshipped by fishermen. 26-28. The language of this digression is strongly allusive, recalling descriptions of fishermen and their skills in earlier authors, as well as those of the battle of Zeus and Typhon. The wide range of sources alluded to by distinctive language suggests that it is the product of extensive research, which is suited to the description of the discovery of fishing. The expression is strongly stylised. This serves both to emphasise Oppian's personal interest in the aetiological aspects and to suggest the formal structure of hymns or prayers to Hermes or epigrams dedicated to Pan in the latter part of the passage. l1ravaGoAa onvea TEXVT)C;' The metaphorical use of the epithet '!TW. is not otherwise attested in epic, though found in drama, cf. Aesch. Pers. 636. Its application here in epic is possibly a mild innovation by Oppian, recalling its use to describe the shifting patterns on the back of an octopus at 2.274 and looking forward to the deliberations of the grey mullet over a potential trap at 3.507. By comparison the simple o(,o'Aor:; is used 11x by

159

2. Digressions

Oppian248 , including to describe the limbs of the octopus, and there is little marked difference in those applications to suggest that the compound form has a strong intensive force, but rather that Oppian uses it for variation. 2 ciypeUTTlpac; cie-&Aouc; ciyP., uniqely used as an epithet here among its 24 uses in the Hal., appears previously in hexameter verse at Call. h. Art. 218 and Theocr. 21.6. The use by Callimachus refers to the hunters of the Calydonian boar, similar to its use at Cyn. 3.456 for hunting dogs. Its use here is likely, however, to be influenced by the description of fishermen in Theocritus, especially as Idyll XXI goes on to describe the equipment of the fishermen, an obvious resonance with the topic material of this book. 3 -&eaj..lov T' e~v6:Al.OV ~Uj..lI36:AAeo This command emphasises the address to the emperor in these opening lines, with the description of the custom of the sea as "6Eo. carrying a double meaning, recalling the rule of law that is maintained by the emperor at 2.664-88. 4-5 oi:j..llJ / -r;j..leTeplJ· As noted elsewhere, a significant difference between the two poets is that Oppian specifically claims the Halieutica as his own, though composed with divine help, whereas the poet of the Cynegetica places a stronger emphasis on divine inspiration in 1.1-46. 7 Tep11'OOA"V Te Kat Uj..lVTlTTlP' The use of 41v. meaning 'poet' is previously attested only at Leonidas AP 7.19. It seems that this line is meant to echo the Tov XOPLEVT' ... , TOV Uj..lVTlTTlp' Uj..lEVOLWV of that epigram, possibly to claim equal status as a 'Hellenistic' poet with Leonidas. 8 UIp' 'Epj..laLol.C; ci06Tol.al.V The term 0.0. for a temple is rare in epic verse, occurring elsewhere at fl. 5.448, 512 and Rh. Apollo 443, though there is nothing in any of these uses to suggest a specific reminiscence by Oppian. 9 au 6E j..lOl. 11'aTPWl.E This claim of an interest by Oppian's native land in Hermes marks the beginning of the aetiological phase of the digression. It also serves to indicate an identification with the land of Cilicia by Oppian. The brevity of the statement of identification is matched by Ej..lrlV 1TOA.l-V of Cyn.2.127. 9-10 lpepTaTe 11'aLooov / A~yl.oxoU The epithet cpEpT. is normally used in the Iliad to indicate excellence in bravery or battle technique, cf. e.g. 11. 248 The three uses of aLoA.. in the nominative masculine singular in the Hal. at 1.100, 242 and 4.49 are all in the same sedes and with LX~61;" possibly an experiment with fonnulaic expression by Oppian.

160

2.10.4 Pan, Zeus and Typhon, Hal. 3.1-28

1.581 and 16.21. Although the translation by Mair as 'best', following its common usage, is appropriate here as there is little in the context to suggest the battle-specific meaning, its use may also anticipate the broader focus of the passage, namely the description of the divine battle between Zeus, Pan and Typhon that is to follow. 11 cpa'CvE TE Kat oTu.J..al.VE Kat apXEo, ... ~ -&uvwv The threefold repetition of imperative verbs followed by the final participle emphatically closes the opening hymnic portion of this digression and marks the change to description of the exploits that make it appropriate to ask Hermes for aid, by requesting this aid in a brief and striking manner. The story that follows is an explanation of why Hermes has been invoked at this stage of the Halieutica: an aetiological explanation of a notable feature of the Cilician coast. As noted above regarding the Heracles digression at Cyn. 2.109-58, such digressions are a typically Hellenistic feature, cf. Callimachus' aetia and the frequent aetia in A.R.'s Argonautica. As with the Hellenistic poets it seems likely that Oppian has chosen this otherwise unattested version of a well-known myth to suggest learning on his part. It is possible, too, that the digression in the Cynegetica is a conscious answer to this one as either homage to the example of Oppian or as a show of equal or greater learning. 11 vuooav ciol.Oflc;/ Although WO., which is used literally 3x in the Hal., is used 5x by Homer to indicate the start/fInish or turning point of a race, its metaphorical use here by Oppian is unique in epic verse and is a live, albeit obvious, metaphor. 12 1TEPI.Ooov6wv dAI.TJWV The compound epithet 1l'EpI.OO. is not previously attested and may be a new coining by Oppian. This type of formation is used also by the poet of the Cynegetica at 3.317 in the possible coining of 1l'EPWOOKOf-lOC;. 13-4 1TpWTI.OTOC; ... ucpatvwv These lines create a logical link between the aetiology and the address to Hermes, following regular hymnal practice. Oppian has avoided a device used by the poet of the Cynegetica, namely to suggest a previously unknown tradition from which he has drawn his new story. Instead he provides this reason for a shift to divine address without suggesting a source for this story. 15 TTavt 6E KWPUKtl\) Maii49 notes that Corycus is a seaport in Cilicia NE of Sarpedon. The possible appeal of this story of the slaying of Typhon

249 Mair, 365 footnote.

161

2. Digressions

for Oppian could be from the association of the giant with Corycus (Mela, 1.72). 16 1Tal.ot TE~ The tradition of Pan being the son of Hermes is also recorded at H.h. Pan (19) 1 and is the subject of Lucian's D. Deorum 2 (MacLeod). The fact that this tradition has not been recorded in the more canonical work such as the Theogony ,reflecting the fact that Pan's cult was confmed to Arcadia before V B.C., would have increased its appeal for Oppian in an aetiological passage of this sort. 16-17 b.l.o!;, pUTllpa ... ,1 ZTlvo!;' IlEV pUTllpa, Tucpa6vl.ov 0' oAETllpa The expression of these lines, with the three-fold repetition of fjpa, and the repetition of the idea'Protector of Zeus' with variety in expression marks emphatically the opening of the myth central to the passage, and the repetition suggests that these may be ritual terms that Oppian has adapted here. 19 EK TE j3Epe-&pou/ The noun ~Ep. is a regular variation on ~apa-. The form used here is also seen at It. 8.14, where it describes the pit in which Zeus will hurl the other gods if they help the Trojans or the Greeks in battle. ~ap. is also associated with execution practised at Athens. It is possible that Oppian is alluding to the Homeric description or to the historical practice here to give the lair of Typhon particularly sinister connotations. 21-2 o~Et::al. oTEpo1Tat pl.1TaL TE KEpauvoov / ~acpAEyeE!;' It is interesting to compare these lines with their model from Hesiod at Th. 884, ~pOVTTlV TE aTEPOiTllV TE Kat aL:&aA6EVTa KEpauv6v. The language clearly suggests the Hesiodic model, although the use of tmpA. is unusual, as in Homer It. 21.465 it is used metaphorically only for men in their prime, and elsewhere in epic literally of fiery horses at Rh. Ares (8) 8, though that is probably very late. 23 Kpa-&' EKaTov 1TETPTlOI. 1TEPI.OTUCPEAL~ETO This is a very brief summary of the death throes of Typhon compared with its treatment in 16 lines at Hes. Theog. 853-68, a characteristically Hellenistic piece of concision. Emphasis is, however, created by the compound verb iTEPLaT., which is otherwise unattested and may be a new coining for emphasis at this point. 24 ~aW6IlEvo!;' This effective metaphor to describe the bunched heads of Typhon as thick woollen fleece that is carded into separate smaller clumps is not seen elsewhere and may be a strikingly innovative touch by Oppian,

162

2.10.5 Address to Emperor and Son, Hal. 4.4-10

giving a very clear image of the bunched heads being torn apart in death. Other descriptions of the battle of Zeus and Typhon as at fl. 2.783, Hes. Theog. 869 and Pindar. Pyth. 1.16 do not use this image. 26 'EplJ.eLa KAUT6~ouAe The epithet KAUT. is otherwise unattested and may be a new coining by the poet to give emphasis to the return to the original topic of the passage, that is the endowment of the fishermen with high cunning by the god Hermes. 'Epl-l. is repeated from 9, giving closure to the passage in the form of a ring composition. 27-8 dypoLol.ol.v .. .1 oaLI-l0ol.v The description of the gods who help the fishermen as ayp. may be a reflection of the lack of an entirely distinct vocabulary for fishing and hunting in Greek, but may also partly reflect the tradition of Pan as patron of fishing and hunting preserved in the epigrammatic poetry discussed above. The flexibility of the terms is shown by the 11 uses of aYPll in the nominative in the Hal., of which 3 do not refer to fishing specifically, and the noun aypEuTIjp is used 5 times by Oppian to mean a hunter out of its 24 occurrences. By comparison, though, all the 11 uses of aypEuw refer to fishing specifically. 28 elHhlPol.o ... OLIJ. ll~ The epithet EW. is used previously of Pan by Zonas at AP 6.185 in a dedicatory epigram asking for success at the hunt, and it may be that that poet has influenced Oppian in its use here, forming part of the collection of the epigrams on hunting fishing and fowling discussed above. 2.10.5 Address to Emperor and Son, Ha!. 4.4-10 This brief passage digresses from the opening statement of programme concerning the nature of Eros and his importance in the capture of fish. In it Oppian calls on the emperor and his son to give heed to his song and claims that the Muses have inspired him for just this purpose. Opening addresses such as these are a standard feature of didactic literature, and in scope and style this one most closely resembles the address to Zeus by Hesiod at Op. 1-10, and the resemblance to this passage is itself, possibly, intended as a piece of encomiastic praise for the emperor. The passage proceeds as follows: Oppian prays to the emperor and his son to listen to his work 4-7. This is a song which the Muses have taught him, 7-9. The Muses provided this song specifically as a pleasure for Emperor and son, 9-10. 163

2. Digressions

Claims of inspiration by the Muses and associated dedications are a common feature of didactic epic, and as such there is only limited scope for genuine innovation in language. This digression is characterised by the distinctive internal rhymes of the opening and closing lines, which highlight a unity of this address distinct from the address to Eros that follows. This device aside, the expression is fairly straightforward, which suits its brevity well. 4 'lfOAI.OOOUXCJJv ~aOI.A f}CJJv The epithet lTOA. appears commonly in drama, but is otherwise recorded in hexameter verse only at A.R. 2.846 and at Call. fr. 43.77 (pfeiffer), albeit in the pentameter line of an elegiac couplet, where it is used of KPOTOLflEVT)c;'. The use of this alternative form of lTOALOUX0c;' could imply that the emperor is a guardian deity, and therefore could be regarded as a veiled request for imperial favour, cf. A.R. 1.312 'APTEflL6oc;' lTOALT)OXOU. 5 •AVTCJJv'i:ve Mair50 notes that the use of this name alone is not definitive proof that the emperor of the dedications is Marcus Aurelius, but rather that it relies on the demonstrable identification of his son as Commodus. The rhyming end to the preceding line in -oov -oov, and the emphatic placement of ~oaLAf}oov emphasises the encomiastic praise of this brief address. A similar effect is created by the emphasis on the pleasure it might afford to the emperor by the rhyming close of 10 Kat ouaol. Kat 'lfpa'lfLoeool.. /. 6-7 rj'lf1.6oCJJpol. / Mouoal. The epithet T]lT. is used previously only by

Homer at 11. 6.251 when describing the care of Hecuba for her children, ol T]lTLo6oopoc;' EVO\ITCT) TlAUi1E flTlTT)p. As the Muses are said to inspire Oppian for the pleasure of the emperor and his son it is possible that the use of this epithet is intended to reflect a similar level of maternal care by the Muses as is shown by Hecuba. Interesting to note also is Orph. Hymn. 67.3, which is dedicated to Asclepius. In that line Asclepius is addressed with similar language as T]lTW6ooPE, KpOTOLE, flOAlTOLc;' KOTayoov uyCewv. This may suggest that by the Imperial period T]lT. had become a feature of ritual language associated with healing. 10 YAUKU vOfla Mair has translated v. as 'draught', which is unfortunate as, if it is given its more precise meaning of 'stream' or 'river', we can appreciate an attractive metaphor describing the poet's song streaming

250 Mair, introd. xx.

164

2.10.6 Eastern marriage customs and jealousy, Hal. 4.203-15

into the ears of the listener, with y A. perhaps implying the sound of the song would be as pleasant as the gentle sound of a stream. 2.10.6 Eastern marriage customs and jealousy, Hal. 4.203-15

This digression forms part of a description of how the merle-wrasse is caught by exploiting its habit of keeping several mates. Initially the fish is compared with a mother fretting over her daughter who is in labour with her first child. Here, however, Oppian gives an extended description of eastern marriage customs and the problems of jealousy arising from their polygamous practices, implying that it has served the fish right to be caught in this way. Corbier51 notes how Tacitus expresses the opinion that polygamy is acceptable for barbarian men such as the German tribesmen, but not for Roman men at Germania 18-19. It is interesting to note that in these later times Oppian has adopted an even more conservative pose, although possibly this has been done more to create drama in the description of the capture of the fish than as a strong expression of his own beliefs. A further point to note is that rather than dwelling on the more sensational aspects of polygamy Oppian has at 206-8 drawn the reader's attention to the impact ofthese practices on the women rather than the men. Such sensitivity is a notable aspect of Oppian's style and can be seen elsewhere as in the description of the mother fretting over a pregnant daughter at 195-201 and the description of a girl deciding whether she dare take food from the cupboard when her mother is absent at 3.512-8. The digression proceeds as follows: The Assyrians and Bactrians have foreign marriage practices, 203-5. They have several wives and sleep with different women on successive nights, 206-8. These people are driven by jealousy to plot against each other, 208-10. There is nothing worse for people than jealousy, 211-3. Jealousy goes with madness and destruction, 213-5. The language of this passage is not generally distinctive. However, it is notable for the influence of descriptions of cruel Eros from earlier literature and for a use of language possibly unique to Euripidean drama. The latter may be an intended allusion to the themes of jealousy and revenge common to Greek drama. Oppian also seeks to build a sense of dread at the 251 Corbier, 100.

165

2. Digressions

effects of jealousy to justify the exploitation of the polygamy of the merlewrasse. To do so he has structured the digression to emphasise jealousy in strongly negative tenns as well as its link with lust. 204 'Aaaup~ou~, ot T~YPI.v u'II'ep 'll'OpOV (faTE' EXOUOl. This description of the homeland of the Assyrians and that of Bactria at 205 shares a vagueness in describing the lands of the east with that of Cyn. 1.340, where Mair52 notes that the reference to the Syrian province and beyond is quite vague. It is possible that this is done to create a sense of mystery concerning these lands and to emphasise the difference between these customs and Roman marriage customs. 205 EKTl130AOV E-&vo~ Ol.aTWV The epithet EKTl~. is regularly applied to Apollo in Homer, with the only other application being to the archery skill of Strophios at Il. 5.54. The use of the epithet here would recall the Parthian peoples to a Roman reader to create a sense of mystery and threat appropriate to the context. In addition, its use with the objective genitive Oi:OTWV is unusual, and strictly redundant, and possibly inspired by the description ofa spear as eyxoc;' EKTl~6AOV at A.R. 1.769. 206 yalJ.-rlAl.a AEKTpa The description of marriage beds as yalJ.. is nonHomeric and may reflect contemporary usage or a prose source, c£ Aeschylus fr. 242. 207 KEKpI.IJ.EVal. ... d'll'aaal. This line has a striking ABBA arrangement of an agreeing participle and adjective and two verbs, as well as a triple rhyme in -aL. This construction gives striking emphasis to the image of the eastern lord rotating his visits between his various wives, a sort of styling more common in the Cynegetica. 208 KEVTPOV O'll'TlOE'C The description of the impact of jealousy as a goad emphasises the pain caused, a familiar theme in Hellenistic depictions of love and in the Halieutica, but by implying that it operates like a tool for controlling animals Oppian implies a dehumanising element in polygamous arrangements. 209 ~-rlAOU aVI.TlP0'Co, 'll'Ept ~-rlA~ The use of the epithet eXv. is perhaps intended to recall Theocritus 2.55 a~a'C "Epwc;' cXvLape, where the speaker bemoans the pangs of jealousy that she feels over a former lover. The delayed mention of jealousy coupled with the repetition gives strong dramatic impact.

252 Mair, 36-7 footnote.

166

2.10.7 Prayer to Earth for protection from the sea, Hal. 5.336-49

210 1hlyovTEt;' aplla The metaphorical use of exp. to describe the fights over multiple brides creates a mock-heroic air, although there may also be some genuine comment on the intensity of the struggles. The sense of dread at the consequences of jealousy created here is continued by the repetition of 213-4 AUOOllt;' .. ./ AUOO\l. 215 Et;' OE ... aTllV E~EX6pEuoE The verb El;. is previously unattested in the active in verse and its sole other extant usage is in the middle at Eur. Hel. 381. The metaphorical usage of this verb to liken the progression of mad jealousy to dancing clearly recalls dancing such as that of the Bacchantes in madness, inter alia. The only occurrence of the simple verb xop- in the Hal. or the Cyn. is at Hal. 2.513, where the image is of the swordfish and the tuna almost dancing with physical frenzy, obviously an image that Oppian found strongly evocative of madness.

2.10.7 Extended prayer to Earth for protection from the terrors of the sea, Hal. 5. 336-349

This digression forms the close of the extended description of the hunting of the whale. The prayer follows a scene describing how men wonder at the size of the dead body of the whale, which may owe some inspiration to the description of the Achaeans wondering at the dead body of Hector at 11. 22.367-75, though it is much more developed in scope and characterised by rare vocabulary, such as the description of the tail of the whale as cl:AXaLllV at 331, a rare term that also describes the tails of mice at Call. fr.I77.23 (Pfeiffer). Unlike the Greek soldiers, who stab the body of Hector and express scorn that he has been laid low, the speaker in this digression offers up a prayer to Earth in thanks that he himself does not have to run risks as dreadful as those of the whale hunters. A distinctive feature of this prayer is the dramatic tension between the horrors that the speaker describes and is glad to avoid and his fear of offending the Sea that is expressed by parenthetical apology. Mair notes also that the speaker addresses the power of the sea in that apology to ensure that he does not anger one god while praying to another, and Engelhofer 53 notes that this feature, which is rare in the Halieutica, is commonly employed in the Cynegetica. Lastly, the description of the dangers for men at sea looks back to the opening of the Halieutica, particular to the description of the 253 Engeihofer, 164.

167

2. Digressions

dangers that are faced by men from storms at sea and from sea-monsters at 1.36-49. This linking of ideas between the opening and closing books of the Halieutica provides a unity to the underlying ideas about fishing within the book, namely that the worthiness of fishing as a pursuit stems from a combination of the physical risks run by the fishermen, and the way that intellect is used by the fishermen to overcome difficulties, that is given emphasis in the opening at 1-45. Another important influence on this passage is Moschus fr. 4, in which the speaker recounts with dread the appearance of the sea during a storm, preferring the safety and comfort of land. He goes on to state that fishermen lead difficult lives as life on the sea is uncomfortable and fishing difficult. The tone of longing for life on land that Moschus adopts bears a striking resemblance to that of the speaker here. The passage is composed as follows: The speaker addresses the earth as a mother figure from whom he is born and with whom he hopes to die, 336-8. The speaker then asks the sea for indulgence and says that he will worship Poseidon ashore, 338-9. The speaker hopes to never be on a small vessel himself and tells of the danger for sailors from storms, 340-5. Many creatures in the sea wait to eat up any sailors they can find, 345-7. The speaker fears the sea and is happy to address it from shore, 348-9. As a hymnlike address to the gods is a common feature in hexameter verse it is to be expected that it would share features of language with similar passages, including other addresses to Gaia, such as Rh. Gaia (30). However, with his innovative focus on protection from the dangers of being eaten by sea-monsters Oppian has introduced striking language from heroic epic to create an original feel for his address. As noted in the discussion of other hymnlike digressions in the Halieutica., Oppian uses stylised expression to capture some of the rhythm and repetition of hymnic expression. In addition, distinctive expression is used to emphasise the separation of sea and land that is intrinsic to this address. 336 a'Ca, rpCATJ -&pE'lTTEl.pa This hymnlike address to Gaia is quite innovative compared with her description as 'ITOI-lI..dlTELPOV at Rh. Gaia 30.1. This is, however, likely to be deliberate variation as Oppian has already used the rare epithet 'ITol-l. at 1.414 in reference to the earth. It is interesting to note that Oppian also uses -6-pE'IT. to describe Dike at 2.680 (see ad n. supra).

r

168

2.10.7 Prayer to Earth for protection from the sea, Hal. 5.336-49

337 KOA'lTOI.c;' f:/ evL. -&avol.lJ.l. While K. means 'bosom (of the Earth)' here, it is worth noting the Homeric use to describe the gulf of the sea, as at 11. 18.140 6WE -&a:Aaaaflc;' EupEa Ko:A'lTOV, with the possible deliberate irony in its use to describe the dry land. 338 TIlJ.ap ... TO IJ.Opal.IJ.Ov This description of an appointed day of doom appears twice in Homer at 11. 15.613 and Od. 10.175. Most evocative of the current usage is that in the Odyssey, where Odysseus encourages his men before going to the halls of Circe, OU yap 'ITW KaTaouaOj.lE-&' ... EL.c;' 'ACoao 66j.louc;', 'ITpLv j.lopm.j.lov ~j.lap E"TTEA-&n. As noted elsewhere, Oppian frequently implies by allusions that the voyages of Odysseus are a prime example of the dangers to be faced by the fishermen, as is the case here as well. 339 Xepotp IT OOEI.OaWVa oej3ol.lJ.l. The land and the god of the sea may be juxtaposed here to emphasise the contradiction of an affirmed land dweller worshipping a god of the sea, possibly as a form of wry humour or perhaps as an emphasis of the pervasive influence of the sea on everyday life. 340-1 IJ.TJOE IJ. •... 'ITelJ.'ITol.,1 IJ.TJO· ... 'ITa'ITTaLvol.lJ.v The anaphora of these lines gives a hymnlike tone that emphasises that they are two of the core requests that the speaker makes of the gods, namely that he never be carried on the sea and fret over adverse weather conditions. 344 OuoKEAaOOI.OI. ... deAAal.c;' This use of OOOK. is unique in epic. Its previous applications in epic include to cpoj30c;' at n. 16.357 and to S'Tl:Aoc;' Hes. Op. 196, E'ITl1ipoj.lCa at AR. 3.593 and as a place name at AR. 4.565. It also appears at AR. fr. 8.2, to describe the sea in fearful terms. It is used previosuly in the Hal. at 2.666-7 to describe KUOOLj.lOC and at 5.153 to describe OKj.lOVEc;'. In epigram it appears at Nicarchus AP 11.328.8 to describe winds that blow by the shores of the land of the dead as 6uaKE:Aa6wv 6:VEIJ.WV. The present use may recall that in the Iliad, implying that the gusts of wind are not only unpleasant to listen to but would engender panic in the sailors, cf. cpo~oc;' 342, or it may recall the rush described at AR. 3.593. The strongest influence, however, appears to come from the epigram of Nicarchus, as the winds that blow on the coasts of the land of dead referred to there by the epithet 6uaK. can be read as the very thing that the speaker here wishes to avoid as he stands on the shore. 344 auvl.'IT'ITEUOVTEc;' This verb is not previously used in epic literature, and creates a striking metaphor of the sailors as unwilling travelling

oe

169

2. Digressions

companions with the winds. Its uses here may have influenced its use with -tl-uEMal.,r:;' at Nonnus Dion. 47.358. 345 ol.,epor:;' j.l.Opor:;' The combination of the post-Homeric use of 61.,Ep. to mean 'liquid' with IJ.. to mean 'drowning' is most likely an innovation by Oppian, appearing later in Nonnus at 40.121. In epic 61.,Ep. also means 'wet' in A.R. 1.184, and that use in a description of the skills of Tiphys in

navigating and anticipating storms suggests possible influence here, although it may have been a literary commonplace by Oppian's time. 346 TOtOUc;' / oat. TUj.l.Ovac;' The use of this common Homeric term for diners, which occurs 9x in the Odyssey though not at all in the Iliad, may partly recall banquets of the suitors of Penelope, metaphorically depicting the sea-monsters as eager and ravenous. 345-6 cXTUj.l.!3euTou 6E Tarpot.o The epithet eXWIJ.. is not otherwise used in epic, and appears otherwise in verse at AP 9.439 by Crinagoras, to which, in view of its graphic description of a skull by the roadside that has no scraps of flesh left on it, Oppian may have been alluding. The striking oxymoron created by the use of TO:CPOLO with the epithet in eX- is of a type favoured in tragedy, c£ e.g. Sophoc1es El. 1154 IJ.T]TTJP eXlJ.T]TTJP and OT. 1214 T' ayalJ.ov YO:lJ.ov. 348-9 oet.j.l.atvw ... Timoc;' e~TJc;' Maif254 notes that the sense of these lines exactly mirrors that of 339, namely that the speaker feels that the safest place to pay homage to the gods of the sea is from land, creating a thematic ring composition within the digression. No god is specifically addressed here, only 86:Aaoaa, which is a personification no less than I'aLa 336, and possibly the vague addressees in this digression may reflect the opinion expressed by Oppian at 2.35-7 (see ad n.) that there is little difference between the range of sea-gods and that possibly they are all aspects of the one god.

2.10.8 Dedication and Dialogue with Artemis, Cyn. 1.1-46 The Cynegetica opens with a dedication to the emperor Caracalla (M. Aurelius Severus Antoninus Augustus) with references to his divine origin, 1-15, and an unusual dialogue with Artemis in which the goddess exhorts the poet to sing not of heroes or pastoral themes, but to turn to the hunt,

254 Mair, 486 footnote.

170

2.10.8 Dedication and Dialogue with Artemis, Cyn. 1.1-46

16-42, followed by a resumption of the dedication and an appeal for help, 43-46. The passage of dedication focuses on the lineage of the emperor, including references to the lineage from Aeneas and therefore from Zeus, 23, the blessed nature of his mother, the Syriac Julia Domna, 4-7 (cf Theoc. 17.56-7), a comparison with the other offspring of Zeus, 8-9, a statement of the achievement of the Emperor's father, 10-11 and a statement that all the natural world is at the emperor's service, 12-15, cf. Theoc. 17.91-2255. The dialogue with Artemis includes an initial exhortation from the goddess, a list of stylised references to other subjects of poetry, which the poet will not follow, and then a description of the hunting forms the poet will discuss. Dalzell256, points out that a lengthy opening to a didactic work, including a hymn or dedication and a statement of aims is the norm in didactic literature, with notable exceptions including the opening to the Georgics of Virgil (1.1-5) and to the Theriaca and Alexipharmaca of Nicander, which are brief compared with, for example, the extensive hymn to the muses of Hesiod's Theogony257. The Theogony is the most obvious inspiration, as both authors claim personal contact with divine beings, who instruct the poet what to sing about and explicitly give a legitimacy to the poet's undertaking. The points of contact between the Theogony's opening and that of the Cynegetica can be summarised as follows: both openings involve divine instructors (the Muses and Artemis). both feature the muse Calliope258 ; both highlight the benefits of their instruction to the reader; both contain a programme of matters to be covered by the poem. Further, by adopting the dramatic dialogue as his style for the opening the author of the Cynegetica has combined both the divine 'hymn', and statement of aims, by allowing Artemis to tell him what the scope of his work must be. Other hexameter dialogues are extant in both Greek and Latin verse, cf for example Theocritus' Idyll XXII259 and Virgil's Eclogue V. In both Virgil and Theocritus, however, a divine figure is not involved in the dialogue. Hesiod uses direct speech from the Muses in Th. 24-29, suggesting that the 255 Hollis, "[Oppian], Cyn. 2.100-158 and the mythical past of Apamea-on -the-Orontes", 156 notes that the encomiastic praise of the Cynegetica may be modelled on the praise of Ptolemy by Theocritus. 256 Dalzell, 113-4. 257 Hesiod, Theogony, 1-103. 258 As does Callimachus in the Aetia, cf. fr. 7 .22 (pfeiffer). 259 Theocritus 22.54-74.

171

2. Digressions

present passage is an innovative combination hexameter dialogue from bucolic verse and the more traditional description of divine information fIrst found in Hesiod. the use of features from bucolic poetry could then be regarded as an innovative trecognition of rural nature of the topic material of the Cynegetica. Another possible influence on this passage is the opening of the Aletheia of Parmenides preserved at fr. 28.b.I_3 260 • After a fantastic voyage to visit an unnamed goddess the poet receives a series of instructions on how his poem is to be set out. Although there is direct speech between the goddess and the poet, see esp. fr. 28.b.1.24-32 and fr.'s 28.b.2 and 3, there is no dramatic dialogue as in this passage. Lastly, and most importantly, the role of Apollo as the instructor of Callimachus at Aetiafr. 1.22-30 (pfeiffer) may be being deliberately answered by the role of Artemis in this passage, particularly in view of the similar instructions to both poets to tread paths not previously travelled by others noted below. Another factor in the choice of Artemis as interlocutor may have been the popularity of the cult of Ephesian Artemis and Anatolia and Syria during the reign of Caracalla. Price261 notes that Caracalla declined to grant Ephesus the title of "Temple Warden" for his own cult, but rather granted the city that title in respect of Artemis. Given also that there were temples of Ephesian Artemis in other cities throughout the region, and that the temple of Artemis at Sardis also apparently involved features of the imperial cults, her appearance here may have represented a mixture of oblique encomiastic praise and acknowledgement of what would be popular with local readers. As in the Theogony and here in the Cynegetica, Calliope also instructs Callimachus in fr. 7 and 75.77 (Schneider), but the brief role played by the muse here in the Cynegetica suggests that she has been included as an acknowledgement of generic convention, highlighting the striking role layed by Artemis. The statement of the scope of the Cynegetica is in the form of a highly allusive rejection of other genres, without explicit reference to other authors. While a recusatio of this sort is not previously attested in the extant Greek epic tradition, there are similar passages in Latin epic, which were themselves likely adapted from the elegiac Aetia of Callimachus; cf. Aetia fr. 1.1-4 and 22-30 (pfeiffer) and Ovid Amores D, with its injunction 260 For full discussion of these fragments see Wright, The Presocratics, 77-79. 261 See Price, 72-3, 130-1 and 152-3.

172

2.10.8 Dedication and Dialogue with Artemis, Cyn. 1.1-46

by Cupid to write elegy rather than epic, "quodque canas, vates, accipe dixit OpUS,,262. That both Roman and Greek epic poets have apparently adapted this striking passage from an elegaic work enforces the important point that boundaries of genre were not strictly observed in large scale allusive passages in Roman and later Greek verse. The divine command in the Theogony is expressed in positive terms, although there too the poet sets out a programme to follow.1 63 In the present passage, after a brief mention of Artemis and Calliope as his sources of inspiration, 16-19, the dialogue begins with a statement by Artemis of the originality of the work to come. After the poet accepts this dictum, 22-23, the poet is advised not to sing dithyrambs, by reference to Bacchus as god of orgiastic rites, 24-27, or epic, with mention of the wars of men or the voyages of the Argo, 28-31, or elegies, as implied by reference to songs of love, 32-34. Artemis instead enjoins him to sing of hunting, establishing a programme including hounds and horses, 36, the skills of tracking and hunting, 37, and the relations of beasts with each other, both hostile and sexual, 38-40.164 Statements of programme need not be compendious; c£ however Opp. Hal. 1.1-55, which provides a description of all the types of fishing to be described in the form of a summary far more lengthy and descriptive than that used here. The conciseness of the statement of programme is reminiscent of the brief statement of topic matter given in Nicander Ther. 17, with its typically Hellenistic brevity, and of Hesiod Th. 104-114. As is discussed in detail below, striking effects are obtained by combining language characteristic of addresses to gods or goddesses in earlier Greek epic with language not normal in such contexts. This latter is often derived from epic, but the poet also innovates by including striking language from contemporary sources or prose usage. The most remarkable aspect of the style of this digression is the dialogue between the poet and Artemis. As noted above, the fragments of Parmenides' works provide us the closest extant parallel to the dialogue here, but if that was the model for 262 Ovid, Amores 1.1.24. 263 Hesiod, Theogony 105-114. Hesiod's programme is not as clearly reflected in the body of his poem, as is the case in the Cynegetica. 264 Dalzell, 122, speculates that the description of the loves of animals in the Georgics of Virgil (3.209-41) was an inspiration to similar passages in Grattius, Nemesianus and Oppian. While it is more difficult to establish any clear suggestion of influence from Roman authors in the Halieutica, more passages are suggestive of influence from Roman authors in the Cynegetica.

173

2. Digressions

this passage, the poet has innovated considerably by introducing forms of expression developed in drama and rhetorical discourse. 1bis creates a sense of immediate interaction with the gods which is quite at odds with the gods greatly removed from the world of men portrayed by Oppian; cf. Hal. 1.409-20. Possibly the poet has opened the Cynegetica with such a dialogue to show a difference between how he will depict the gods and the way they are depicted in the Halieutica. 2... EvuaALCJJv... A~vEao6:CJJv As pointed out by Mair ALv. suggests the descriptions of the Romans as descendants of Aeneas in Lucretius265 and Vitgil266. Possibly this reflects a desire to provide an encomium of a Roman emperor by reference to Latin poets. 3 AuaovLou ZT)vol;' The use of the epithet AD. to refer to Zeus is rare, appearing previously at the anonymous AP. 7.343, and A.R. 4.553. 7 'AaaupLT) Ku"fMpEl..a The epithet K. used as a name appears at Od. 8.288, where Demodocus sings of the affair of Aphrodite and Ares, and at 18.193 of Aphrodite changing the appearance of Penelope, in the last two metra in both cases. In both cases it is used with EUaTECPO:Vcx;'. 1bis suage also appears at Res. Theog. 196 and 1008, the latter of which is in a description of the birth of Aeneas. The combination with .AaaupLll is innovative, and Maif267 notes the possible association of the mother of the Emperor, Julia Domna with the goddess Astarte. If we accept this connection, it is likely to reflect encomiastic passages in imperial times designed to promote an imperial cult. (see 1.39 ad n.) A possible model can be seen at AP 5.209.1, which is attributed to Posidippus or Asc1epiades,

TIacpLT) Ku-eEpet.a. 9 Tt.TaV CPae-&CJJv Kat CPot[301;' 'A-rrOAACJJV references to Phaethon and Titan as deities of the sun are common in epic literature, similar are Virgo Aen. 4.119 and 5.105. Worth noting, however, is the identification of Relios and Apollo in a work as late as the Cynegetica. Their mention may also reflect the identification of Caracalla with Apollo, as seen in coinage of the period268 . 14 ch' 'QKEavoto peE-&pa The reference to 'streams from Oceanus' seems to be a conscious archaism, ignoring the change in later literature

265 Lucretius, DRN 1.1. 266 Virgil, Aeneid 8.648. 267 Mair, 2-3. 268 Grant, 177.

174

2.10.8 Dedication and Dialogue with Artemis, Cyn. 1.1-46

from depiction as a river to such generalised references to the western Ocean as below at 43 269 • 16 TCl.yap eywv epaj..lal. -&fJpT)e;' KAUTa ofJve' aetOal. gives an immediate statement of the topic matter for the poem. Similar brief statements of scope can be seen in Nicander, Ther. 1-2 and Alexipharmaca 4-5. It is probably a conscious variation on Oppian's aAL.TJc;' TE 'TTOA:ruTpO'TTa of)VEa TEXVTJc;', Hal. 1.7. The reference to 17 KaUU)'TTT) recalls her eminent position in the opening of the Theogony, K. -&'. 1'] oE 'TTPOcpEpEOTaTTJ EOTL.V a'TTaOEWV 79. As noted previously, Calliope also appears as a source of inspiration in Callimachus' Aetia at fr. 7.22-34 (Pfeiffer). Hh. Hel. (31) 2 also invokes Calliope to open a hymn to Helios, but it is an open question whether that reference is to Calliope as the muse of epic as is the case here270. Her mention here should best be regarded as a recollection of these occurrences in toto, rather than to one passage in particular. 20-21 "Eypeo, ... e'ITclTT)OeV aOl-Oate;' enforces our understanding that this is a path not trodden by any other poet before. A claim to originality is a common epic motif; Mair notes similarities with Lucretius DRN 1.920 and Nemesianus Cyn. 8.271 Of interest is the use of TPTJXELaV, implying both the difficulty of the path to be trodden and that it is a path not trodden before, inviting comparison with Hesiod Op. 291 KaL. TPTJxUc;' TO 'TTp(knov., of the path to virtue, and Callimachus Aetia fr.1.26-8 (pfeiffer) ETEPWV 6' 'LXVLa 1lT] KW' OIlO: / OL.cppov EA.l~ IlTJ6' OLIlOV cl:vO: 'TTAaTUV, cl:A.A.0: KEAE6-&ouc;' / mpL.'TTToluc;'. The latter in particular, which comes in the form of instructions

to the poet from Apollo, may be deliberately answered by this description and the use of the epithet TPTJX., as in Hesiod, may be a deliberate variation on the epithet cl:TPL.'TTToluc;' used by Callimachus. 24-25 OUK e-&EAw ... ' Aow'lToto. In the first of the themes not to be followed by the poet, a style of definition which Schmitf72 notes was adopted by later authors such as Nonnus at 41.58ff. and Achill. Tat. 2.15.3, the goddess Artemis warns the poet from composing dithyrambs by reference to the two-yearly feasts of Bacchus on the mountain and to the choirs in Boeotia. The nearest thing to a direct command to the poet in the Theogony is Il' EKEAOV-&' UIlVELV llaKO:pwv YEVOc;' 34. A more likely model 269 Schmitt, 47. 270 ibid., 49. 271 Mair, 4 footnote. 272 Schmitt, 50.

175

2. Digressions

for these oblique references are those to brief forms of poetry that Callimachus cites as examples for the scope of his Aetia at fr. 1.6-12 (pfeifIer). 24 TpI..ETn ... 'OpL~aKXov The most obvious influence for this description of Bacchus to be found in verse is Eur. Bacch. 132ff. Et;' oE XOpEUf.laTa OUVlll\Jav TPl-ETrIPCOWV, .... The use of the word TPl-ETllPCOLV to indicate a two year cycle in H. h. Dion. (1) 11 seems a likely influence given that this hymn is to Dionysus. Mair73 notes similarities with Virgo Aen. 4.302 'repetita triennia' and Ov. Met. 9.642, which suggests that by the time of the writing of the Cynegetica the new form >OpC~aKXov would have been a traditional epithet in this context. 26-27 l\e(.l\IolJ.ev, ... 9uwva(.c.p b.l..ov60c.p most likely indicates that poems such as dithyrambs are meant here, with the focus on the festivals of Dionysus, where they were commonly performed. References could also be being made to Dionysus epics. If we accept the 26 La~6:~l..a we may perhaps see an influence of local cults on the poet, as this would appear to be a reference to a Phrygian culf74 • Giangrande argues for the manuscript reading of TO: 00: ~6:sELV, but the reading of Mair, Schmitt and others should stand, as reference to things which the poet should sing of are delayed until 35275. The use of 26 -&6o-&Aa for the Bacchic festivals themselves is unique in extant verse to the Cyn., but/I. 6.134 provides an early use as 'thyrsi'. While the epithet 27 8uwva(.c.p first appears here, appearing subsequently at Cyn. 4.285 8uwval.ou b.wvuoou, H.h. Dion. (1) 21 gives 8UWVllV to mean Semele, which appears again in Pind. Pyth. 3.98276 • 28-31 Mi] revol;' ... Kat KTll0l..rpowvTa. This exchange between Artemis and the poet, in which the poet is enjoined not to write epic, has several unexpected references. Reflecting the predominance of Hellenistic references in the Cynegetica, the poet is bidden not to make a poem like the Argonautica, with only 29 suggesting a direct reference to the Iliad. Similarly this is the first use by the poet of contemporary detail by reference to the battles of Rome with the Parthians in AD 198. This inclusion of contemporary detail may show the influence of Greek historical epic. A reference to the Parthian peoples may also answer the 273 Mair, 4 footnote. 274 ibid. 275 Giangrande, 489. 276 Schmitt, 52.

176

2.10.8 Dedication and Dialogue with Artemis, Cyn. 1.1-46

description of the Massagetae at Call. Aet. fr.1.15 (pfeiffer) MaaaayETal.. KaL jJ.aKpov oI.aTEUOI..EV. The Parthians would appear to have mentioned by the poet as they were a race of archers of greater menace at the time of the composition of the Cynegetica. 28 1lT] vauTGAov ' Apyw The description of the ship Argo as vauTlAov follows apparent regular dramatic usage, as at Aesch. Ag. 1446 and Eur. fr. 846 (Nauck), although it is worth noting the use of the word as a noun to mean the paper nauti1us in Call. Ep. 6.3, which is seen again at Halieutica 1.340. The use of 29 1l6-&ouc;' IlEp6'11'wv to describe battles is possibly a new combination reminiscent of the Homeric jJ.EP01YWV O:v&pcJ.J1l"WV of n. 1.250, but it is also worth noting Nicander Th. 191 1ST' Er:; jJ.ofuv ELal..V as, like Nicander, the poet will eventually discuss the battles of beasts, cf. also 35. The epithet 29 BPOTOAOl.YOV is common to Homer, as 11. 5.31 "'ApEr:;, "ApEr:; ~pOTOAOI..yE ... , though not as a noun. Schmitt notes that the reference to Ares is essentially redundant after the reference to battles277. Similarly the references in 30 are only a repetition, although it is interesting to note the change from jJ.o-&our:; to 1YOAEjJ.our:; and from BPOTOAOI..yov to "ApEor:;. The reference to battles of the Emperor Septimius Severus in 31 IT ap-&wv TE OUac;' Kat KTllal.cpowvTa is also seen in Herodian 3.9.9-12, referring to Ctesiphon as the capital of the Parthians. As the events referred to are so recent, it is likely that this reference is not modelled on literature. 32-34 ' AIlCPt 1Yo-&Ol.c;' ... eoOaav. In the final part of the recusatio the goddess bids the poet to forego writing erotic poetry. The oblique references to poetry include the command 32 AE'C1TE§ TE KEaTouc;', which echoes the description of the girdle of Aphrodite in 11. 14.214. A Hellenistic model for using KEOTOr:; as metonymy for Aphrodite may be found at Call. fr. 43.53 (Pfeiffer). The epithet 33 IT OVTOYEVEGllc;' is possibly an innovation by the poet, probably formed by analogy to O:CPPOYEvEW found at Hesiod Theog. 196, which West regards as an interpolation, but would have been in Hesiod's text by the time of the Cynegetica. 278 It may, however, show influence from Orph. H. 55.2 1YOVTOYEvf)r:;, used to refer to Aphrodite.

277 ibid. 278 West, Hesiod: Theogony, 223.

177

2. Digressions

The description of Artemis as 34 yeXj..lCllV dj..luT\TOV may be influenced by the description of Artemis in Orph. H 36.4, in which she is uninitiated in the pangs of birth. The problems with the dating of the Orphic hymns throw doubt on whether this is a likely influence. Schmitf79 notes the similarity between 42 EKAUOV ... rixf]v and Pindar Nem. 6.26. Schmitf80 also draws a comparison between 43-46 and Hh. Dem. (2) 490-1, with its description of the geographic extent of the influence of Demeter and Persephone. In the description of the scope of the reign of the emperor 43 dVTo:ALT\-&ev E1T' 'QKeaVQV the use of the form aVTo:ALrrB-Ev in epic is a likely innovation by the poet, being only otherwise seen at 2.123, in the description of the founding of Apamea-on-Orontes, and later in Manetho 2.11 and 3.49. The poet appears to have been inspired by the epigramm AP 16.65 ofCrinagorus. The description ofa divine figure in that epigram who has arisen like a sun "EK110PEc;' aVTo:A.(;r111E, cpoEocp6poc;' Tl:A.l..Oc;' aUoc;' is strongly suggestive of the encomiastic tone adopted here. The use of 'OKeaVQV to indicate the west is different from its use at 14. The description of the emperor as 44 euol.ov ... yeYT\-&ooe; recalls descriptions of the expressions of men and gods communicated by their brows, cf. esp. of Zeus 11. 1.528 ~ KOL KUOVEnOLV E1r' OCPPUOL vruOE KpOVLWV.

Schmitf 81 points out that the epithet 44 dj..l~pootlJOl.V is only associated with divine figures in Homer, emphasising its encomiastic role here. 45 1Tovt:A.oov appears both here and at Hal. 2.40, although in the Hal. it refers to divine help for the Emperor and son, rather than from the Emperor as is the case here. The closing reference to the 46 1To:A.teOOl. Kot eu-&f]pol.Ol.V dOl.oaLe; reflects the close of the dedication and hymn to Poseidon in Hal. 2.42 :A.OOLc;' aUj..l1TOOL KOL T)f.lETEpnOLV aOL6oLc;'.

2.10.9 Address to Artemis and list of discoverers of hunting as a pastime, Cyn. 2.1-30

This passage consists of an opening address to Artemis, focussing on her kinship with Zeus and Apollo, 3-4, followed by a list human and semi279 Schmitt, 57. 280 Schmitt, 58. 281 ibid.

178

2.10.9 Address to Artemis and discovery of hunting, Cyn. 2.1-30

divine figures, with an emphasis on the latter, and the hunting arts that they discovered, 5-30. In particular, the chase after (or perhaps 'for', see ad n. infra) the banquet was invented by the centaurs, 5-7, and then for men to chase game on foot by Perseus, 8-13, hunting on horseback was invented by Castor, 14-17, hunting with dogs by Polydeuces, 18-21, close combat with beasts by Meleager, 22-3, hunting by nets and snares by Hippolytus, 24-25, falconry by Atalanta, 26-7, and hunting at night by Orion, 28-9. The passage follows the style of the long list typical in didactic literature and used freely by both Oppian and the poet of the Cynegetica, cf. e.g. the list of fish living in the littoral zone at Hal. 1.93-101. The poet avoids repetition by varying the length of the items in the list between 2 and 5 lines, increasing the tempo of the description by giving the last four descriptions only two lines each. The brevity of the opening address to Artemis, compared to that of book 1, is not reflected in the hymns and addresses that open the books of the Halieutica, but resembles that of the address to Pales at Virgil Geor. 3.1-5. Lines 5-30 provide a semi-divine pedigree to the arts of hunting and allow the poet to demonstrate a wide knowledge of the mythical and literary background of hunting. This incorporation of figures from myth into the technical discourse is not otherwise seen in Greek didactic literature and, for example, is quite at odds with the tone of Hesiod who depicts the gaining of useful knowledge as contrary to the aims of the gods KpUtjJOVTEc;' yap ExOOOL -&EoL ~Cov ov-Bp6nfOWLv... OAAa ZEUc;' EKpUtjJE, XOAWOap.EVOc;' CPPEoLv nOLV.282 Passages of this sort are not, however, unknown in Roman didactic epic. In particular in the opening to Georgics IIIVirgil names a semi-divine figures connected with the raising and use of horses that he is about to discuss at 42-45, but more notable is the extensive list of famous wives atArs Am. 3.11-52 by Ovid. Neither of these lists share content with that of the Cyn., but they would seem to suggest that in later didactic literature the list of heroic antecedents to the present discussion was a more common topos, which the poet has creatively adapted to his own topic material in this instance. The Halieutica does not contain any passages that could be considered a close model for this one, with the invention of the craft of fishing being attributed rather to Hermes at Hal. 3.28. The range of influences is very broad, but is generally

282 Hesiod, Op. 42-7.

179

2. Digressions

focussed on descriptions of hunting in Homer and on the Hellenistic poets, particularly the Idylls of Theocritus. The language of this digression is, as would be expected from the nature of the topic, strongly allusive. The poet is able to display his learning very effectively by using language allusive of descriptions of these heroes in earlier literature, particularly with epithets that describe each hero. The poet's wording is notable for the emphatic placement of the names of the heroes that it describes. Of the heroes' names, four occupy the opening of a line and five occupy the closing position. Otherwise the passage is composed of a series of hunting methods in turn. The poet avoids making these introductions repetitive, creating fresh emphasis for each new name introduced. 1 E~ C) cxye jJ.OI. Mair83 notes here that some manuscripts open with vDv, which he rejects. This variant manuscript may have arisen by analogy with Hal. 3.1 NDv 6' ayE iJ.OI.. Although it is possible that the poet wished to recall the address to the emperor made at that point, a different form of address would avoid the appearance of a slavish imitation of the forms of the earlier poet, recalling instead, EL 6' ayE iJ.OI. from fl. 6.376, Od. 4.832, 22.391 andA.R. 3.l3l and 4.1073. 1 ZTJvoc;' "8-6yaTep, KaAALacpupe CPoLf3TJ This oblique address to Artemis is unusual and does not reflect the usage of the name in reference to the mother of Leto, and therefore to Artemis' grandmother, seen in Hesiod Theog. l36, 404, and Aeschylus Eum. 7. As CP. is used of Artemis at Virgil Georg. 1.431, 'vento semper robet aurea Phoebe', it is attractive to speculate that this is evidence for the influence from the Georgics on the Cynegetica. In particular, as that line is itself possibly modelled on Aratus Phaen. 803 284 1TO:VTa 0' EPEUfuiJ.EVn OOKEEI.V aVEiJ.OI.O KeAe6fuuc;', possibly it is an oblique allusion to Aratus as well. This sort of multi-layered allusion is popular with the Hellenistic poets, the Neoterics and the works of Virgil285. However, CP. may also be a straightforward, albeit innovative, variation of gender on CPo'C~oc;'. 2 xpuaojJ.L TpTJ This epithet refers to Dionysus previously at Soph. Oed. Tyrannus 209, which is indicative of the apparently greater familiarity of the poet of the Cynegetica with drama. 283 Mair, 54 footnote. 284 Williams, 153. 285 Conte, 36.

180

2.10.9 Address to Artemis and discovery of hunting, Cyn. 2.1-30

2 6L6u\-loV YEVOr; •A1T6AACJJVI. This statement removes the ambiguity over the identity of 4>. referred to above. In view of the identification of Caracalla with Apoll 0 286, it may be used encomiastically to deliberately recall the family relationship between Artemis and Apollo and, by implication, the emperor. 3-4 et:1TE\-leVal.... 6f)vea -&f)PTlr; It is interesting to compare the brevity of this statement of programme with the 'history' given at 5-30. It is essentially a conventional request for information, usually addressed to (a) Muse(s), so that what follows is not really a digression. This ambiguity over what mayor may not be genuinely considered a digression is an issue throughout didactic literature, where the definition depends on a mixture of perceived didactic utility and generic standards. This question is especially vexed in the Cyn. as the poet frequently uses artistic "ornamentation". I have included the following passage as, unlike for example the description of the Agassean hunting dog at 1.468-539, the verses 5-30 could be excised and the logical unity of the book would remain. There is no statement at the beginning of the Hal. which states the aims of the relevant book so succinctly, but there are similar statements at Cyn. 3.5-6 and 4.4-7. 5-6 aypl.a 'PGAal-&TlP0\-l1.yfj This begins the periphrasis for the Centaurs developed in the following two lines. The epithet '6-., possibly an innovation by the poet, fills two roles, describing both the physical nature of the Centaurs as half horse, and suggesting the figures of Castor, Pollux and Perseus, inter alia, described below, who are only partly human, although in a different way. 6-7\-lep61TCJJv ... TJ\-lI.!3pOTCJJV This periphrasis for the centaurs is, perhaps, appropriate as their conception as half-man-half beast belongs to the period after Homer, where they are always referred to as such explicitly, cf. Hh. Herm. (4) 223, where they are referred to as AOOWUXEVOc;'. The epithet TU.ll.~p6TCJJ\7 is a likely innovation by the poet by analogy with T]I.lC'6-EOc;' . 7 E1TI.OOP1TI.OV ... -&f)PTlv. Although the use of the epithet EiTl.O. here to describe hunting is unique, it is worth noting its occurrence at Nic. Alex. 21 in the same sedes, where it describes part of the lower digestive tract. It also appears at Theocritus 13.36 to describe water drunken after a feast. The concept of the hunt taking place after the feast, depicting the hunt as a pastime rather than a practical occupation, would seem to reinforce 286 Grant, 177.

181

2. Digressions

Toohey's conception of the intended reader for later didactic epic, that is a reader looking for entertaining diversion on leisure time topics.287 It should, however, be acknowledged that possibly E. is used here uniquely as a synonym for the Homeric 11'oTL.66p11'l..Oc;' = 'Jar supper'. Such a usage reduces the link between hunting and leisure, though it does not remove it entirely. 8 1I'PWTOC;- 6 fopy6voc;- aUXEv' dlJ,Epoac;- In this, the first of two descriptions of Perseus, the poet draws on Hesiod Th. 280, although he innovates in his expression. 9 ZTlvoc;- xpuoe~oL.O 1I'atc;- KAuT6c;- This line draws on the description of Zeus at n. 14.319-20, with innovative language. The epithet xpoo. is also applied somewhat playfully as a double reference to Zeus appearing to Danae, Perseus' mother, as a shower of gold. These two lines set the descriptions of the inventors of hunting within the most respectable tradition of epic literature, viz. that of Homer and Hesiod. The implied claim for the value of the teaching to follow mirrors that of 1.20-1 discussed above. Hollis also notes the similarity of this line in the Cynegetica with Euphorion, SH 418,42 clv ..6.dt xpoo .... aL.TJL. TEKEV 'AKpL.O'L.WVTJ. 288 10 aAAeX 1I'06wv ... 1I'TepuyeOoL. Mair89 notes that the story of Perseus and the winged shoes is told at Apoll. 2.38-39. 11-13 Kat 1I'TWKac;-... KapTlVa. These lines both add colour to the description of Perseus and set out the content of this book, although they are not strictly programmatic as hares and jackals are not discussed until the following book. Also striking are the rhymes of the noun endings -ac;', -wv, OUc;' and -a. 14 6 cpaeocp6poc;-... KaoTwp The application of cpaEOcp. to Castor is unusual, recalling the tradition of Castor and Pollux as the rescuers of sailors at sea. 290 For the tradition of aid at sea from the Dioscuri see also Rh. Dioscuri (33) 7ff. This role is more strikingly recalled by Alcaeus at fr. 34a.11, in a line with the most likely reading apyaAEg. 6' Ev VUKTL. cp[aoc;' cpElPOVTEc;'.291 This epithet and its variant cpwacpopoc;' are applied to several of

287 Toohey, Epic Lessons, 17-8. 288 Hollis, "[Oppian], Cyn. 2.100-58 and the mythical past of Apamea-On-The-Orontes", 155. 289 Mair, 54 footnote. 290 Dover, Theocritus: Select Poems, 238. 291 Campbell, 290, notes the ambiguity of cpOoc; between 'light' and 'safety' in Homer.

182

2.10.9 Address to Artemis and discovery of hunting, Cyn. 2.1-30

the gods in epic and drama, including Hecate and Artemis (see LSJ S.V.).292 Possibly its application to Artemis as goddess of hunting, such as OO'TTl, crvaaa' EUG.'Yll'L. cpaEacpopE293 has been influential here. However, it is worth noting its use in the same sedes at AR. 4.885 of Dawn, with the same sense of rapid motion implied by E:~aME as is implied by the hunt on horseback here. 15-16 TOU~ j..lEv ... clKOVTI.. ~aAA6j..lEVO~ These lines show possible influence from the story of the instruction of Heracles in archery at Theocritus 24.107 E1Tt aKo1Tov ELVal- oCaTov. A comparison of those passages shows a thematic similarity in the enumeration of gentlemanly skills, though the list of those taught to Heracles in Theocr. 24.105-33 includes literacy and military training. The influence of Idyll XXIV on the poet is further suggested by the description of Heracles as an exemplar of hunting in 00 Kat il-rpLa 1Tae-&oov EKoTeooaTo Tl.Tavl This half line seems to be influenced by the description of the anger of Apollo towards Diomedes during the funeral games at 11.23.383 KOTeooaTo cl>o'C~oc,' 'ArroMwvl. 618 IlJ.aVTl.1TOAOU cl>oL~ol.o This epithet of Phoebus does not appear elsewhere as an epithet of this god in verse, although it is also used by the poet of prophetic swans at 2.548. It is used as an epithet of Apollo at Eur. Hec. 121, but I-l0VT. would make better sense as a noun denoting Phineus (pace Mair!). If the line is read as "angered at the victory of the seer of Phoebus", with I-l0VT. being used as a noun, the double description of Phaethon's anger at by EKoTeoooTo and XOAW06:I-lEVOc,' appears redundant. However, Engelhofer's argument regarding the mention of these gods at 1.9, that the poet uses redundant-seeming description to avoid hubris by omission of a god, could then be equally applied here. 618 XOAOOoalJ.evoc,' 1Tept VLKT)c,'1 The grievance of Phaethon towards Phineus is not described by A.R, where the taking of his sight is attributed to Zeus at 2.183-4. 619 lpeyyoc,' CIlJ.epoeV This term for blinding is not Homeric, nor is it used for the blinding of Phineus by A.R. However, it is similar to cpeyyoc,' cX1TOl.X0I-lEVOV .. . ooowvl at Theoc. 24.75 describing the blinding of Teiresias, and as the blinding of prophets is described in both cases this may have been influential. The expression is used somewhat differently to refer to the death of the horses forced into an incestuous union by their owner at Cyn. 1.268 EOv 6' a1To cpeyyoc,' al-lEpaav. 619-20 aVal.OEa lpUAa ... ap1TuLac,' This description of the harpies is unique, but is possibly modelled on ap1ToKTfjPEc,' cXVOI..6EEc,' of Hal. 1.373 or cXvol.6Eo CPUAO 1TOYOUpwv at Hal. 1.281. Given the similarity of the sound ap1T- between Hal. 1.373 and this description, and that cXvol.6Eo CPUAO is in the same sedes in both Hal. 1.281, it seems that this is an innovation by the poet which conflates both models from Oppian. 6201TTepoevTa 1TapeOTl.a 1Tl.Kpa yeve-&Aal This striking description of the harpies by three similar sounding epithets should be compared with the description of the arrows of Eros by four epithets at 2.423 and the description of shields by five epithets at 1.217-8, (see notes on these above).In each of these cases the string of epithets creates a striking break in the flow of narrative or description, and in each case the poet attains

199

2. Digressions

striking effects in sound. The rhyme and assonance of 1TT-a 1T-a 1T-a -al creates a striking effect that also recalls the sound of ap1TuCac;' that the clause describes. 622 .ApywTlc;' E1Tt VTloc;' This is the second mention of the Argo in the Cyn. It is also mentioned in the opening address and recusatio at 1.28. In view of the range of borrowings from and allusions to the Argonautica elsewhere the poet has apparently been strongly influenced by this work. It may be that the deliberate allusions to the Argonautica of Apollonius Rhodius here and at 1.28 represent an attempt to identify the Cynegetica as a Hellenistic work equal to its predecessors. 622 aUjJ.1ToveovTEc;' This verb does not otherwise occur in Greek epic, although it does in drama and prose. Its use in epic is possibly an innovation by the poet. 623 /1TaLoE ... KAEEvvw,I While this line seems to be modelled on the description of these brothers at AR. 2.211 IZf]TT)c;' aD Kw....dLc;' TE Bopf]LOL ULEc;'... , the epithet KAEEWW is otherwise only seen in Lyric poetry as at Simonides AP 7.514.3, and this may be a striking innovation on the model. 624 OLKTELpavTE ... cpuAa, This is a brief summary of the actions of the two brothers on behalf of Phineus which is a large part of the narrative of AR. 2.176-497. However, as noted above, the harpies are not slain by the sons of Boreas in the Argonautica, at AR. 2.432 Wc;' "'IPLc;' EpuKaKE TaaoE odU;aL.

625 yAUKEp-r;v ... eOTlTl)v./ The ABBA structure of noun and epithet in this line and the dactylic rhythm of the line create a striking visual and sound effect. This signals the end of the internal story of the digression and the return to the opening of the ring composition, namely the transformation of Phineus into the race of moles, particularly as the inner story of Phineus and the harpies begins with striking anaphora at 616-7. By having an inner and outer story which can so readily be distinguished at the close of a book the poet has created a similar effect, though on a far smaller scale, to the closing of book 4 of the Georgics with the Aristaeus epyllion, inside which the story of Orpheus and Eurydice is nested, although there is a closer causal link between the stories here. 626 dU' OUo' c.3c;' CPae-B-oov XOAOV EllvaaEv The description of the story of Theseus and Ariadne at AR. 3.997-1004, particularly 1000 XOAOV EuvaOE MCvwc;'/, may have been influential here. Possibly the anger of Phaethon is being compared with that of Minos who is, in a sense, 200

2.10.12 Lion seen in imperial procession, Cyn. 3.46-7

responsible for a similar phenomenon to the transformation by creating a mixture of man and animal in his son the Minotaur. 627 d01l'oAaKoov ... eOVTtllv· / This line strikingly emphasises the description of transformation and its position at the close of the book with enclosure in both rhyme and sense by eX-oov.... E-ooV, enclosing the assonance of '!TOellOE ... '!Tp00i3-EV. 629 eXAOOV TE !-lEVEl. This description of the blindness of the moles may be a last indirect reference to the blindness of Phineus, drawing on A.R. 2.259 E'!T' ocp-8-oAt.iwv eXAoov vecpoc;'.

2.10.12 Lion seen in imperial procession, Cyn. 3.46-47 It may seem unusual to designate such a sma1l description which is integrated well within the technical discourse as a digression, but its statement of personal experience is a striking divergence from the technical description and allows the author to decorate otherwise repetitive material by introducing a related but irrelevant matter. The personal approach is, however, reminiscent of that of Herodotus when describing national customs, and given that there are signs of influence by Herodotus, such as at 2.115-6, (see n. supra), it is possible that this may have influenced his anecdotal approach here, or perhaps the poet has been influenced by historic epic no longer extant that owes something of its style to Herodotus. J.R. Morgan325 notes a similar description of giraffes seen in a procession in a fragment of Timotheus at Sylloge Constantini 2.270 and it is possible that recollections of this sort were a more popular motif in literature of the Imperial period than the extant literature would suggest. The language of these lines is quite straightforward, which enforces the immediacy of the poet's expression that is being described. In view of its close integration with the technical discourse this approach ensures that it does not strongly disrupt the flow of the technical discourse. These lines are notable for the way the poet has distinguished them from the surrounding discourse by rhyme and parenthesis to draw attention to this story of his personal experience.

325 Morgan, "Two Giraffes Emended".

201

2. Digressions

46-7 /eOpaKov ... oacpol.v6v/ KOl.paVI.Ko'C~ ... ocp-&aAjJ.o'COl.V/ The poet strikingly encapsulates this description of his own experience by the parenthesis with the description of his observation, EopaKov... OcpfuAj..lO'CcrlN. Similarly, these lines are distinguished from the surrounding discourse by the rhyme in -ov ... -ov and -OLe;' ... OLO(LV). 46 EopaKov, ou 1Tu-&6jJ.TJv This is a concise statement of personal knowledge compared with a prose equivalent such as Herodotus 1.140 Tmha jJ.EV ClTPEKEWe;' EXW iTEpt al)TWV ELOWe;' ELiTELV, or 2.5.1 Kat ill jJ.OL EOOKEOV AEYELV iTEpt Tlle;' XWPT]e;'- ollAa yap OT] Kat jJ.T] 1TpoaKouoaVTL LOOVTL OE. The phrasing is likely modelled on OUK 'Coov, ou 1Tu-tl-OjJ.T]V Od.

23.40, Rh. Herm. 263, 363. The emphasis on vision as the definition of veracity is also seen at 3.482 and 4.17 EjJ.OLc;' 'Coov ocp-tl-aAjJ.o'CcrLvl, cf. also 11. 1.587 jJ.f) OE CPLAT]V iTEP EoDoav EV ocp-tl-aAj..loLoLv 'CowjJ.aL -tl-ELVOjJ.EVT]V and similar expressions at 3.28, 169. 306, 5.212, 10.275 and 13.99, ~ jJ.Eya fuDjJ.a TOO' ocp-tl-aAj..loLoLV opwjJ.aL. A mixture of sight and vision appears at Od. 3.93f. and 4.324 EC iTOU oiTwiTae;' I ocp-tl-aAjJ.oLoL TEOLOLV, il oUou jJ.DfuvaKouoae;'.

47 ol.a1T6jJ.1TI.jJ.O~ This epithet is otherwise only seen at Diod. Sic. 2.49, suggesting that the poet may have had some familiarity with prose historical sources. 2.10.13 Invocation to the emperor Caracalla and to Artemis, eyn. 4.10-24

This digression follows a theme popular with both Homer and later authors 326, that is prayer for aid in composing the poem for which the aid of the deity invoked is critical. In the current passage the inclusion of the emperor is unusual, but creates a tone similar to the attribution of the return of justice to the world to the emperor Marcus Aurelius at Hal. 2.664-688. The passage consists of a description of the range of hunting styles available to be discussed, 10-12, a description of the problem this presents to a mortal seeking to describe them and the ease with which the gods could complete it, 12-15, a statement from the poet on what he will attempt, 16-19, a statement of dedication to the emperor, 20, and prayer to Artemis, 21-4. 326 Farrell, 232 notes the widespread popularity of this motif. Farrell focuses on the Roman authors with whom it was popular, including Vergil at Georgics 2.42-4, Ennius Ann. 469-70, Hostius fr. 3 and Lucretius fr. I.

202

2.10.13 Invocation to Caracalla and Artemis, Cyn. 4.10-24

The language of the passage is very distinctive, with the poet using rare or unique vocabulary several times as well as a number of striking effects of sound. The prayer itself is not strongly stylised but follows the general outline of those of other poets. The invocation to the Muses at 11. 2.484-93 shares with that here an invocation of the gods, 484, a description of why the gods can help the poet, 485-6, a statement of what the poet seeks to describe, 487, and a description of the deficiencies that prevent the poet from completing the work alone, 488-93. Not all similar passages in other works are as fully developed along Homeric lines. Virgil addresses Bacchus at Georg. 2.1-8, stating what he is seeking to describe at 9-34, and that he cannot as a mortal manage the job at hand, 43-4, asking for help with the task at 39-42. Unusually, rather than calling on the god for help, Virgil calls on his friend Maecenas, a step which may have inspired the mention of the emperor here, although that may also reflect of the divine aspirations of the emperor. In the opening of the encomiastic Idyll XVII [Theocritus] calls on the Muses and states that he will begin from Zeus327 when considering how to describe Ptolemy, but he does not address Ptolemy directly, leaving that until the close of the encomium328 • Virgil also departs from the model of the Iliad by not establishing why the addressee should be especially able to help with the discourse. The poet of the Cynegetica has been more true to his model than Virgil by including all the points made in the Homeric model. This digression is notable for the manner in which the poet chooses alternative expressions from those popularly used in dedicatory passages to create a sense of novelty. The poet also makes frequent use of rhyme and repetition. It is possible that in doing so he is striving for the rhythm of a prayer, which would make the inclusion of the emperor together with Artemis strikingly strong encomiastic praise. 10 "H-&ea ... CfYPTlc;'/ This opening line is striking for its alliteration and assonance and rhyme of -a -a and -T]c;' ... -T]c;', emphasising the two main reasons for calling on divine help, namely the importance of his topic material and its complex nature. Mair chooses "H-&ea over ElhEa, possibly due to its occurrence 7x in the Hal. and once elsewhere, at 2.83, in the Cyn, although the usage IEC6Ea 1TOAAO: 1TEA.EL 6E Kat t)-&ea j-lupc.a in that line and the use of EC6Ea 11 x in the Cyn. raises some uncertainty. 327 Theocritus 17.1-2. 328 ibid., 135-7.

203

2. Digressions

10 'll'OAUapKeOe; It is doubtful whether this epithet should be 1TOAUEPKEOc;' or 1ToAuapKEoc;'. 1TOAUEPKEOc;' is not otherwise attested and seems unlikely. 1TOAUOPKEOc;' is also found at, inter alia, Ael. NA Prooem. and may be more likely here. 11 -&fJpeool. Kat e-&veow riM xapo:opal.e;/ A three part definition of topic material is used elsewhere by the poet, c£ r;EpLT]V X-&OVLT]V TE KoL El.VOALT]Vat 1.47. The logic of this line is that the techniques of hunting are sorted according to the prey, the hunters and location. On that basis Xop. seems a poor reflection of the range of geography traversed in a hunt, although it is evocative of the likely location for hunts by hound and nets, with which the poem is largely concerned, c£ its use to descrinbe the lairs of the female merle-wrasse at Hal. 4.176 1TOMOL 0' aAoXOl. , 1TOMOL OE xopaopat.. . 12-3 TLe; ... Xwp"'oel.ev / eL'II'E~:j..leVal. The poet avoids the popular motif established at Il. 2.488-93 329 of the needs for an iron heart and a thousand tongues and instead settles for asking a rhetorical question implying that no man could tell the material that is to follow without divine help. 13 eUKeAO:oOl.Ol.V aOl.oa'Ce;;! Although the use of the epithet EUKEA. is not uncommon in drama, occurring at Eur. Bacch. 160 and Ar. Nu. 312, and epigramm Mnasa1c. AP 7.194.4, Plat. AP 9.823.3 and Alcaeus AP 16.226.3 its use in epic is unusual and innovative by the poet, becoming more common in later works. 14 TLe; o· av ... TLe; o· av ... The anaphora of the question in this line builds striking tension towards the answer given in 15. The poet has also made effective use of variatio by replacing the KEV of the question in 12 with the repetition of O:v here. 15 / -&VT]TOe; eoov; j..loGVOl. oE -&eot The juxtaposition of the mortal and the god in this line emphasises the introduction of the addressee with the striking noun-participle-adjective-noun sequence. Maif330 notes that 15 -&eot pea 'll'o:v-&' op6wol.v/ is close in sense to Il. 3.381 PELO j..laA' Wc;' TE -&E6c;', Od. 10.305-6 j..lWAU OE j..ll..V KOAEOUOI.. -&EOL, XOAE1TOV 6E T' OpUOOElN O:vopaol.. yE -&VT]ToLOI.': -&EoL 6E TE 1Ta\?TO OUVOVTOl.. and Od. 4.379 and Res. Theog. 442f pT]l..OLWc;' aypT]v KUOpf] -&EOc;' W1TOOE

329 Farrell, 232, notes the conscious evolution and expansion of the Homeric motif in later authors. It is possible that here the poet has reacted to the fact that it had become hackneyed by removing it entirely. 330 Mair, 161 footnote.

204

2.10.13 Invocation to Caracalla and Artemis, Cyn. 4.10-24

1TOUTlV, / pEW 6' acpELAETO cpmNol..H~VT]V and Res. Op. 325 pE'Ca 6E flLV flaupoGoL 'frEOL. It may have been influenced by either phrase. 17 dYAa6owpov This epithet is previously seen at Rh. Dem. (2) 54, 192,

492 of Demeter, and its use of hunting here is unusual, anticipating the divine assistance to be received from Artemis. 19 a~6Aa 1TaVTOLT]C; ... TEXVT]C;,/ This description of the secrets to be revealed is striking for its triple rhyme in -T]c;', its rhythm of alternating dacty1s and spondees, and the description of the knowledge by the noun flooTf]PLa, which is common in prose and drama, appears at Damag. AP 7.9.5, but is very rare in epic. This line dramatically emphasises the mention of the emperor that follows. 20 LeOUTlPOu D.1..0C; uUl)/ This mention of the emperor Caracalla as the son of the divine Severus at the end of the line gives encomiastic emphasis. As discussed above, his inclusion may reflect a tradition similar to that which influenced Virgil to mention Maecenas at Georg. 2.39 in a passage normally addressed to a god, although here the emphasis is on the pleasure of the emperor, rather than a request for his aid as in Virgil. The fifth foot placement epithet of 6.LOc;' strongly emphasises the encomiastic praise. Its use to indicate the divine nature of kings is unique in extant epic, though its presence in the Seleucid inscription at OGI 245.10 suggests that it may have been a conventional mode of praise. Note also that the prosody of this line requires that -ou- be read both consonantally and as a vowel. 211T6Tva -Sea This phrase occurs 3x in the Odyssey at 5.215, 13.391 and 20.61. Each of these occurrences, for Calypso in the first instance, then Athena, and the last for Artemis, forms part of an address to a divine figure who is to be a helper to Odysseus, and it is this sense which may have influenced the poet here as he calls on Artemis for help. It is interesting to compare the often informal relationship that Odysseus has with these goddesses and the active partnership between the poet and Artemis implied by the dialogue at 1.20-35. 211TaYKoLpave This epithet is not previously attested and may be a new coining by the poet. 23 oapLoflaTa This noun is not otherwise attested, but is most likely a variation on Resiod Op. 789, KpUCPLOUc;' T' oapLofl06C;/ creating an esoteric feel here. Wesf31 notes that oa. is the first '-ism' in Western literature. The

331 West, Hesiod: Works and Days, 357.

205

2. Digressions

use of the noun by Callimachus at Fr. 401.3 Pf. may have inspired the poet to similar innovation here. 24 "6-TlPocpov"ij This verb is otherwise unattested and was possibly coined by analogy to the adjective i1TlPOCPovoc;', which appears 4x in the Cyn., 3x as a substantive, once in the Hal and at AP 16.94.4 (Archias) OUXEVO i1TlPocpovol..c;' eXyx0IJ.EVOc;' 1TOAcXlJ.0U;-, which is perhaps most suggestive of this line. 25 1TOAO:IJ.U Kat aOl.o"ij This close to the digression has the appearance of an idiomatic phrase, such as the English 'by hook or by crook', although originality is implied by the zeugma of 'his hand' and '!ill:: song'. Like most such phrases rhyme is used, in -n here, giving a stylish flourish to fInish the digression.

206

3. Similes 3.1 Overview of similes The differences in the quantity and nature of the developed similes used in the Halieutica and the Cynegetica are striking. As has been noted above (see Digressions), the poet of the Cynegetica uses far fewer developed similes than does Oppian, and there is little of the strong anthropomorphic focus found in the Halieutica. More generally both poets frequently allude to earlier epic in both the theme and the language of their similes. Although the bulk of this influence is Homeric, as is reasonable given the striking range of similes in the Iliad and the Odyssey relating to hunting and related endeavours, there are also frequent allusions to subsequent Greek epic. Lastly novel or striking language is frequently used to develop on these models.

3.2 Quantity The different approach taken to the use of similes by both poets can be seen in their total number, 47 in the Halieutica compared with 8 in the Cynegetica, and the amount of space that they occupy, 304 lines in the Halieutica compared with 54 lines in the Cynegetica. The poet of the Cynegetica allows an entire book, book 2, to pass without a developed simile whereas the Halieutica has no extended section without one. This difference in part reflects the aesthetic preferences of the two poets, but may also reflect a lack of physical immediacy in fishing so that the action can or should be usefully emphasised by similes. 3.3 Placement The use of developed similes to enliven the technical discourse in the Halieutica appears to have been the strongest influence on their placement, with few occurring within digressive or other non-technical passages. Within the Cynegetica, none of the genuinely developed similes occur outside the technical discourse. 207

3. Similes

3.4 Classification The similes of the Halieutica and the Cynegetica can be usefully classified in terms of the influence from earlier Graeco-Roman epic and according to the most striking innovations made by Oppian, namely the frequent use of anthropomorphism to engage the reader's interest in the lives and behaviour of the fish332 • 3.4.1 Anthropomorphic similes A striking difference between the developed similes of the Halieutica and the Cynegetica is how Oppian makes use of anthropomorphic similes to engage the reader's interest in the behaviour of fish. In view of the innovative nature of this usage and its occasional use in the Cynegetica theses similes will be examined in detail as a separate category. 3.4.2 Generically inspired similes In addition to the anthropomorphic similes, there is a wide range of similes in both works strongly influenced by images in earlier epic literature. The majority of the developed similes within the Cynegetica fall into this category. It is worth noting, however, that the images are not limited to those found in similes in earlier works, but often include striking scenes from the narrative discourse of heroic epic adapted to the similes here. Several of the anthropomorphic similes could be usefully included in this category, but as the anthropomorphism is a striking feature they have been considered separately. 3.4.3 Other developed similes There is a significant number of similes within the Halieutica which are neither anthropomorphic nor apparently strongly influenced by images from earlier literature. these similes are notable for almost exclusively 332 Rebuffat, 189-90 also distinguishes between anthropomorphic and non-anthropomorphic similes in his analysis. I have made a further distinction on the basis of inspiration as most, but not all, of the non-anthropomorphic similes within the Halieutica have a dominant model that can be readily identified. The similes within the Cynegetica are. of course, beyond the scope of Rebuffat's work

208

3.5 Differences between these similes

involving comparisons of fish with land animals. In epic it is more normal to see human behaviour described through similes comparing it with that of land animals and as such it could be argued that there is an implied anthropomorphism in similes of this sort. These similes also include details that appear more contemporary and less deliberately suggestive of the world of heroic epic. Significantly there is only one simile within the Cynegetica which seems to fit into this category. This reflects an apparent preference by Oppian for contemporary detail in his similes, possibly to engage the interest of a reader of his time in a manner similar to the use of anthropomorphic images. 3.5 Differences between these similes The detailed examination of the similes will focus mainly on the following aspects within the categories set out above. 3.5.1 Allusion/Originality in theme Possibly as a reflection of the limited use made of similes in the Cynegetica, the similes in that poem draw mainly on images and themes seen in earlier epic. The similes that are more innovative are those that use anthropomorphic themes, as is commonly seen in the Halieutica, such as the comparison of a frantic hunting dog to a girl nearing the end of her pregnancy at l.494-50l, or which draw on other forms of literature such as bucolic, e.g. the comparison of a hunting dog to a girl gathering flowers in springtime at 4.367-73. Comparatively speaking, Oppian made frequent use both of allusive themes and images and original ones. Oppian's common use of anthropomorphic similes allowed him to use images from earlier literature that would otherwise be difficult to incorporate logically into a work on fishing. However, these anthropomorphic similes frequently present novel images such as those comparing the behaviour of fish to medical practice, e.g. the comparison of pagurus to a man who has been tended by a physician l.298-302. In view of the greater number of developed similes in the Halieutica it is possible to observe marked preference for the application of images both from similes in heroic epic and more generally from distinctive scenes in Homeric epic. It is possible that the eschewment 209

3. Similes

of Homeric images by the poet of the Cynegetica was a conscious innovation on the style of Oppian. It is also worth noting how the more strikingly original similes within the Halieutica use images from contemporary life, such as the slaying of a leopard in the games, 2.350-6, or the attack on a drunken reveller returning home at night from a banquet, 2.408-17.

3.5.2 Allusion/Originality in language Compared with the similarity in the images used, there is a closer resemblance between the language in developed similes in the Halieutica and the Cynegetica. Both poets frequently use allusive language, often from sources different from those which provide the image of a simile. In particular, Oppian uses strikingly allusive language in the more novel similes. While this includes language drawn from earlier epic, it may be drawn from further afield, such as language from technical prose used to novel effect in some similes with a medical theme. The poet of the Cynegetica uses less distinctly Homeric language than Oppian, although a great deal of his language recalls later Greek epic and other poetic genres.

3.5.3 Rare and new language Both poets also make frequent use of rare and apparently newly coined compound words in the developed similes. Oppian commonly uses these terms to create effects suggestive of the actions described, whereas in the Cynegetica they are used more for innovation alone. While both poets use hapax words from Homer, there is also rare language from other poets and genres in both works. A notable difference is that there seems to be more possible influence from drama in the Cynegetica, whereas Oppian appears to use more rare language from technical prose.

3.5.4 Anthropomorphism As mentioned above, the anthropomorphic images to describe the behaviour of sea creatures is one of the most striking innovations of Oppian. This in part allows logically appropriate use of themes and images 210

3.6.1 Comparison of pagurus and patient, Hal. 1.298-302

from heroic epic to enliven the technical discourse. More importantly, anthropomorphic similes can engage the reader's interest in a topic that might otherwise have been too dry for its audience. These images are used thematically, with those in book 4, which focuses on the exploitation of the sexual behaviour of fish, consistently reflecting human behaviour that involves surrender to strong emotions. Similarly the similes of book 2, which is focussed on the interactions of and conflicts between species of sea-creatures, consistently present images of human conflict, although Oppian avoids consistently drawing on Homeric images by using more contemporary detail. On the other hand, in book 5, which is devoted to the intrinsically exciting subject of hunting 'sea monsters' and the dangers faced by fishermen in doing so rather than the suffering of the sea creatures, Oppian makes only very limited use of anthropomorphic images. The poet of the Cynegetica does occasionally use anthropomorphic images to describe animal behaviour, but this is rare and never describes prey animals, as is often the case in the Halieutica. Such images in the Cynegetica are at least partly used as homage to Oppian. 3.6 Anthropomorphic similes There are 25 similes in the Halieutica that are dominantly anthropomorphic in theme. By comparison, there are only six in the Cynegetica that could be genuinely considered to be anthropomorphic. 3.6.1 Comparison ofpagurus to a man who has been tended by a physician, Hal. 1. 298-302

In this simile the pagurus, a species of edible crab, that is feeble after casting off its old shell is compared to a sickly man who has been tended by a physician and has his strength built up. The description of the gradual building up of fitness for the patient is striking and may owe some inspiration to descriptions of the cures for poison in the Alexipharmaca of Nicander, but the nearest model is the simile at Od. 5.394-7, describing the recovery of a father from a long illness. An interesting feature is the close linguistic parallel with the preceding description of the pagurus at 290ff. The simile proceeds as follows: The doctor tends to a man affected by disease, 298. In the first days the man is fasted until the symptoms clear, 211

3. Similes

299-300. Then the patient is given a little food until the pains have gone away, 300-2. This simile allows the reader to look into an aspect of everyday life, which is a distinctive feature of Oppian's writing influenced by Hellenistic epic. It does not perhaps display the chann of some of the images used elsewhere in the Halieutica and in the Cynegetica by virtue of the serious topic matter, but nonetheless it is unusual and gives a foretaste of the use of everyday life as a theme for similes more fully developed later in the Halieutica. As mentioned above, the works of Nicander seem to have influenced the theme of this simile, and this is reflected by the unusual technical language in this simile, possibly as a conscious reflection of that poet's very learned and unusual style. The expression is not strongly stylised, so that the technical language and plain expression suggest the medical literature which seems to have influenced Oppian here. 298 vouaax-&ea cpooTa The epithet vOUO". is not otherwise attested and seems likely to be a new coining by Oppian, strongly emphasising the introduction of the simile. With this and the otherwise unattested epithet 299 d1l'611'aaTOV possibly Oppian is attempting to give the passage a technical feel suggestive of the style of Nicander, with his rich use of rare language, and of the prose of medical writers. 299 j3oPTlC;- implies 'simple' food, as suggested by its use again at 301 to indicate the first food that the invalid is allowed access to on recovery, cf also its use at 291 of the food that the pagurus neglects while growing a new shell. 301 voaf)Al.a The use of this epithet in the neuter plural as a noun to indicate food for invalids is otherwise unattested, and may be modelled on the use of VOO"T]AELa to indicate nursing care in the prose medical authors as at Galen 5.48. Its use may also be inspired by the description of Philoctetes' illness at Soph. Phi/oct. 39 as VOO"T]AELae;-. 302 TE Mac;- 6Mvac;- TE The repetition of TE ... TE and the rhyming of -ae;gives a striking close to this simile by sympathetically emphasising the patient's pains, engaging the reader's sympathies for the pagurus. 302 YUl.oj36pouc;- It seems likely that here the poet is alluding to Hes. Op. 66 YULo~6poue;- IlEAEowvae;-, which Wesf33 notes is the preferred reading to YULOKOPOUe;- shown in several MSS. The reference in that use is to the 'limb333 West, Hesiod : Works and Days, 66.

212

3.6.2 Comparison of spring to the raising of a siege, Hal. 1.463-9

destroying' cares caused for men by Pandora, while Oppian changes the focus from a mental to a physical pain. 3.6.2 Comparison ofjish enjoying the arrival of spring to citizens of a city relieved from a siege, Hal. 1. 463-9

In this simile the way fish become happy when winter ends and spring begins to warm the waters is compared with the relief and joy of citizens of a city that has been under siege when that siege has been lifted. The obvious inspiration is the Iliad, with the happiness of the citizens of Oppian's city in unspoken contrast with the inhabitants of Troy, and in particular the description of the cities in peace and war on the shield of Achilles at 11. 18.490-540. Sieges must, however, have been a source of concern for those who, like Oppian, dwelt towards those edges of the empire with a history of unrest and it is important to remember that the inspiration for this description, as well as that of the city whose inhabitants have their wells poisoned by a besieging army at 4.685-93, might likely have come from both non-literary as well as literary sources. The simile proceeds as follows: The fish are like a city which has escaped from the clutches of war, 463-4. The enemy have besieged it for a long time as though by a flood and now it catches its breath from the battle, 464-6. The city people take pleasure in peacetime labour and hold a festival with dancing men and women, 467-9. As befits the theme of this simile its language recalls the Iliad, innovating with unusual compound terms in place of the traditional Homeric vocabulary. Particularly worth noting is the creation of drama by exaggeration of Homeric images. There is also some rhetorical exaggeration in 465 to emphasise the danger of the siege and the relief felt at its lifting. 463 1ToAuppatoTao ... 1TOAE\J.Ol.O The epithet 1TOAUpp. is not otherwise attested and may be a new coining, possibly influenced by the use of the simple epithet POl..OTrlPLOc;' by Apollonius to describe drugs as deadly at A.R. 3.790 and 803. 464 OA~tT] d-&avaTOI.OL cptAT] 1T6AI.~ It is possible that this phrase is used deliberately as ironic comparison with cities that are not blessed by the gods, such as Troy. 465 OUO\J.EVEWV 1TayxaAKo~ ... -&uEAAa The use of the epithet 1TO:rx. to describe enemies that have beset a city should be compared with its use at 11. 20.lO2, where Aeneas uses it of Achilles. The application of 1TO:rx., 213

3. Similes

which is literally appropriate for war, to the metaphorical -t}uEAAa effectively echoes metaphorical 463 vetpoc;' and the storms of winter in the preceding discourse. It is possible that Oppian is alluding to the Iliad and implies that the inhabitants faced an army of Achilleses, exaggerating a motif from an earlier writer in a manner common in Hellenistic and Roman epic. 334 466 d'll'aAU~aaa Kat dj..l'll'VEUaaaa The rhyme in - aoa here gives emphasis to the description of the city relaxing from its struggle. 469/dvopwv TE ... TE yuval..Kwv/ This line is a distinctive end to the simile, with the contrast between the masculine and feminine genders suggested by the placement of the nouns in the genitive plural at either end. 469 XOpOI..TU'll'LTlc;' Oppian gives this noun a different connotation to that implied by its use at 11. 24.261, where it is used derisively of the family left for Priam after the Greeks have killed off all the best and bravest among them, and possibly it is influenced instead by XOP0I..TUTfE at H.h. Herm. 31, describing a lyre played at a choral dance. Oppian has apparently coined a new verb based on this noun at 472, one taken up later in the Cynegetica at 4.342 to describe leopards affected by alcohol, creating a strong link between fish compared with dancers in that line and the dancers of the city here. 3.6.3 Comparison offishing-frog with a bird trapper, Hal. 2. 99-104

In this simile the fishing-frog (angler fish), which fishes by waving a phosphorescent fleshy extrusion as a lure for fish near its mouth, is compared with the fowler who catches birds with a trap consisting of a propped up container with food inside. This simile creates drama by ensuring that the connection is drawn between the folly of the greed of the birds and their eventual capture. The sententia connecting the downfall of an animal to a lack of control is, as mentioned elsewhere, expressed more fully in book 4 with its focus on the conflict between passion and control, but it is interesting that the idea has been extended to the appetite for food.

334 See Hinds, 92 on the exaggeration of the motif of "A hundred tongues could not tell this story ... " as it is passed from Homer to Virgil and thence to Statius.

214

3.6.3 Comparison of fishing-frog with a bird trapper, Hal. 2.99-104

Also very important is the following comparison with a fox feigning death, 107-119, which, though not formally a simile, is identical in function. This is important for the wider discussion of the relation between similes and other fonns of digression. N.B. cf. n. ad 2.359-86. The simile proceeds as follows: The fish is like a man trying to snare small birds, 99. The man scatters grains in front of and inside a propped-up box, 100-1. The birds have a keen longing for the food and go inside the box, 102-3. There is no return to the outside for the birds and their banquet ends badly, 103-4. This simile uses language not specific to fowling to describe its practice. By avoiding technical vocabulary Oppian focuses the reader's attention on the physical aspects of that pursuit, rather than the technical knowledge of its practitioners. This digression is not strongly stylised, with the focus instead on the anthropomorphic depiction of the behaviour of the fishing-frog. 99 1I'eXYTJv ... TI.TtJOKtIlV The use of TLT. in the active is a feature of postClassical Greek, as e.g. at Arat. Phaen. 418, with only the middle appearing in Homer. In Homer it commonly means 'to shoot at' or 'hit (with an arrow or spear)', c£ e.g 11. 21.582 EYXELn 0' atho'Co Tt.TOOKETO, but it is unlikely that it implies an especially elevated tone for this topic matter. There is at least one deliberate effect of sound in this simile in the rhyme of -ou / \jIauaal. IJ.EV TPOIJ.EEl. IJ.TlTpOq XOAOV The indecision of the girl and, by extension, of the mullet is emphasised by the construction of this phrase and the indefinite nature of TEU crUOl>. The overall construction here is somewhat difficult, with X6AOV apparently an accusative of respect for the anger the girl stands in dread of, cf. Od. 18.80 Toi3T6v yE TPOIJ.EELc;' Kat OEwac;'. 514 ouo' dvaouval. / EA00IJ.EVTl TETATlKEV The use of €AO. in this effective description of the mixture of longing and fear recalls its use to describe the hunger of the admon for mossy stones at 3.382. 516-7 aUoTE -&a:paoq, / aAAOTE ... OEl.Voq cpo[3oq The repetition of crUOTE ... -Oc;' emphasises the balance between longing and fear of the girl. The difficult dilemma of the girl is presented without any suggestion of a moral standpoint, especially as Oppian does not show whether the girl :finally relents. 518 o~Ea 1Ta1TTaLvovTa ... TETaVTal. The juxtaposition of the keen watching of the girl here and the careful stretching for food of the mullet at 519 finishes this simile without showing whether she gives in to temptation or not. In addition to avoiding any moral standpoint this ending also 232

3.6.14 Comparison of swordfish to besiegers, Hal. 3.560-5

returns the reader to the indecision of the mullet in medias res, creating a vivid feeling of the hesitation of the fish. 3.6.14 Comparison of swordfish to men besieging a city, Hal. 3.560565 In this simile the swordfish that are tricked into driving themselves into the side of a ship are compared with the inhabitants of a city tricked into admitting enemy soldiers dressed in the garb of the city's own soldiers. The description of this deception does not seem to be based on a particular literary model, but is sufficiently close to the subject matter of heroic epic that such a model is not strictly necessary. What is notable is that Oppian 'has avoided a direct reference to the Trojan Horse. It is possible that by comparing the fishennen to men devising a clever way of ending a siege Oppian is again comparing the intellect of the fishennen to that of Odysseus, the deviser of the Trojan horse. The simile proceeds as follows: The men trapping the sword fish are like men devising a trick of war against their enemies, 560. The men are keen to enter an enemy's town and dress in the anny of dead soldiers from the town to do so, 561-3. The townsmen are delighted to see what they think are their friends and open the gates of the city, 564-5. The townsmen have no pleasure in the return of their 'friends', 566. It can be seen from the above analysis that the violent rush of the swordfish is compared with the foolishness of the city men as they open the gates. The comparison is not particularly effective as the rush of the enemy through the gates is far more suggestive of the charge of the fish. Instead, Oppian relies on the similarity between the foolishness of the men and that of the swordfish to charge in the first place. The simile makes frequent use of the language of heroic epic, but not in a strongly allusive manner. While there is no rare or novel language in this simile, some of the expression apparently alludes briefly to episodes in both the Iliad and the Odyssey. It is worth noting that in the developed similes with military themes Oppian generally does not appear influenced by the limited number of depictions of battle and its various plans and deceits in Apollonius' Argonautica. Although the simile is expressed in a straightforward style, the way Oppian closes the simile is noteworthy, ensuring that the difficult 233

3. Similes

link between the swordfish and the town's men is established at the return to the discourse. 560 ooAov TE6xoVTE~ apllo~/ The use of the term o. to describe the craft of the soldiers, and therefore of the fishermen is a consistent feature, cf. on 3.393 infra (p. 291). The expression of this line may be modelled on Od. 8.276 TEU;E MAov KEXOAWj.lEVOC;- "ApEL, concerning the trap devised for Ares by a jealous Hephaestus, although there is not a strong connection in context. 561 tejJ.EvOl•... EVoov tKeo-&al. As mentioned above, it is surprising that this description of the eagerness of the men to enter the city is compared to the fishermen on the ships, rather than to the swordfish striving to ram them. 562 oUAfJoavTE~ aplll.tp(lTWV a'lJ"o VEKPOOV Compare the expression here with the words of Odysseus concerning Dolon il Twa oUAfpwv VEKUWV at 11. 10.343 and 387. A possible further inspiration may be Crinagoras AP 7.741.6 aUTLC;- apllLcpaTwv awopEv EX VEKUWV 565 Kat OV yfJ-&lloav ETaCpOI.~ links the folly of the townsmen to that of the swordfish, as the downfall of the townsmen is their eagerness to be reunited with their companions and that of the swordfish is their blind eagerness to charge the ships.

3.6.15 Comparison of the parrot-wrasse with men leading each other over difficult terrain in darkness, Hal. 4.65-70 In this simile the way that the parrot-wrasse draw each other free from a weel is compared with men holding hands and leading each other over difficult terrain in darkness. There is no clear model for this simile from earlier epic, and although Maw 46 notes possible influence from prose sources such as Polybius 5.104 and Diodorus Siculus 17.55, it seems reasonable, as this is quite a commonplace image, that its use is an innovation by Oppian. There is, given Oppian's other apparently borrowing of philosophical language and motifs, perhaps some slight overlap of subject matter with Empedocles' famous simile of a lantern prepared for use on a night journey (frag. 88 Wright (=84 Diels-Kranz))cf. esp. 1-2 1Tp60oov VOEWV ... XELj.lEPLllV OLD: vUKTa and 65-66 of the present simile avaOTELxwoL ... t)1fO OKLEPT]C;- WKToc;- KvEcpac;-. The simile is 346 Mair, 408 footnote.

234

3.6.15 Parrot wrasse are like men together in darkness, Hal. 4.65-70

interesting as it focuses on a kind of love different from the passionate Eros attributed to fish more generally in this book, focus sing instead on a spirit of friendship and cooperation. To reflect this, the simile does not use the language of passion and control that is characteristic elsewhere. The simile proceeds as follows: The parrot-wrasse are like men climbing a rugged hill under the cover of darkness, 65-6. The moon is hidden and the clouds make the landscape pitch black, 66-7. The men labour on the unfamiliar ground, wander about and hold each other's hands for guidance, 68-9. The men drag and are themselves dragged and have a useful exchange oflabour, 70. It can be seen from the above analysis that there is little in this simile that does not relate to the comparison with the parrot-wrasse. The main ornamentation comes from the striking description of the light conditions and the blind wandering of the men. This simile is expressed in ordinary language, ensuring that the focus is on the vivid description of the help that the men give each other in turn. It is, however, marked by the redundant threefold description of the darkness in which the men struggle and the use of language to vividly suggest the mutual help they give each other. This latter serves to highlight the humanity of the behaviour of the fish. 66-70KI.EPll«;, VUKTO«;' KVEcpa«;" ... IJf)Vll / KEKpU1TTal., VECPEOOV oE KEAal.VI.OOOol. KaAU1TTpal. Although little of the language used to

describe how dark the night is distinctively epic, the succession of three different aspects of the darkness is striking and is perhaps influenced by A.R. 3.750 01.Yrl OE j..lEAal.VOj..lEVTjV EXEV oPCPVTjv. Mair translates KaA.. as 'curtains', but the normal epic meaning of 'veils' is better, suggesting that it is the face of 'night' that has been covered by the clouds, following the sense of mystery created by the description of the covering of the moon as KEKpU1T.

68 aTpL1TTOI.OI. KEAEU-&Ol.c;'/ This description of the paths on the hill may be inspired by the description of thickets in which Heracles searches for Hylas as (hpL1TToI.Ol.V O:K0v8-aLc;'/ at Theocritus 13.64, or by that of the new path that Callimachus must tread in composing the Aetia at fr.1.27-8 (Pfeiffer) c!i}..)..a KEAeUfuuc;' / chpL1TToluc;'. The thematic similarity in the use of (hp. by Theocritus is more suggestive of that here. 69-70

XE'Cpa«;, OE IJET' aAAf)AOI.OI.V EXOUOl.V, / EAKOIJEVoL -&' 1TOVOOV E1TLKOUPOV alJ0I.j3f)v These closing lines very

~AKOUOI.,

235

3. Similes

strongly emphasise the mutual help important to the description of the parrot wrasse. In particular, the use of eX:A.AfjAOLOW and eXflOLl3fjv (cf. esp. the description of the love of the fish as eXfloLl3aCn CPLAOTTlTL at 71), and the repetition of EAK. strongly suggests that each man helps the next one in turn in the darkness, and that this will also be the case for the wrasse.

3.6.16 Comparison ofparrot-wrasse to men in afoot race, Hal. 4.101106 In this simile the male parrot-wrasse pursuing a female being drawn by the fishermen into a weel are compared with men in a foot race. Descriptions of foot races, both in direct narration and in simile, are common in both epic and lyric poetry, but here Oppian focuses on the passion of the runners for the prizes on offer to describe the passions of the male parrot-wrasse as they charge after the female. The simile is composed as follows: The fish are like men in a foot race, 10 I. The men dart forward from the line and always strive to complete the course, 102-4. The desire of every runner is to reach the end and gain victory, 104-5. The runners hope to enter the barriers and to take the prize for the race, 105-6. Little emphasis is given to the actual running of the race in this simile, with three out of six lines devoted to describing the desire for glory and prizes. This focus on the prizes effectively highlights the passions of the fish, strongly recalling the unifying theme of the book. The language of the passage is unusual with, as Mair notes 347, vocabulary describing aspects of foot racing not attested elsewhere. It is possible that Oppian innovates by introducing contemporary elements to motifs common in earlier epic, cf. also the description of the cornering of a leopard by a bestiarius in an arena rather than, as in Homer, by a hunter in the countryside at 2.350-6. This creates considerable novelty in an image that has been used previously in epic, as at 11. 23.740-97, as well as in lyric poetry. Oppian enlivens this description by using unusual vocabulary to create unusual effects of sound to suggest the action of the race. Otherwise, the simile is expressed in a straightforward manner. l011l"oOWKELTlc;' ... eXe-&Awv The noun 11"00. referring to speed on foot as an abstract quality is previously attested in epic only at 11. 2.792, although 347 Mair, 410 footnote.

236

3.6.17 The merle-wrasse is like a fretting mother, Hal. 4.195-201

it is used later in drama and in prose. There is nothing in that occurrence that suggests an allusion here, and it is likely that it is used in this context for innovation and as a display of learning. 102oTcr&IJ.T]c;' 6plJ.T]-&evTEc;' ci'ITOOOUTOI. The use of OT(:X-tJ.. to denote the starting line is similar to its meaning in Pindar and Euripides. The epithet cnrooo. is previously unattested and may be an innovation by Oppian here and at 2.560, where it is used to describe a dolphin that has strayed from its pod, and later lOx by Nonnus. 103 'ITPO'ITPOTI. Tal. VOIJ.EVOI. This striking verb is an otherwise unattested strengthened fonn of rrpoTELvW. The sound effect of the reduplicated prefix strongly suggests the straining and striving of the runners. Oppian also uses a reduplication of this sort at 1.167 rrporrpOKUAl..vOOI-lEVOV, which is Homeric, appearing at 11. 22.221 and Od. 17.525, of the rolling of a fish onto the rocks. Apollonius Rhodius uses rrporrpoKaAm/1al-lEVOl.. in the same sedes as here in the Argonautica at l.386. It is possible that all of these usages inspired the poet of the Cynegetica to his rrporrpoKaAmjJal-lEVOl.. at 4.334. 103-4 eYKoveouow / e~av6oal. The use of the verb EYK. with the infinitive to mean 'to hasten (to do something), is not previously attested and may reflect later use. It is also used in this manner by Quintus of Smyrna at PH 1.157,4.549 and 7.459. 105 VCKT]c;' TE YAUKUOWPOV EAE'CV KpaToc;' It is possible that this expression is modelled on Bacchylides ILl NLKa Y AUKU6wPE, I-lEYLoTav.... The use of periphrasis with VLKT]c;' ... KpaToc;' creates novelty of expression. 105 -&6pETpa Maiil 48 notes that the use of this tenn to denote the barriers which the winners enter is innovative, and may be a reflection of the Latin tennfores. As noted above, this may be a deliberate introduction of a contemporary detail to distinguish his description from those of races in poets such as Pindar and Bacchylides. 3.6.17 Comparison of the merle-wrasse fretting over his mates with a mother fretting over her daughter about to give birth, Hal. 4.195-201 In this simile the urgent action of the merle-wrasse as it rushes to tend to its many mates is compared with a mother who frets over her daughter as she gives birth for the first time. In particular, Oppian gives strong attention to 348 ibid.

237

3. Similes

the fears of the mother that her daughter may die in childbirth. This simile tends to put the merle-wrasse in a positive light not generally seen in similes describing fish about to be caught by the exploitation of their passions, and it is possible that Oppian has included the digression concerning foreign marriage customs at 203-215 partly to redress the apparent inconsistency. Another factor, though, is an air of condescension implicit in comparing the male merle-wrasse with a frantic mother that is appropriate to a passage highlighting how polygamy of the fish is its downfall. It is also possible that this sympathetic treatment of the dangers of childbirth may have influenced the simile likening a frantic hunting dog to a girl in the first pangs oflabour at Cyn. 1.494-501. The simile proceeds as follows: The merle-wrasse is like a mother distraught for her only daughter at the birth of her first child, 195-7. First childbirth is the great dread of women, 197. The mother feels the pangs of birth in sympathy with her daughter, 198-9. She roams throughout the house, praying and groaning, 199-200. A cry from the young mother is what finally delivers her from pain, 201. A final issue is that there is no clear model for this simile in earlier epic literature beyond a brief simile in the Iliad at 11.269-71 in which the pain of Agamemnon's wound is compared to that of childbirth. The strongest impact of the simile comes from a mixture of sympathy for the plight of women in childbirth and the incongruous application of this image to a polygamous fish. Perhaps surprisingly, the language of this simile is strongly inspired by the Homeric epics, innovating on their descriptions of grief and distress and of the pangs of birth. This generally involves modifying the language of the Homeric text to reflect the different context here. The expression of this simile captures the indecisive worrying of the mother and, as a result, the merle-wrasse. As with the simile describing the indecisive behaviour of a little girl at 3.512-518 the link between the mental and physical disturbances of the worried mother is highlighted in the expression of the simile, strengthening the suggestion of similar mental distress for the fish. 195-6 eXAUEI. / IJ.t1TTlP The use of aA. is very effective in this context, as it can be used metaphorically to mean both the distraction that results from grief and that which results from frenzy, as at Od. 9.398 eppl.\jJEV aTTO EO XEpaLv aA.UWV, describing the frenzy of Polyphemus as he hurls away the stake that was in his eye. At once Oppian describes the fretting of the 238

3.6.18 Comparison of dogfish with mourning parents, Hal. 4.256-61

mother in sympathetic terms and also implies the types of passions that have been the downfall of other fish and will be for the merle-wrasse. 196 TllAUyETOI.O -B-oiJv c.MlCva -B-uyaTpoc; The epithet TT)AUy. captures the fears of the mother as it is used consistently of a favourite or only child in Homer; c£ its sole use in the feminine gender of Hermione at 11. 3.174-5 AI.1TOOOa / 1TaLOO: TE TT)AUyETT)V. The expression as a whole is a variation on 11. 11.271 {}UYaTEPEc;' 1TLKPOc;' wOLvac;' ExouoaL, describing the labour pain caused by the Eileithyiai. 197 1TPClJTOAEXOUC; Fajen349 raises concerns at this reading, noting that it is a conjecture and not otherwise attested, and prefers the variant 1Tpu.lTOAOXOU, which itself is not otherwise attested. Regardless of which reading is accepted the overall meaning here is clear, as the mother is concerned over her child's first birth. 198-9 E~AEI.-B-uLllC; / KUlJ,a 1TOVCJ.)V This attractive metaphor is suggestive of the series of labour pains that beset a woman in labour. The metaphor is quite distinct from that used by Homer at 11. 11.269-70 ~EAOc;' osu YUValKa, / Opq.1U, TO TE 1TpoL.EL01., IJ.0YOOTOKOL EO\.EL{}UWL, which likens the pangs of labour to sharp arrows. 200 EUX0IJ,EVll, O'TEvclxouO'a, IJ,ETf)Opov r}TOP ExouO'a with the series of participles in this line Oppian effectively depicts the passing of hours as the mother frets for her daughter and the strength of those concerns, echoing his acknowledgment of the dangers of first childbirth as IJ.Eya OELlJ.a yuvaLKwv at 197. 201 AUO'I.1TOVOI.O ~oflc;' The epithet AUOL1T. is only previously attested at Pindar Pyth. 4.41, fr. l31.1, Meleager AP l2.l27.7 and is used later by Paulus Silentiarius at AP 5.221.4, Cyn. 4.254 of Dionysus and 23x in Nonnus. Both the prior uses have a similar sense of being set loose from cares as is the case here, but it is used here as an answer to 1TOVCJ.)V at 199, describing the birth pains, rather than as an allusion to either of the earlier occurrences. 3.6.18 Comparison of dogfish mourning for their fellows with parents mourning for their only son who has died, Hal. 4.256-61

In this simile the dogfish, which are depicted in the technical discourse as being caught en masse when mourning for one of their companions that 349 Fajen, Noten, 355.

239

3. Similes

has been caught, are compared with parents mourning for a dead son who will not leave his grave site in their grief. With such an image for the simile Oppian recalls descriptions of mourning in earlier epic such as the mourning of Priam and Hecuba for the dead Hector in book 24 of the Iliad and engages the emotions of the reader in a very familiar aspect of human experience. The main model for this simile, however, is the brief comparison of Achilles to a mourning father at fl. 23.222-3, particularly as that simile focuses on the impact of the death of the son on both parents. The simile proceeds as follows: The fish that wish to perish along with the captured member of their school are compared with parents bringing the body of their newly slain son from their home to the tomb, 256-8. This is their only son for who they have done much in vain, 258. They tear their cheeks and wail in their grief, 259. The parents do not wish to go home, preferring to die with their son, 260-1. The sympathetic treatment given to the dogfish is not the norm for discussions of how fish are caught by the exploitation of 'love'. One explanation is that Oppian depicts the dogfish being caught by their sympathetic desire to be together, rather than by a passionate frenzy, to make a moral statement about proper and improper forms of 'Eros'. It is not possible to state confidently whether this has been done solely to engage the reader in the experiences of the dogfish or reflects Oppian's personally held beliefs. Oppian prevents this simile from becoming a mere restatement of scenes of mourning in heroic epic by the use of striking compound epithets not previously attested and by the use of language from minor scenes of mourning rather than the more dramatic centrepieces in Homer. As noted for lines 258-9, Oppian does use some effects of sound to emphasise the depth of the mourning of the parents. Otherwise, though, the expression of this simile is not strongly stylised, with the focus on the pathos of the parents being critical for the comparison with the dogfish. 256 dPTl.tpCXTOl) 'JI"a\.l)OI; The epithet apTl.,tp. is not previously attested and may be a new coining by Oppian to emphasise the opening of this simile350 • The implication of the epithet seems to be that the son was slain in war, rather than by illness or some other misadventure. 350 This epithet appears subsequently at Nonnus 5.554, and is notable for being used only once by that poet, cf. e.g. the use ofmTooouToc;, a new coining by Oppian at Hal. 4.102, lOx by Nonnus or of aUTOKUAl.OTa, an Oppianic coining at Hal. 2.604, 42x, inter alia.

240

3.6.19 Comparison of sargue with mourning mother, Hal. 4.335-42

257 TUJ.l.~OV EC;- dJ.l.cpCKAauTov The epithet cXJ.lcpLKA. is not previously attested and may be a new coining by Oppian. These two compound epithets very briefly suggest details that we might normally expect to be treated at length, namely the circumstances leading to the burial of the son and the mourning at his death, allowing Oppian to focus on the part of the description most important for his simile, the behaviour of the parents at the grave site. In a sense these epithets operate as code for the famous death and mourning scenes, such as the death of Hector at Iliad Book 22 and the mourning of his female relatives at Iliad Book 24, and the lament of the female members of the family for his fate. 258 TTlAUYETOU This epithet is also used at 196 to describe the daughter a mother frets over while she gives birth for the first time. Fajen351 notes that there is a variant reading TTlAUYETOV, acc. agreeing with TUJ.lf30v, but rightly prefers the gen. -ou with 'ITaL,ooc;-, in spite of the striking separation, because this epithet is otherwise always used to refer to a person, as is the case at 196. In particular it is possible that in using this epithet Oppian is influenced by the description of the mourning of Phainops for his sons at 11. 5.l53ff. ClJ.lCPW TTlAUYETW, 6 6' ETELPETO yf]poi:. AUYPCP, uLov 6' 06 TEKET'

ClAAOV .... 258-9 'ITEPl.J.l.OX-&"owol./ .. . 1TEPl.KWKUOVTEc;-1 These compound verbs are not previously attested and may be new coinings, with the prefix 'ITEPl.giving intensive force to the description of the mourning and wailing, as well as creating a striking effect by ending the successive lines with unusual and similar sounding verbs and by the repetition of the heavy spondaic rhythm. 'ITEpl.KWK. appears 6x subseuqently in Quintus Smyrnaeus. 261 OU01TEV-&El. VEKPc$ The use of the epithet 6u011". to describe the dead body carries a double meaning, emphasising the lamentation of the parents over the body and foreshadowing the grief that is to come for the dogfish that are easily caught while mourning for their companion.

3.6.19 Comparison of the sargue mourning for the departed goat with a mother mourning for her son going to sea, Hal. 4.335-342 In this simile the sargues mourning the departure of the goats returning to their steading are compared with a mother mourning for her son who has 351 op. cit. 358-9.

241

3. Similes

gone to sea, or a wife mourning for her husband. The unspoken comparison would appear to be of the goats with Odysseus, the sargues corresponding to Penelope or Anticleia. In particular, the description of the long period for which the sailor is at sea and the distances he will travel is a likely allusion to the exploits of Odysseus. The strength of the emotions shown by the woman as she walks down to the sea and calls for her son to come back is incongruous when compared with the bizarre behaviour of the sargues, giving a mock heroic air as the intensity of the emotions of the fish far outweigh the gravity of their circumstances. There is also a similarity with the elaborate description of the departure of the Argonauts at A.R. 1.234-306. In particular, note the simile comparing the mourning of Alcimede with the tears of a girl who weeps in the arms of her maid when a friend departs and leaves her to the less than tender attentions of her stepmother at 269-78. Oppian emphasises this allusion by making the main narrative in that instance the object of comparison in this simile. The simile proceeds as follows: The fish are like a mother mourning for her son or a wife mourning for her husband as he journeys far away to a foreign land, 335-7. A great distance and a long period of time lie between the sailor and his return home, 338-9. The woman stands on the shore of the sea and calls on the man to hurry and return soon, 339-41. As she walks unwillingly back to the house she cannot take her eyes off the sea 341-2. While the language of this passage is suggestive of the models that influence its theme, there is only little genuinely striking vocabulary. This style keeps the reader's attention on the use of a striking and popular theme from heroic epic in an unusual context. The expression is relatively straightforward, with only a few effects of rhythm or sound as noted below. 335-6 TTJAUYETOV ... y6vov ... TTJAEx-&ova ... t:6vTa The near rhyme of these expressions in successive lines and the repetition of TTJA- emphasises the connection between the mother's grief and the fear of the unknown in foreign lands. 335 TTJAUYETOV ... y6vov Compare the use of the epithet TTJAUY. and its use to describe the pregnant daughter over whom her mother frets at 4.196 and of the dead son for whom parents mourn at 4.258. The former instance carries a mocking tone similar to that here as, although it describes the plight of the mother and daughter with genuine sympathy, the merle242

3.6.20 Comparison of male sargue to shepherds, Hal. 4.393-8

wrasse when compared with the mother is, like the sargue, less worthy of sympathy. The use in the comparison of the dogfish to mourning parents elicits genuine pathos from the reader. 336 TTJAEx-&ova ya'Cav The epithet TTjAEX-B-. is not otherwise attested and may be a new coining to emphasise by tautologous expression the great distances which the sailor will travel and the implied dangers therein; cf. the description of the dangers faced by fishermen on the sea at 1.9-12. 337 v6oe;' 6E oL EVoov aAUEl. The use of eXA. to describe the distress of the woman standing by the sea-shore may recall its use in describing Achilles wandering the sea-shore in distress at 11. 24.12 OlNEUECJK' eXAuwv lTapa -B-'Cv' aAOc;'. 340 U1T1l0ETO KaYKaAOWoa. 235 ai:ol.ov eXyyeALTlv It is possible that this is a deliberate likening of the messenger to Hermes, who is described by Priam at fl. 24.375-6 as Qt;' 378 West, Hesiod: Theogony, 227.

299

3. Similes

1-10L TOLOVO' ~KEV 600L'!TOpov .. . ,1 aCoLOv, particularly as this is the only

occurrence of this epithet in Homer. 3.8.9 Comparison of bears to young cattle licking each other, Cyn. 3.163-7 This simile, which is part of an extended description of the reproductive habits of bears, emphasising how unnatural they seem compared to other animals, compares the bear licking her new-born cubs to give them shape to how cattle lick each other in a gesture of bonding. Mai2 79 notes that the phenomenon of bears licking their young is mentioned by a range of prose authors, but most interestingly it is mentioned at Ov. Met. 15.379-81 suggesting that the poet was possibly aware of that description. The simile is arranged as follows: The bear licks her offspring as calves are known to lick each other, 163-5. The cattle lick each other until they have had their fill of pleasure, 165-6. The herdsman is glad to watch the cows enjoying themselves, 167. Only lines 163-5 are germane to the comparison of cattle and bears, while the remaining lines convey a brief narrative of an event of everyday life to create a striking image, with the emphasis on persistence at 166 relevant too as is the case in the previous two similes. The poet has used a few unusual compound terms in this simile, but otherwise the language is neither distinctive nor allusive of a model in earlier epic. The poet of the Cynegetica has made use of striking patteming in this simile to suggest the physical process here and in the technical discourse. 163-4 IALXI-10TaL yAWOOTJ ... IALXI-1WVTaL yAWOOTJOLV... The comparison of the bear and its offspring is strongly emphasised by the striking double anaphora of these lines, and is further emphasised by the mutual action implied by the closing of 164 by eXI--lOL~OOCS', eXMTJAOLOL. 165 KaUCKEpwS' This rare epithet previously appears only at AP 9.603.4 in an epigram of Antipater, and with the ending in -OS' by Bacchylides at 18.24 and at Pindar fr. l69a.50 [Sn.-M.]. It is possible that the poet has borrowed the term from one of these uses as a display of learning, with an innovative adaptation to describe cattle here.

379 Mair, 126 footnote.

300

3.8.9 Comparison of bears to calves licking each other, Cyn. 3.163-7

167 -&UlJ,ov ... ouvl.aLvouol. vOlJ,flo!;, This description of the herdsman, which uses the previously unattested compound verb OUVl-. may be an innovation, influenced by the description of the shepherd gladdened by the sight of the stars at n. 8.559 and, more importantly, by the description of the goatherds cheered by the sight of the goats and the sea-bream being friendly with each other at Hal. 4.329 v60e;' 0' EyEAOOOE ~OTT]pWV. If the latter has been influential the new compound may be part of an effort to use innovative expression, while still maintaining the theme of the description by Oppian. The simple verb is a common one in Homer, c£ e.g. 11.24.119 owpa 0' 'AXl-AAfjl- CPEPEIJ,EV, TO: KE '5-q.lOV i.T]vn/.

301

4. Conclusion

The following observations can be made in summary of the individual analyses of this book. While there are several notable similarities in the approaches of Oppian and the poet of the Cynegetica to the generic standards of Greco-Roman epic, a number of significant differences become apparent on close examination. In respect of the digressions in the two works, both poets make frequent use of themes from earlier epic in striking and innovative ways, but Oppian is more influenced by philosophical and religious themes from didactic and heroic epic, such as the spheres of influence of the gods and the different 'spheres' of the world, i.e. the land, the sea and the sky, whereas themes in the Cynegetica more strongly reflect the influence of the aetiological digressions popular in Hellenistic epic and in the Metamorphoses of Ovid, as well as images of bucolic life. These influences are also reflected in the language used by both poets, although they both draw on a wide range of unusual sources and apparently coin new terms for striking effect. These differences in theme can, to a certain extent, be seen as reflecting the interests of the emperor Marcus Aurelius, in the case of the Halieutica, to whom it is dedicated on numerous occasions, and to the rural nature of its topic material, in the case of the Cynegetica. The use of developed similes, which appear far more frequently in the Halieutica, is an important difference between these works. This is such a striking feature of the Halieutica that the poet of the Cynegetica may have avoided their extended use so as not to appear too closely imitative of Oppian's style. In particular, the similes of the Halieutica feature much greater use of anthropomorphic themes, many of which are influenced by earlier literature. While there are some anthropomorphic similes in the Cynegetica, these have themes that are apparently more innovative and are almost exclusively focussed on aspects of country life. As has been discussed in the Introduction, the use of these similes in the Halieutica may reflect a desire to affect a philosophical style of composition, whereas the rural focus in the Cynegetica is more simply suggestive of the focus of the work as a whole on a pursuit germain to contemporary country life, lacking as thye do many of the features of the bucolic verse of poets such 302

4. Conclusion

as Theocritus. Again, the language of all the developed similes both reflects the influence of their thematic models and shows an innovative use of vocabulary from other literature within and outside the epic genre. In both works rare and apparently newly coined vocabulary is used to create striking effects of sound that often evoke the actions described in the similes and the technical discourse and can be regarded as the outcome of contemporary rhetorical practices and the flourishing of this practice among the Hellenistic poets. The difficult issue of possible direct influence by Roman poets has been examined on several occasions. While some striking parallels in content are noted above, particularly with the Georgics of Virgil, it is likely that these similarities stem from common models in Hellenistic literature which are no longer extant. However, even if there are prior models for all of the aspects that these works share in common with Roman epic poetry, the fact that it is these descriptions in particular that have been used suggests the strong possibility that both poets were at least aware of the broader features of the Roman works, if they had not read them closely. While there is scope for closer examination of this aspect of the two works, in the absence of documentary evidence to show that the Greek authors of this period were familiar with at least some aspects of Roman verse, any argument could only be conducted on the basis of a 'balance of probabilities' . Lastly, it can be seen that in the ornamental modes of expression discussed in this book the poets have responded in different ways to the developments in rhetoric of the second century AD. The poet of the Cynegetica makes much greater use of repetitive figures than does Oppian, although they are also a distinctive aspect ofOppian's style. The similes of the Halieutica, on the other hand, show much greater use of moralising and, on occasion, sententiae. These features of tone are much less apparent in the Cynegetica, and where they are used they are generally indicative of influence on theme, as well as style, by the Halieutica. Again, the poet of the Cynegetica seems to have avoided following Oppian's lead in creating a tone and mood suggestive of philosophical enquiry by eschewing the implication that philosophical and moral principles underlie the interaction between man and animal. This book is intended to provide a fundamental examination of those parts of the Halieutica and Cynegetica which have the closest thematic relationship with earlier Greco-Roman epic with a primary focus on 303

4. Conclusion

influences from epic. As noted in the Introduction, there has been only limited modem examination of the literary influences on the Halieutica and the Cynegetica. Until recently, the most significant of these, those of W. Schmitt and Rudolf Keydell and, most recently, of Rebuffat, have focussed most strongly on the influence on these works from technical prose. There is, however, scope for further examination of the influences of earlier epic on the technical discourse of these poems and of the influence of epigrammatic poetry on both the language and themes used by both poets. A comparative study of the influence of epigrams such as those of the Palatine Anthology, inter alia, and the extent to which the Halieutica and the Cynegetica have influenced later epigrammatic poets could be particularly worthwhile given the large number of apparent influences by those works on the vocabulary of both works. A starting point for such a study could be those epigrams addressing the inventors of hunting, fishing and fowling and Pan as their teacher at AP 6.11-16 and 6.179-187 discussed at Hal. 1.1-79n, a genre which both predates and postdates the composition of the Halieutica and Cynegetica. In respect of possible influences from Roman literature, a more complete study of possible influences that included an examination of the technical discourse of both works would be profitable. Any such study should pay particular attention to the potential influence from the fragmentary Halieutica of Ovid380 noted by Keydell381 , as well as prose works in Latin such as the DiscipUnae and De Re Rustica of Varro and the developments in rhetoric discussed in the works of Cicero that appear to have still been influential when these works were composed. Any definitive conculsions on this topic would, however, need the support from evidence that the works of Roman poets were promulgated and read to any significant degree in the Near East. The dominance of Greek as a literary language need not presuppose any familiarity with Latin as a literary language. Indeed, Fisher notes that Plutarch explicitly mentions his command of the Latin language at Demosthenes 2, while Pliny notes the demand for a 380 The influence of the Halieutica of Ovid may at first glance appear to be a notable oversight in this work. However, the extant remains of that work focus almost entirely on technical discourse and do not, therefore, appear to a viable model for the digressions and similes discussed here. The popularity of stories of transformation in the Cynegetica may appear to be an important point of similarity with Ovid. However, while some episodes in both works do also appear in the Metamorphoses of Ovid, these are few and other potential sources exist in earlier Greek literature. 381 Keydell, "Oppians Gedicht von der Fischerei und Ae1ians Tiergeschichte", 4l9ff.

304

4. Conclusion

translation from Latin to Greek at Pliny Epist. 7.4. Also intriguing is the existence of a translation of Virgil's fourth Eclogue into Greek from the fourth century A.D382. This last would appear to presuppose the existence of Greek poets who were familiar with Latin verse in the century following the composition of the Cynegetica. Sadly, however, it is administrative documents that continue to fonn the bulk of the documentary evidence from this region. It has not been the intention of this work to examine exhaustively the use of rhetorical styling in the Halieutica and the Cynegetica. As these are among the first significant extant didactic epics written after the flourishing of declamatory rhetoric earlier in the 2nd century AD, a close examination of their style would provide interesting comparison with similar developments in the later Latin epic poets and with the style of the Hellenistic hexameter poets that preceded them. In the case of the Halieutica the work of Rebuffat has provided a useful catalogue on which this comparison could be based. Also possibly illuminating would be a stylistic comparison with the one other extant Greek didactic epic of the 2nd century AD, the Periegesis of Dionysius (ed. K. Brodersen, Hildesheim 1994), which dates (certainly) from the reign of Hadrian. Another potentially worthwhile study would be to compare the use of moralising in book 4 of the Halieutica with that observed in Lucan383 , which could highlight the strikngly different relationships that the poets apparently had with the imperial administration. Similarly, although there have been a few cases where figures of repetition used allusively are noted in this work, a more thorough study of these fonns, such as that of those in Latin epic by J. Wills 384 could be made. Although the main focus of this book has been on the influences from within Greco-Roman epic, other influences have been noted, although by no means exhaustively. In particular, the influences of Greek drama on the Halieutica and Cynegetica would make a profitable study, particularly in respect of the Cynegetica, which shows a greater influence even in the material examined here. Several uses oflanguage and themes suggestive of influences from contemporary use on the poets have been noted above, and this too could be a profitable area of study, possibly in comparison 382 Fisher 175-7. 383 MacL. Currie xLff. 384 Wills, esp. 387 ff.

305

4. Conclusion

with the works of Greek prose authors associated with the Second Sophistic, particularly Lucian, the various Philostratuses and Plutarch. It is, perhaps, worth noting in conclusion that the authors of these poems seem to have come from a similar social milieu and that in the approximately thirty to forty years between the composition of the Halieutica and the Cynegetica there are unlikely to have been dramatic developments in the genre of Greek epic as a whole and in didactic epic in particular. The differences in the approaches of the two poets give, therefore, a clear example of the impact of a poet's own background and preferences on the approach to generic standards, as opposed to the broad external influences stemming from developments in the 900 years between the composition of the Theogony and Works and Days and that of the Halieutica. These differences are suggestive of a difference in religious and/or social background, as in the apparent Stoicism of Oppian compared with the more traditional approach to religion seen in the Cynegetica, or of different responses to their social background, such as the apparent fascination of Oppian with medical practice compared with the preference of the poet of the Cynegetica for scenes of rural life. It is impossible, however, to state categorically to what extent these reflect the personal characters of the poets, as there would have been a natural desire on the part of Oppian to present himself as something different from the epic poets that preceded him, and likewise for the poet of the Cynegetica, who would also need to distinguish himself from his apparently very popular predecessor, as suggested by apparent influences from the Halieutica on Quintus of Smyrna385 and the Bessarica of Dionysius Epicus386 . 385 James and Lee, A Commentary on Quintus ofSmyma Posthomerica V, 24 and Vian, "Les Comparaisons de Quintus de Smyrne", 50-1 both note the following influences on the PH from the Halieutica: PH 7.569-75 - Hal. 4.640-6 (fish are captured when lured to the surfac by light), PH 9.172-7 - Hal. 3.567-75 (the swordfish is captured in a large net and brought ashore), PH 11.62-5 - Hal. 4.637 (the fate for all fish is the same, i.e. capture). James and Lee, op. cit., 1-9 establish a date of composition for the PH from mid to late third century. Further evidence of the influnce from the Halieutica can be seen in the range of compound terms first seen in the Hal. that are apparently adopted in the PH, as noted in this work. As the Cynegetica was apparently composed in the early to mid second century it is not unreasonable to think that the Halieutica was already well known by the time of the latter work's composition. 386 Both Livrea, 12-14 and Heitsch, 66 note influences from the Halieutica and, more rarely, from the Cynegetica in the fragments of the Bassarica, which is commonly dated to late in the third or early in the fourth century A.D. The influences noted by both authors come exclusively from the technical discourse of these works, but due to very fragmentary of the works of Dionysius Epicus it is impossible to speculate further on his reception of the Halieutica and Cynegetica.

306

Bibliography Ehlers, Widu-Wolfgang, ed., Valerius Flaccus, Argonauticon, B.G. Teubner, Stuttgart, 1980. Engelliofer, C. M., "Gotter und Mythen bei Oppianos von Apameia", Grazer Beitriige, 21, Horn 1995, 157-73. Fajen, Fritz, Noten zur handschriftlichen Uberlieferung der Halieutika des Oppian, Franz Steiner Verlag, Stuttgart, 1995. Fajen, Fritz, ed., Oppian, Halieutica : Der Fischfang, B.G. Teubner, Stuttgart, 1999. Farrell, Joseph, Vergil's Georgics and the Traditions of Ancient Epic, Oxford University Press, Oxford 1991. Feeney, D.C., The Gods in Epic, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1991. Fisher, Elizabeth, "Greek Translations of Latin Literature in the Fourth Century AD." in Yale Classical Studies, 24, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1982, 173-216. Forbes Irving, F.M.C., Metamorphosis in Greek Myths, Clarendon Press, Oxford 1990. Friinkel, Hennann, ed., Apollonius Rhodius, Argonautica, Oxford Classical Texts, Oxford, 1961. Friinkel, Hermann, Dichtung und Philosophie des frilhen Griechentums, C.H. Beck'sche Verlagsbuchandlung, Miinchen 1958. Geymonat, M., Scholia in Nicandri Alexipharmaca, Inst. Editoriale Cisalpino - La Goliardica, Milan, 1974. Giangrande, Giuseppe, "On the Text of ps.-Oppian, Cynegetica", Greek Roman and Byzantine Studies, 13, no.4, Durham 1972, 489-496. Gow, AS. F. & Scholfield, A F. ed., Nicander, The Poems and Poetical Fragments, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1953. Gow, AS.F., "On the Halieutica of Oppian", The Classical Quarterly, 21, Oxford 1971, 60-8. Gow, AS.F., Theocritus, 2 vols., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1950. Gow, AS.F., ed., Theocritus, Bucolici Graeci, Oxford Classical Texts, Oxford, 1952. Grant, M., The Climax of Rome, Weidenfeld, London, 1968. Hard, Robin, tr., Apollodorus, The Library of Greek Mythology, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1997. Heitsch, Ernst, ed., Die griechischen Dichterfragmente der romischen Kaiserzeit, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Gottingen, 1961. Hinds, S., Allusion and Intertext: Dynamics of Appropriation in Roman Poetry, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1998. Hollis, AS. "The Ars Amatoria and Remedia Amoris", in Ovid , ed. lW. Binns, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London, 1973, 84-115. Hollis, AS., ed., Callimachus, Hecale, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1990. Hollis, AS, "[OPPIAN), CYN. 2, 100-158 and the mythical past of Apamea-on-theOrontes", Zeitschrift for Papyrologie und Epigraphik, 102, Koln 1994, 153-66. Hollis, AS., ed., Ovid, Ars Amatoria I, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1977. Hollis, AS., ed., Ovid, Metamorphoses Book VIII, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1970. Hunter, R.L., ed., Apollonius Rhodius, Argonautica Ill, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1989. Hopkinson, Neil, A Hellenistic Anthology, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1988.

308

Bibliography Hopkinson, Neil, Greek Poetry of the Imperial Period : An Anthology, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1994. James, AW., Studies in the language of Oppian of Cilicia, Ado1f M. Hakkert, Amsterdam, 1970. James, AW., Index in Halieutica Oppiani Cilicis et in Cynegetica Poetae Apameensis, Georg Olms Verlag, Hildesheim, 1970. James, AW. and Lee, K.H., A Commentary on Quintus of Smyma, Posthomerica V, E.J. Brill, Leiden, 2000. James, AW., "'The Honey on the Cup' in Oppian and others", Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society, 192, Cambridge 1966 , 442-9. James AW., The Zeus Hymns of Cleanthes and Aratus, Antichthon, 6, Sydney 1972, 28-38 Kenney, E.J., ed., Lucretius, De Rerum Natura Ill, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1971. Kenney, E.J., "The typology of didactic", The Classical Review, 29, Oxford 1979, 71-3. Kern, 0., Orphicorum Fragmenta, Weidmann, Berlin, 1922. Keydell, Rudolf, "Oppianos", RE 18.1 1942, 698-708. Keydell, Rudolf, "Oppians Gedicht von der Fischerei und Aelians Tiergeschichte", Hermes, 72, Berlin 1937, 480-510. Kidd, Douglas, ed., Aratus, Phaenomena, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1997. Kidd, D.A, "The pattern of Phaenomena 367-385", Antichthon, 1, Sydney 1967. Kirk, G.S., The Iliad: A Commentary, vols. 1 and 2, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1985, 1990. Kirk, G.S., The Nature of Greek Myths, Pelican Books, London, 1974. Knoefel P. K. and Covi M. C., A Hellenistic Treatise on Poisonous Animals (The "Theriaca" of Nicander of Colophon), The Edwin Mellen Press, Lewiston, 1991. Krentz, Peter, Xenophon: Hellenika 1-11 3.10, Arris and Phillips, Warminster, 1990. Latham. R. E., tr., Lucretius, On the Nature of the Universe, Penguin, London, 1951. Leaf, W. and Bayfield, M.A, ed., Homer, Iliad: Books I-XII, Macmillan, London 1895 (reprinted 1959). Leverenz, Lynn, "Four Manuscripts of Unattached Scholia on Oppian's Halieutica by Andreas Darmarios", Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies, 36, Durham 1995, 101-14. Livrea, Enrico, ed., Dionysii Bassaricon et Gigantiadis Fragmenta, Ediz. dell' Ateneo, Rome, 1973. Lloyd-Jones, H. and Parsons, P., ed.'s, Supplementum Hellenisticum, Walter De Gruyter, Berlin, 1983. Lloyd-Jones, Hugh, "The Pride of Halicarnassus", Zeitschrift for Papyrologie und Epigraphik, 1 24, Koln 1999, 3-14. Lyne, R. O. A M., Further Voices in Virgi/'s Aeneid, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1987. Lyne, R. O. A M., Words and the Poet, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1989. Lynn-George, Michael, Epos : Word, Narrative and the Iliad, Macmillan, Basingstoke, 1988. MacL. Currie, H., Silver Latin Epic, Bristol Classical Press, Bristol 1985.

309

Bibliography Mair, AW & G.R., ed., Callimachus Hymns and Epigrams, Lycophron, Aratus, Harvard University Press, London, 1921. Mair, A W., ed., Oppian, Colluthus, Tryphiodorus, Harvard University Press, London, 1928. Maza1, Otto, "Eine neue Rezension der Biographie Oppians'" Wiener Studien, 80, Vienna 1967, 115-24. McCall, M.H., Ancient Rhetorical Theories of Simile and Comparison, Harvard University Press, Cambridge Mass., 1969. Melville, AD., tr., Ovid, The Love Poems, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1990. Millar, Fergus, The Roman Near East: 31 BC - AD 337, Harvard University Press, Cambridge Mass., 1993. Miller F. J., ed., Ovid, Metamorphoses, 2 vols., William Heinemann, London, 1916. Morgan, J.R., "Two Giraffes Emended", Classical Quarterly, n.s. 38, Oxford 1988. 267-9. Mozley, J. H., tr., Ovid, The Art of Love and Other Poems, William Heinemann Ltd, London, 1957. Mozley, J.H., ed., Valerius Flaccus, Argonautica, Harvard University Press, Cambridge Mass., 1958. Mynors, R.AB., ed., Virgil, Georgics, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1990. Nesselrath, H.G, Ungeschehenes Geschehen - Beinahe-Episoden in Griecischen und Romischen Epos, B.G. Teubner, Stuttgart, 1992. Nilsson, Martin, Griechische Feste von religioser Bedeutung, B.G. Teubner, Leipzig 1906. Norden, Eduard, Die antike Kunstprosa vom VLJahrhundert v. Chr. bis in die Zeit der Renaissance, B.G. Teubner, Stuttgart, 1915 (reprinted 1958) 2v. Page, D.L., Poetae Melici Graeci, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1962. Pohlman, E, "Charakteristika des romischen Lehrgedichts", Aufstieg und Niedergang derRomischen Welt, 1, Berlin 1973, 813-901. Powell, J.U., ed., Collectanea Alexandrina, Clarendon Press, Oxford 1925, reprint Ares Publishers, Chicago, 1999. Price, S.R.F., Rituals and Power - The Roman Imperial Cult in Asia Minor, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1984. Quinn, Kenneth, Texts and Contexts, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London 1979. Quinn, Kenneth, Latin Explorations: Critical Studies in Roman Literature, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London, 1963. Rebuffat, Enrico, TTOIHTHL ETTEQN Tecniche di composizione poetica negli Halieutica di Oppiano, Leo S. Olschki Editore, Firenze, 2001. Roberts, Michael, The Jeweled Style: Poetry and Poetics in Late Antiquity, Comell University Press, Ithaca, 1989. Sale, W., "The popularity of Aratus", The Classical Journal, 61, Kansas 1966, 160-4. Schiesaro, Alessandro, "The Palingenesis of De Rerum Natura", Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society, 200, Cambridge 1994, 81-107. Schmitt, W., Kommentar zum ersten Buch von Pseudo-Oppians Kynegetika, PhD. thesis, WesWilische Wilhelms Universitiit zu Miinster, 1969. Sharrock, Alison, Seduction and Repetition in Ovid's Ars Amatoria 2, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1994. 310

Bibliography Sherk, Robert K., Translated Documents of Greece and Rome vo!. 6 - The Roman Empire: Augustus to Hadrian, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1988. Snell, B., ed., Maehler, H., rev., Pindari Carmina cum Fragmentis, pt. 1: Epinicia, B.G. Teubner, Leipzig 1975, pt. 2: Fragmenta, Indices, Lepizig, 1987. Stanford, W. B., ed., Homer, Odyssey, 2 vols., Macmillan, London, 1958 (reprinted 1996). Thomas, Richard F., Reading Virgil and His Texts - Studies in Intertextuality, University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, 1999. Thompson, D.W., A Glossary of Greek Fishes, London, 1947. Thompson, W.E., "The Turin Manuscript of Oppian's Halieutica", The Classical Quarterly, 21, Oxford 1971, 509-13. Toohey, P.G., Reading Epic, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London 1993. Toohey, P. G., Epic Lessons, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London 1996. Toohey, P.G., "An [Hesiodic] danse macabre: The Shield of Heracles", Illinois Classical Studies, XIII.l, Illinois 1967. Van Nijf Onno, "Athletics, Festivals and Greek Identity in the Roman Period", Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society, 45, Cambridge 1999, 176200. Vian, Francis, Les Argonautiques Orphiques, Societe d'Edition Les Belles Lettres, Paris, 1987. Vian, F., "Les Comparaisons de Quintus de Smyrne", Revue de Philologie, 27, Paris 1954, 30-51. Wardman, Alan, Plutarch's Lives, Paul Elek, London, 1974. West, M. L., Greek Metre, Clarendon Press, Oxford 1982. West, M.L., ed., Hesiod, Works and Days, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1978. West, M.L., ed., Hesiod, Theogony, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1966. West, M.L., ed., Homer, Ilias,2 vols., K.G. Saur Verlag, Stuttgart and Leipzig, 1998 and 2000. West, M.L., "On Nicander, Oppian and Quintus of Smyma", CQ, 13 no.1, Oxford, 1963, 57-63. West, M.L., The Orphic Poems, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1983. White, Heather, Studies in Late Greek Epic Poetry, J. C. Gieben, Amsterdam, 1987. Wifstrand, A, Von Kallimachos zu Nonnos : metrisch-stilistische Untersuchungen zur spiiteren griechischen Epik und zu verwandten Gedichtgattungen, Gleerup, Lund, 1933. Willcock M.M., ed., Homer, Iliad: Books XIII-XXIV, St Martin's Press, London, 1984. Wills, Jeffrey, Repetition in Latin Poetry, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1996. Winkler, John J., "Akko", The Classical Quarterly, 77, Oxford 1982, 137-8. Woodman, T and Powell, J, Author and Audience in Latin Literature, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1992. Wright, M.R., ed., Empedocles, The Extant Fragments, 2nd ed., Bristol Classical Press, London, 1995. Wright, M.R., The Presocratics, Bristol Classical Press, London, 1985.

311

Index of Names and Subjects

chiasmus 16, 32 Cilicia 3, 5, 21, 48, 158, 160, 161,279, 280 Circe 93, 101, 155, 156, 169, 299 Cleanthes 13 Clitor 27, 99, 100 Cocytus 78 comfort, fishing 100 comfort, hunting 35, 37, 97 comfort fowling 37, 97 Commodus 3, 30, 43, 164 cosmology 3, 50, 53, 58, 61, 62 Corycus 14, 161, 162 cow 63, 66 creation myths 80, 82 Cronus 42, 82, 126, 127 Curetes 21, 125, 126, 129, 130, 132, 146, 148 cutt1e-fish 57, 59 Cybe1e 128, 129 cyclops 71, 107, 192 Cypria 195 Damis 27, 99, 100 danger, fishing 28, 34, 36, 40, 48, 81, 83, 84, 85,97, 99, 100, 167, 168, 170 danger, hunting 108 Daphnis 95 dating: Halieutica 5 dating: Cynegetica 4 Deidamia 195 Demeter 18, 24, 71, 72, 73, 77, 78, 178 Demophoon 247 Deo 69, 278 digressions, narrative 12 digressions, temporal 10 Diomedes 53, 183, 199,299 Dionysius Periegeta 14 Dionysus 13, 19,24,42, 93, 120, 121, 128, 130, 132, 133, 135, 136. 139, 142, 145, 146, 176, 180, 239 dolphin 16,17,18,24,29,62,64,68, 87, 88, 89, 90, 92, 93, 94, 118, 132, 151, 152, 155, 187, 191,221,231, 270,272,273,284 314

doves 18, 103, 115, 116, 118, 124, 148 Dryads 141 Echidna 296 elaboration 58 elements 59, 60, 61 empire 48 encomiastic praise 12,20,21,22,39, 41,42,43,44,47,48,75,172,202, 205 Enipeus 288 Enyo 72 Ephialtes 72 Eris 142 Eros 18,22,23,26,34,46,48,49,50, 51,52,53,54,55,56,86,95,163, 164, 165, 199,221, 235, 240, 244, 260 Euctenius 14 Europa 55, 262 Eurystheus 186, 189 excursus: 10 expression, hymnic 54 fisherman, imperial 40, 41 fowling 28, 32, 35, 83, 97, 101,215, 216, 217 Galatea 54, 91, 140, 190 Ganges 286, 287, 288 geographical descriptions 47, 50, 52, 59,60,75,80,178,187,191,193, 204, 279, 286, 287, 302 Geryon 20, 187, 188, 194 Hades 81, 262 hapax 1egomena 35 hawk 67 Hecate 11, 183 Hector 50, 110, 135, 142, 198,218, 219,241,246,247,259,298 Hecuba 164, 240 Helen 76,93 Helios 174 Hellenistic verse 15, 19,29,50, 56, 58, 68,75,76,78,79,85,88,95,100, 102, 130, 144, 147, 149, 160, 161, 162, 173, 17~ 177, 18~ 183, 185,

Index of Names and Subjects

186,196,212,214,246,261,268, 302 Hephaestus 73, 135, 234 Hera 33, 52, 127, 189, 249, 260 Heracles 1,5, 18,21, 88, 148, 153, 159, 161, 183, 186, 191, 192, 194, 195, 197, 235, 259, 286 Hermes 21, 22, 45, 72, 137, 159, 160, 161, 162, 179, 252, 299 Hermione 239 Hippo1ytus 185 homage 56, 57, 59, 152, 155, 196, 266 horses 70,104,107,108,110,111,112, 113, 114, 116, 118, 133, 148, 193, 297 hubris 51 hunting 1, 27, 32, 97, 98, 179 Hyacinthus 120 Hylas 235 Idomeneus 65 India 84, 286, 287 intertextuality 1, 2 Ixeutica 14, 27, 292 Jason 128, 190, 299 Jocasta 115 Julia Domna 41, 171, 174 Justice 17,22,23,41,43,44,45,47 Laconian children 17 lammergeier 67 Latin verse 8, 12, 16,25, 139,214,303, 305 leopards 18,24, 102, 147, 148,210, 214,258,260,261,263,267,289, 290,291 Lethe 52 Leto 180 lion 18, 20, 21, 51, 53, 62, 64, 65, 67, 84, 86, 88, 101, 102, 107, 108, 119, 128, 148, 184, 190, 201, 258, 259, 271,276,286,287,289,296 love 62, 63, 64, 65, 166 lyric 34 manuscripts 2, 5 Marcus Aurelius 3,7,22,27,28,30, 43,44,47,59,164,202,302

marriage customs 165, 238 Medea 37,51,71, 146, 190,243,249, 256 Meleager 185 Meliboea 187, 190, 193 Memnon 195 men, race 46 Menelaus 96, 255, 269 Menthe 18,24,77,78,79 Meriones 108 metre 38 Minos 200 moralising 23, 215, 217, 220, 228, 232, 240, 248, 251, 267, 275, 291, 293, 303 Muse 28, 43, 69 Myrrha 76, 77, 78, 79 Nausicaa 258 Neoptolemus 158 Nemesis 44 Nereus 103, 150 Nestor 152, 198, 258, 299 nightingale 67 Nile 286 nymphs 103 Oceanid 29 Oceanus 74 octopus 5, 19,24,26, 38, 55, 56, 57, 58, 63,159,264 Odysseus 29, 31,32, 36, 37, 46, 65, 66, 71, 8~ 8~9~ 101, 155, 15~ 15~ 158, 169, 183, 185, 192, 194,205, 216,222,227,228,233,234,242, 245,252,258,259,268,270,278, 281,283,292,293,296,299 Oedipus 115 onomatopoeia 192, 193,217 Orion: 185 Orontes 5, 16, 18,20,22, 186, 187, 190, 194,286 Orpheus 128, 268 Otus72 Ouranos 48, 80, 124 Pallas 69

315

Index of Names and Subjects

Pan 5, 14, 18,27,99, 128, 158, 159, 161, 162, 163, 187 Pandora 213 Paris 53, 76, 218, 219 Parthians 176, 177 patience, hunters 36 Patroclus 46, 65, 93,101,107,110, 111,133,138,151,223,227,246, 247, 255, 256 Pene10pe 82, 151, 174, 228, 229, 242, 261 Pentheus 129, 130, 131, 142, 143, 145, 146 Persephone 71, 77, 136, 147, 178, 262 Perses 154 Perseus 179, 181, 182 Phaeacians 26, 36, 37, 86, 90 Phaethon 174,196,197,198,199,200 Phemius 63 philosophy 13,20,23,60,61,62,64, 69 Phineus 18, 24, 76, 125, 126, 130, 132, 147, 148, 196, 197, 198, 199,200, 201 Phoebus 199, 253 Phorkys 103 Pigres 27, 99, 100 pleasure, fishing 39, 164 Po1ydeuces 120, 179, 181, 182, 184 polygamy 18, 23, 165, 166,238 Po1yphemus 54, 90, 91, 140, 151, 190, 238,243, 244, 245, 277 popularity 4 Poseidon 17, 18, 22, 24, 27, 28, 39, 41, 42,56, 89,90,95,96, 103, 149, 151, 155, 168, 178, 187 prayer 42, 151, 159, 167,202,203 Priam 84, 120, 142, 144, 195,214,240, 252,299 Prometheus 79, 81, 82, 157 Proteus 245 Ptolemy Soter 12, 43,141,171,203 recusatio 172, 177, 200 religion 1, 17, 20, 23, 69, 95

316

repetition 31,37,38,62,63,70,92,93, 95,96, 103, 112, 134, 135, 145, 146, 148,154,161,162,166,179,183, 187,192,203,212,226,228,231, 232, 249, 256, 272, 303 Rhea 126, 127, 128, 129, 150 rhetoric 2,5, 14,25,51,56,63, 112, 135, 144, 152, 173, 193, 196, 232, 250, 305 rhyme 30, 31, 32, 34, 35, 39, 47, 63, 96, 100, 103, 109, 114, 125, 134, 141, 145,146,164,166,182,187,192, 193,200,201,202,203,205,206, 2l2,21~ 215, 218,225,22~22~ 242, 247, 253, 272, 277, 278, 283, 285,299 ring composition 36,163,170,187, 196,200, 219, 228 Romans 44, 46, 47, 48, 166, 188,226 Sarpedon 192, 218 Scamander 188, 194,260, 286 Scylla 37, 141 sea monsters 168 Septimius Severus 4 shepherd: 66, 276 similes, function 6 similes, role 5 Sirius 37 Sisyphus 157 Smyma 24,75 snake 68, 223, 264, 265, 266, 284, 285, 291 stag 264, 266, 270, 271, 272, 296 Stoicism 7, 13,58,70,74 Strife 45, 61, 122 Styx 52 suitors 66 superiority, fishing 32, 34, 40, 97, 99 superiority, hunting 34, 40, 97, 99 swallow 273, 284, 285, 286 Syria 166, 172, 194 Tartarus: 81 Teiresias 158, 199 Telemachus 229 Telegonus 17,24,155,156,157,158

Index of Names and Subjects

Thalassa 103 Theias 18,75,76 theology 3 Theramenes 7, 11 Theseus 200 Thracians 245, 284, 285 Thrinacie 36 Titan 174,196,197,198 Tlepolemus 218 Trojans 45,56,93, 162,213,252,259, 270,296 Tumus 286, 295

Typhaon 5, 14, 18, 44, 64, 158, 159, 161, 162, 163, 185, 186, 187,279, 280 Xanthos 33, 111 Zetes 196, 200 Zeus 5, 12, 13, 14, 18,22,30,41,44, 46,47,50,52,53,58,60,61,62,68, 70,71,80,82,84, 98, 9~ 103, 125, 126, 127, 128, 130, 135, 150, 158, 159,161,162,163,171,174,178, 182, 185, 187, 199,203,262,280, 281, 282

317

Index of Sources Cited

9.603.7: 132 Antiphil.: Anthol. Gr. 6.252: 126 - , Anthol. Gr. 9.222: 94 - , Anthol. Gr. 10.17: 51 Anyte: Anthol. Gr. 9.745.1: 145 Apollodorus: 14, 186 -, Bibliotheca 1.25-6: 185 1.45: 82 1.45-6: 82 1.65-71: 185 1.120-3: 197 2.38-9: 182 2.49-53: 189 2.106-12: 188 3.21-29: 133 3.183-5: 76 - , Epitome 7.36: 155 Apollonius Rhodius: 14, 50, 56, 73, 186 -, Argonautica: 138, 153, 200 1.4: 39 1.18: 72 1.111-14: 72 1.146-50: 184 1.184: 30, 170 1.188-9: 198 1.226: 72 1.234-306: 242 1.312: 164 1.370: 86 1.386: 237 1.427: 192 1.541: 86 1.573: 51 1.622: 135 1.625: 33, 185 1.636: 147 1.645: 52 1.760: 143 1.769: 166 1.790: 119 1.839: 48 1.880: 141 1.918: 66 1.1125: 128 1.1134-9: 128

1.1220: 195 1.1353: 94, 157 2.1-97: 120, 184, 227 2.11: 137 2.34: 32 2.40: 102 2.43: 261 2.131: 141 2.175: 219 2.176-497: 197,200 2.183-4: 199 2.184: 197 2.211: 200 2.238: 198 2.259: 201 2.317-45: 194 2.323: 194, 280 2.366-7: 192 2.432: 200 2.506-30: 139, 146 2.507: 140 2.533-4: 103 2.662-3: 278 2.673: 115 2.707-9: 121 2.708: 41 2.779: 261 2.800: 258 2.846: 164 2.811: 229 2.984: 193 2.990: 51 2.1044-5: 294 2.1101: 57 2.1109: 86 2.1232: 127 2.1237: 86 2.1260: 219 3.27: 156 3.36-110: 260 3.131: 180 3.132: 51 3.223-5: 142 3.337: 127 3.347: 268

319

Index of Sources Cited

3.413: 71, 278 3.453; 258 3.478: 249 3.541: 103 3.593: 169 3.717: 69 3.749: 66 3.750: 235 3.750: 37 3.790: 213 3.803: 213 3.997-1004: 200 3.1000: 200 3.1008: 119 3.1013: 258 3.1085: 190 3.1289: 94, 157 3.1318: 258 3.1329: 137 3.1364: 71 4.64: 299 4.174: 114 4.209: 39 4.228: 115 4.236-71: 194 4.281: 85 4.284-8: 193 4.303: 94, 157 4.339: 94 4.382: 42 4.445-9: 49, 54 4.475: 115 4.553: 174 4.565: 169 4.598: 65 4.687: 93 4.731: 243 4.796: 52, 134 4.885: 183 4.896: 71, 278 4.897: 55 4.902: 51, 55 4.950: 52 4.986: 71, 278 4.988: 71, 278

320

4.1044: 115 4.1064: 146 4.1073: 180 4.1131-8: 139 4.1132-3: 141 4.1133; 140 4.1235: 258 4.1260: 39 4.1279: 145 4.1299: 274 4.1338-42: 128 4.1342: 258 4.1343: 128 4.1394: 94, 157 4.1425: 48 4.1432-49: 191 4.1441: 191 4.1669: 249 -,fr. 8.2: 45, 169 Aratus: 29, 43, 58, 60, 61, 70, 122 - , Phaenomena: 3, 8, 12, 13 1-14: 58, 61 2-5: 59 5-9: 98 11: 60 22: 102 25: 31 98-136: 28 125-6: 222 133-4: 45 360: 45 367-85: 122 393-4: 8 400; 100 418: 215 471: 251 506: 100 637-46: 186 656-7: 8 685: 100 803: 180 993: 57 999: 185 1140: 46 1152: 189

Index of Sources Cited

Archias: Anthol. Gr. 6.16: 27 6.179-81: 27 15.51.3: 268 16.94: 287 16.94.4: 206, 267 Aristodicus: Anthol. Gr. 7.473: 35 Aristophanes: Aves 194: 101 -, Equites 292: 108 889: 263 -, Nub. 312: 204 -, Ranae 213: 254 327: 145 -, Thesm. 320: 267 - , Vesp. 728: 145 Aristotle: 7,296 - , de partibus animalium 3.14.20: 153 - , Historia Animalium 3.6: 296 4.8: 198 5.10.29: 124 9.7: 292 9.46: 86 9.47.1-7: 106 - , Rhetorica: 2.2.7: 96 3.3.8: 223 3.11.3-8(l413a): 6 - , Poetica 21, 1457bl-3: 6 -,fr. 640.18: 30 Arrian: 296 [Asclepius]: Anthol. Gr. 5.209.1: 174 Bacchylides: 253 8.38: 92 9.38: 92 11.1: 237 12.8: 92 18.24: 300 Balbilla: Epigr. Gr. 990.3: 42 Bianor: Anthol. Gr. 9.227: 38 Bion 13.4: 55 [Bion] 1.60: 31 2: 195 Callimachus: 14,25,50,71, 123, 189 -, Aetia:fr. 1.1-4:22, 172 6-12: 176 15: 177 22-30: 22, 172

26-8: 175 27-8: 231, 235 fr. 7: 172 22: 171 22-34: 175 fr. 21.10: 278 fr. 43.53: 177 77: 164 fr. 63.10: 278 fr. 75.77: 172 fr.177.23: 167 fr. 184: 48 -, Epigram. 6.3: 177 45.3: 94 -,fr. 228.45: 278 -,fr. 229.2: 294 -,fr. 401.3: 205 -,fr. 493: 80, 82 -,fr. 623: 96 -,fr. 714.3: 293 -,fr. 746: 94 - , Hecale: 151 fr. 285.1; 278 fr. 328.2: 272 -, Hymn. in Apoll. 36-8: 121 110: 278 202-3: 121 -, Hymn. in Cerem 17: 278 132: 278 -, Hymn. in Del.: 95 7: 195 15: 38, 137 26: 96 52: 137 276-7: 72 -, Hymn. in Dian. 59: 73 84: 85 124: 157 160: 153 204: 183 218: 100, 160 -, Hymn. in Jup. : 126 3: 48 6-7: 59 41-3: 127

321

Index of Sources Cited

23: 8 35D: 104 62: 45 87: 13 88 (84 D.-K.)1-2: 234 115.5: 63 155.10: 71 fr. 128.1: 45 Ennius: Annales 469-70: 202 Epigr. St. Greg. Anthol Gr. 8.178.1: 70 Erastosthenes Catast. 31: 151 Euphorion: 186, 256 -,fr. 9.11-12 (Powell): 255 -,fr. 40 (Powell): 272 -,fr. 94.1 (Powell): 258 - , SH 418,42: 182 Euripides: 237 - , Aleestis 572: 244 579: 184 , Baeehae 108: 138 Damagetus: Anthol. Gr. 7.9.5: 205 132ff.: 176 Demosthenes: de falsa legatione 255.13: 160: 204 153 578: 146 Diodorus Siculus: 287 585-603: 146 2.49: 202 703: 138 3.41.4: 94 704-11: 142 5.4.2: 78 ll53-5: 101 17.19.6: 125 , Cyc. 259-60: 244 17.55: 234 , Electra 816: 272 Diogenes Laertius: 7.169: 256 -, Heeuba 90: 184 Dionysius: Periegesis: 305 121: 199 Dionysius Epicus: Bassariea: 306 Dionysius Halicamassus: A.R. l.79.3: 33 -, Hel. 381: 167 1502: 223 Empedocies: 8,9, 13,49,50,58,60,61, 1558: 288 118, 122 - , Herael. 961: 69 fr. 3.2: 149 - , Here. 835: 286 fr. 5.5: 13 1381: 286 fr. 6.1-2: 59 -, Hipp. 538-41: 49 fr. 8.17-8: 60 -, Jphigenia in Aul. 204-5: 120 fr. 15: 13 -, Jphigenia Taur. 262: 280 fr. 17: 49 752: 69 17.18: 51 1286: 39 17.20-4: 53 , Orestes 1356: 157 17.21-6: 50 -, Troj. 195: 47 fr. 2l.9-12: 52 722: 249 fr. 22.3: ll8 62-4: 100 90-91: 71 - , Hymn. 4.165-70: 43 - , Viet. Beren. fr.l77: 216 12-4: 217 30-1: 217 Catullus: 6l.4: 146 63.76ff.: 129 64.9-ll: 72 64.28: 151 Cicero: de Finibus: 4.23.64: 7 - , de Natura Deorum: 2.8.22: 7 Cinna: 75 C1eanthes: 7: 61 Cratinus: fr. 149: 229 Crinagoras: Anthol. Gr. 7.74l.6: 234 9.439: 170 9.555.5: 295 16.65: 178

322

fr. fr. fr. fr. fr. fr.

Index of Sources Cited

1290: 153

-,fr. 37: 136 -,fr. 846: 177 Eusebius: Praep. Ev. 9.20.1.5: 40 Eustathius: 1.337.39: 133 Galenus: Comp. Med. Gen. 5.48: 212 13.626: 133 Grattius: 173 - , Cynegetica: 14 Hermippus: fr. 47.4: 263 Herodian: 3.9.9-12: 177 Herodotus: 66, 296 1.2.48: 90 1.140: 202 1.184: 189 2:17 2.5.1: 202 2.31: 191 2.33.2-4: 193 2.65.2: 92 2.115-6: 201 3.38: 287 3.84.3-86.2: 112 4.192: 296 7.129.4: 187, 189 7.186.1: 92 Hesiod: 29, 43, 44, 59, 69, 70, 122, 152, 306 -, Opera: 1-4: 99 1-10: 163 8: 82 9: 153 42-7: 179 60-1: 82 66: 212 67: 185 106ff.: 80 111: 41, 82 120: 81 122: 64 153: 81 187-8: 250 188: 250 196: 169 199-200: 44

203: 66 213-85: 28 232-3: 141 239: 73 259: 45 286-334: 152 286-92: 98 291: 175 311: 153 325: 204 332-34: 152 347: 154 349: 154 360: 145 414-40: 111 431: 258 435: 258 441: 109 468: 48 516: 157 524: 55 549: 114 550: 34 564-70: 122 568: 273 568-9: 274 595: 34 597: 279 599: 192, 278 604: 184 605: 155,219,220 624: 283 624-6: 282 726: 71 789: 205 796: 184 805: 279 806: 192, 278 -, Theogonia: 12,44,58,82,106,126, 171, 187, 306 1-103: 171 24-9: 171 34: 175 71-3: 41 72: 282

323

Index of Sources Cited

79: 175 94-103: 98 104-14: 173 120-2: 53 122: 63 123-5: 60 129: 85 136: 180 144: 71 175: 184 180: 184 184-7: 80 187: 103 188-200: 124 196: 174,177 214: 299 223: 177 226: 299 240-64: 103 280: 182 282: 71 300: 296 311: 296 321: 190 331: 51 364: 151 365: 29 404: 180 414-52: 11 431: 45 442-3: 204 453-506: 125, 150 477: 127 479-80: 126, 127 486: 48, 127 502: 48 504: 282 512-59: 82 576: 127 578: 112 605: 250 707: 282 760: 53 762: 39 821-80: 158

324

832: 64 839: 50 844: 36 853-68: 162 854: 282 863: 109 869: 163 884: 162 936: 66 977: 139 1008: 174 -,fr. 10(a).56: 268 87: 296 -,fr. 14.2: 268 -,fr. 67a.5: 38 -,fr. 67b.1: 38 -,fr. 112: 38 -,fr. 198: 126 -, fr. 209.4: 94, 157 -,fr. 212b.3: 268 -,fr. 372.13: 128 [Hesiod]: Scutum, 177: 32 152: 114 303: 184 430: 147 Hippocrates: De officina medici 3: 143 Homer, Iliad: 8, 10, 39,41,46,51,52,57, 60,62,67,72,84,93,96, 106, 116, 117,126,170,222,229,247,250,263, 268, 290, 296 1.4: 294 1.225: 117, 221, 223 1.250: 177 1.279: 75 1.311: 157 1.490: 143 1.518: 249 1.528: 178 1.568: 52 1.581: 161 1.587: 202 2.56: 153 2.86: 75 2.88: 141 2.148: 191

Index of Sources Cited

2.169: 102 2.208-9: 111 2.209-10: 193 2.210: 124 2.293: 283 2.308-20: 67, 273, 284 2.308-9: 285 2.311: 285 2.314: 274 2.314-5: 285 2.353: 109 2.459: 29 2.477-8: 81 2.488-93: 140, 203, 204 2.651: 107, 108 2.673: 120 2.783-5: 159, 163 2.792: 236 2.804: 29, 111 2.824: 189 3.18-9: 219 3.28: 202 3.40: 115 3.42: 34 3.44: 218 3.62: 289 3.166: 60 3.169: 202 3.174-5: 239 3.182: 75 3.211: 157 3.237: 120 3.306: 202 3.381: 204 3.382: 114 3.413: 76 3.423: 33 4.40: 110 4.47: 120 4.165: 120 4.324: 125 4.433-5: 276 4.441: 142 4.477: 250 4.542: 289

5.2: 65 5.4-6: 37 5.31: 177 5.54: 166 5.61-2: 72 5.91: 261 5.153ff.: 241 5.161-2: 66 5.171: 185 5.212: 202 5.270: 69 5.424: 93 5.448: 38, 160 5.495: 219 5.499-502: 278 5.500-1; 278 5.512: 38, 160 5.592: 72 5.593: 45 5.627-54: 218 5.635: 192 5.698: 225 5.740: 66 5.756: 30 5.782-3: 86 5.788: 143 6.6: 107 6.104: 219 6.132: 133 6.134: 146, 176 6.155-96: 112 6.179:112 6.211: 198 6.251: 164 6.268: 198 6.376: 180 6.436: 110 6.449: 120 6.483: 114 6.607: 115 7.81: 254 7.144-5: 294 7.166: 108 7.213: 259 7.220: 110

325

Index of Sources Cited

7.248: 114 7.257: 86 7.288: 85 7.324: 113 7.384: 193 8.14: 162 8.22: 30 8.185: 107 8.190: 198 8.226: 219 8.264: 108 8.291: 123 8.338-40: 259 8.559: 301 9.2: 66, 141 9.63: 221 9.141: 194 9.201-2: 223 9.228: 118 9.283: 194 9.323-4: 273 9.232: 274 9.343: 246 9.473: 256 9.500: 45 9.508: 45 9.539: 32 9.547: 69 9.629: 107 10.8: 54 10.23-4: 107 10.30: 112 10.44: 31 10.177: 107 10.185-6: 291 10.247: 102 10.275: 202 10.343: 234 10.360: 183 10.387: 234 10.483: 103 10.565: 299 11.9: 219 11.67: 269 11.118: 101

326

11.169: 83 11.212: 219 11.259: 110 11.269-71: 238 11.271: 239 11.298: 36 11.383: 53 11.453-4: 63 11.471: 262 11.474-81: 270, 288, 296 11.475-6: 271 11.479: 272, 297 11.480-1: 271 11.548: 107 11.549: 258 11.676: 258 11.711: 198 11.734: 53 12.37: 282 12.46: 84 12.116: 147 12.332: 109 12.414: 261 13.99: 202 13.103-4: 270 13.131: 110 13.198: 184 13.281: 259 13.303; 110 13.314: 184 13.441: 65 13.493: 276 13.499: 108 13.519: 107 13.521: 107 13.812: 282 14.203: 127 14.214: 177 14.308: 85 14.319-20: 182 14.347: 127 14.398: 35 14.488: 289 15.10-1: 298 15.36-38: 52

Index of Sources Cited

15.197: 102 15.264: 115 15.272: 258 15.362-4: 141 15.381: 56 15.416-7: 52 15.613: 169 15.624-8: 36 15.690: 107 16.7-10: 232 16.21: 161 16.28: 156 16.149: 184 16.257: 107 16.294: 65 16.357: 45, 169 16.365: 282 16.475: 84 16.487-8: 107 16.621: 83 16.643: 262 16.716: 109 16.725: 254 16.745-6: 138 16.744-50: 93, 101 16.773: 185 17.5: 255 17.9: 120 17.20: 291 17.111-2: 145 17.133-5: 64 17.135: 33, 185 17.204: 151 17.211: 108,259 17.212: 70 17.259: 108 17.265: 192 17.301: 250 17.329: 219 17.339: 30 17.426-8: 110, 111 17.499: 70 17.570-3: 269 17.670: 152 17.746: 227

18.23-5: 256 18.39-49: 103 18.140: 169 18.161: 107 18.413: 135 18.476-7: 73 18.490-540: 213 18.491: 261 18.521: 297 18.535: 45 18.580-1: 66 18.589: 277 18.597: 112 19.31: 246 19.91: 45 19.121: 45 19.258: 30 19.282: 81 19.343: 143 19.379-80: 110 19.380: 110 19.408-18: 111 20.59ff.: 188, 189 20.65: 81 20.102: 213 20.172: 147 20.225: 118 20.266-9: 111 20.276: 114 20.316: 54 21.8: 33 21.20: 103 21.38: 48 21.96: 151 21.141-3: 186, 190 21.195-7: 74 21.237: 286, 287 21.243-4: 194 21.253: 102 21.257-62: 194, 260 21.261: 194 21.306: 147 21.337: 33 21.375: 54 21.465: 162

327

Index of Sources Cited

21.493: 124 21.516: 143 21.573-8: 266 21.582: 215 22: 241, 246 22.21-2: 34 22.93: 265, 291 22.95: 265, 266 22.127-8: 91 22.140: 103 22.189: 276 22.189-92: 275 22.192: 276 22.199: 276 22.221: 237, 258 22.367-75: 167 22.375: 247 22.481: 144 23: 246 23.43: 30 23.104: 117 23.115: 35 23.135: 46 23.222-3: 240 23.252: 151 23.309: 297 23.330: 183 23.383: 199 23.518: 33 23.600: 119 23.648: 152 23.694: 272 23.700-39: 227, 228 23.740-97: 236 23.853: 118, 124 24: 240,241 24.12: 243 24.13: 136 24.82: 63 24.119: 301 24.192: 33 24.261: 214 24.314-20: 84 24.317: 33 24.321: 119

328

24.375-6: 299 24.409: 142 24.415: 246 24.444-6: 252 24.516: 144 24.540ff.: 250 24.541: 251 24.795: 135 - , Odyssey: 10,41,58,60,62,67,84,96, 116, 138, 153, 170, 246, 263, 268 1.1: 31 1.3: 216 1.9: 216 1.10: 42 1.128: 268 1.134: 156 1.205: 222 1.226: 261 1.242: 112 2.142: 39 2.231: 75 3.93-4: 202 3.231: 102 3.372: 66 4.36: 154 4.232: 69 4.278: 134 4.324: 202 4.335-9: 289 4.379: 204 4.404: 30 4.412-3: 245 4.432: 57 4.503: 78 4.606: 157 4.718: 158 4.774: 78 4.794: 266 4.832: 180 4.846: 92 5.56: 36 5.215: 205 5.230: 299 5.250: 283 5.282-332: 36, 37

Index of Sources Cited

5.292-3: 36 5.297: 36 5.328: 37 5.391: 124 5.394-7: 211 5.402-3: 192 5.412: 86 5.438: 194 5.452: 124 5.468: 225 5.479: 53 6.53: 119 6.66: 60 6.70: 258 6.99-109: 262 6.148: 31 6.185: 87 6.201: 30 6.306: 119 6.326: 46 7.319: 124 8.276: 234 8.288: 113, 174 8.548: 31 9: 243, 244 9.37: 224 9.43: 30 9.70: 109 9.182-3: 277 9.184-5: 245 9.291: 142 9.353: 144 9.365: 29 9.374: 192 9.393: 249 9.398: 238 9.443: 245 9.447-8: 245 9.507: 90 9.536: 151 10.30: 31 10.94: 124 10.141: 92 10.150: 101 10.175: 169

10.197: 101 10.200: 107 10.212: 291 10.217: 93 10.276: 156 10.299: 114 10.305-6: 204 10.511-15: 74 10.512: 81 10.543: 299 11.16: 53 11.41: 246 11.94: 35 11.107: 36 11.128: 278 11.134ff.: 155 11.201: 54 11.213: 78 11.240: 143 11.243-4: 288 11.268: 113 11.271-80: 115 11.293: 258 11.320: 72 11.364: 185 11.519: 158 11.522: 195 11.611: 190 12.2: 57 12.60: 151 12.62: 118 12.86: 141 12.104-26: 280 12.168: 124 12.259: 37 12.415-7: 281 13.108: 119 13.116: 39 13.172: 90 13.246: 157 13.255: 71 13.291: 31, 185 13.391: 205 14.218: 292 15.55-6: 274

329

Index of Sources Cited

15.293: 191 15.319-20: 72 16.15: 70 16.215-7: 66 16.421: 143 17.126-30: 289 17.187: 128 17.223: 128 17.288: 39 17.525: 237, 258 18.80: 232 18.179: 82 18.193: 174 18.240: 223 18.339: 142 18.372: 107 19.53f.: 81 19.163: 90 19.246: 194 19.326: 117 19.417: 70 19.435: 33, 185 19.438: 259 19.518-23: 67 19.530: 229 20.14-5: 65 20.61: 205 20.346: 293 21.72: 151 21.85: 258 21.274: 157 21.316: 151 21.338: 254 21,365: 41 22.7: 254 22.278: 114 22.308: 103 22.347: 63 22.391: 180 23.1: 299 23.13: 229 23.40: 202 23.47: 119 23.77: 71 23.322: 81

330

23.351: 224 24.169: 144 24.176: 71 24.184: 103 24.251: 153 Homeric Hymns: 59 - , Aphrodite 159: 64, 119 253: 60 - , Apollo 165: 41 404: 134 443: 160 - , Ares (8) 8: 162 16: 146 - , Artemis (5) 71: 263 - , Demeter: 77, 250 2-3: 78 4-16: 262 6: 263 8: 263 16-7: 78 17: 147 47: 71,278 54: 205 168: 250 174-5: 66 192: 205 211: 71 230: 115 254: 247 490-1: 178 492: 71, 205 - , Dionysus (1) 11: 176 21: 143, 176 - , Dionysus (7): 146 11: 96 35: 142 35-41: 138 38-9: 138 40: 138 48-50: 138 48-53: 138 51-3: 137 52: 93, 138 -, Dioscuri (33) 7.ff: 182 11-12: 37

Index of Sources Cited

- , Gaia (30): 168 1: 60, 168 5: 71 - , Helios (31) 2: 175 -, Hermes 31: 214 37: 115 151-3: 141 210: 104 223: 181 263: 202 363: 202 368: 59 439: 31 565-6: 72 587-8: 72 - , Pan (19) 1: 162 - , Poseidon (22) 7: 87 Horace: Carmina 1.16.13: 82 Hostius: fr. 3: 202 Hygin. Astr. iLl7: 151 Hyperides: fr. 87: 132

6.673: 264 Lucian: 306 -, De Hist. Conser. 3: 215 -, Dialogi Deorum 2: 162 -,Iup. Trag. 1.17: 193 Lucillius: Anthol. Gr. 11.196.6: 229 11.390: 137 Lucretius: De Rerum Natura: 8,9, 11,58, 98 1.1: 47,174 1.1-49: 49 1.10-20: 121 1.11: 273 1.22-3: 49 1.80-145 1.418: 104 1.920: 175 2.600-39: 129 3.87-93: 8 3.221-223: 8 3.403-7: 8 3.978-1023: 129 5.454: 87 6.765-6: 264

!conium: Epigr. Gr. 406.8: 45 Inseriptiones Graeeae 1.225c: 137 Ister: FGrHist. 334 F.8: 132 Julianus Aegyptius: Anthol Gr. 6.68: 96, 6.1138-9: 247 159 6.1262-3: 249 ·d AI -,fr· 1: 202 Leom as exandr.: Anthol Gr. 7.925: 38 L o . . Leonidas Tarent.· A th I G 613· 27 99 ye phron. Alex. 828-30. 75 . no. r. . . , , 1258· 47 100, 159 . 6.4.4: 137 1356ff.: 80 6.4.7: 137 Lysippus: fr. 2: 263 6.35.6: 275 Manetho: 2.11; 178, 191 7.19: 160 3.49: 178, 191 7.504.12: 137 4.506: 61 Mareus Argentarius: Anthol Gr. 5.105: 47 Limenius: Paean Delph. ii.26: 46 Martial: 14.218: 101 Livy: 1.7.3-12: 188 Maximus Astrologus: 529: 129 1.7.4: 188 Mela 1.72: 162 Longus: Daphnis et Chive: 91 Meleager: Anthol Gr.: 5.154.1: 190 1.5-8: 92 5.177: 49 1.9: 263 7.196.3: 289 1.27-30: 91 7.428.13: 40 3.18.8: 133 9.331.3: 145 3.23.2: 103 12.49.2: 145 Lucan: 274, 305 12.53.4: 190 - , Pharsalia 4.437: 294 331

Index of Sources Cited

12.127.7: 136, 239 Menander: Mon. 81: 155 Mnasa1cas: Anthol. Gr. 6.110.3: 268 7.194.4: 204 Moschus: 2.23: 55, 89 2.28-62: 262 2.43: 132 2.66: 263 3.73: 45 4.26: 127 -,fr. 4: 168 Nechepso: apud Vettiurn Valentem Anthologiarum 9.241.18: 223 Nemesianus: 173 - , Cynegetica: 14 8: 175 279-80: 107 Nicander, Alexipharmaca: 3, 8, 12, 156, 212 1-11: 12 4-5: 175 21: 181 30-4: 8 33: 289 39: 258 49: 154 50: 268 63: 154 71: 154 88: 154 93: 154 94: 154 111: 192 134: 192 139-44: 264 165: 274 176: 109 181: 138 209-10: 222 215-20: 8 228: 274 358-9: 8 375: 77 401: 158 468: 30 332

472-5: 8 476: 114 485: 30 514: 223 -, Theriaca: 3, 8, 12, 154, 156 1-2: 175 1-7: 12, 173 4-7: 98 8-12: 80, 82 20: 38 45: 198 60: 87 70: 83 104: 231 121: 85 141: 265 158: 85 171: 119 175-6: 8 183: 156 191: 177 194: 150 201: 125 202: 289 222: 101 232: 192 268-70: 8 302: 123 336: 85 343: 108 361: 114 401: 183 511: 157 541: 266 696: 85 767: 157 793: 38 818: 85 919: 266 923: 262 945: 268 -,fr. ID.2: 157 50.2: 157 70.1: 279 74.6: 32

Index of Sources Cited

Demon. 19.11; 289 74.34: 126 98: 275 om 245.10: 205 [Nicander]: SH 563A: 96 Oppian: Halieutica, 1.1-79: 20 Nicarchus: Anthol. Gr. 11.328.8: 169 1.1-55: 83, 9~ 9~ 173 Nonnus: 42, 55, 73, 89, 96, 117, 118, 129, 1.1: 40, 69 145, 198,215,223,225,237,239,244, 1.7: 175 256, 259, 286, 296 1.20: 185 - , Dionysiaca 1.150: 195 1.25-40: 101 4.61: 250 1.30: 100 4.100: 250 1.36-49: 168 5.362: 289 1.37: 100 5.554: 240 1.66: 59 8.88: 254 1.81: 60 8.353: 127 1.93-101: 179 9.82: 74 1.100: 160 9.156: 184 1.121: 57 9.263: 35 1.152: 118 9.301: 35 1.161: 190 11.206: 45 1.166: 100 13.157: 109 1.167: 237, 258 13.241: 274 1.180: 85 14.67: 33 1.217-8: 54 14.541: 251 1.242: 160 15.192: 33 1.281: 199 16.187: 66 1.300: 54 20.147: 147 1.306: 57 21.57: 289 1.309: 136 21.125: 289 1.338-59: 58 27.14: 274 1.340: 177 28.317: 127 1.356: 31 38.63: 274 1.373: 199 38.257: 35 1.374: 99 40.121: 170 1.385-93: 89 40.159: 250 1.395: 85 40.297: 147 1.397: 109 40.390: 114 1.409-20: 75, 174 41.58.ff: 175 1.410: 69, 82 41.175: 274 1.458-78: 121, 123 44.195:66 1.507: 125 46.363: 274 1.555-79: 124 47.358: 170 1.561: 54 48.415: 66 1.650-1: 128 48.596: 274 1.691: 85 - , Paraphrasis: 75 1.749: 150 Demon. 11.136: 289 1.781: 81

333

Index of Sources Cited

2.11: 115 2.33: 54 2.34: 191 2.40: 178 2.41: 59 2.42: 178 2.54: 222 2.89: 81 2.99: 113 2.122; 57 2.125: 57 2.167: 57 2.277: 92 2.241-6: 55, 56, 57 2.243: 58 2.244: 57 2.247-52: 56 2.250: 57 2.253-421: 102 2.322: 144 2.350-6: 236 2.352: 260 2.368: 54 2.241-52: 5, 57 2.408: 155 2.434: 184 2.481: 108 2.510: 54 2.513: 132, 167 2.560: 237 2.564: 108 2.583: 191 2.597-604: 271 2.604: 240 2.642-3: 223 2.644: 152 2.664-688: 16, 41, 202 2.666-7: 169 2.680: 168 3.1-28: 5, 11, 186 3.1: 180 3.9-28: 137 3.16-7: 128 3.28: 179 3.44: 31

334

3.49: 295 3.224: 150 3.243: 285 3.243-8: 285 3.305: 260 3.376: 262 3.412: 263 3.481: 185 3.486-97: 260 3.496: 197 3.539: 268 3.562: 246 3.567-75: 306 4.4-10: 16 4.10: 113 4.11-39: 48, 50, 52, 53 4.31-2: 53 4.34-9: 53 4.40-6: 113 4.43; 100 4.49: 160 4.71: 114 4.77: 114, 143 4.88: 184 4.102: 240 4.103: 258 4.113: 262 4.120: 217 4.142-3: 54 4.147: 190 4.157: 295 4.172-241: 118 4.176: 115, 204 4.180: 115 4.185: 123 4.196: 241, 242 4.201: 136 4.203: 123 4.203-15: 118 4.226: 123 4.234-8: 216 4.237: 113 4.256: 246 4.258: 242 4.264-307: 38

Index of Sources Cited

4.264-374: 104, 105 4.264-403: 50 4.270-1: 107 4.300: 291 4.312: 190 4.329: 301 4.359: 75 4.360: 125 4.419: 118 4.437: 90 4.522-3: 126 4.524: 117 4.555: 108 4.586: 291 4.615: 185 4.637: 306 4.640-6: 306 4.663: 249 4.685-93: 105, 213 5.35: 32 5.105: 283 5.106: 81 5.109-357: 11 5.144: 132 5.153: 169 5.159: 37 5.171: 37 5.208: 37 5.245: 108 5.280: 54 5.313: 85 5.320: 37 5.336-349: 52 5.348: 52 5.365: 249 5.410: 85 5.416: 271 5.448-518: 16, 19, 104, 118 5.448-57: 131 5.512: 81 5.517-8: 91 5.548: 251 5.519: 152 5.612-74: 269 5.650: 57

5.652: 150 5.667: 37 [Oppian]: Cynegetica, 1.1: 40 1.1-15: 39 1.2: 47 1.3: 47 1.4-7: 40 1.9: 198 1.20-34: 28 1.20-35: 69 1.20-1: 230 1.21: 13 1.28: 200 1.35: 100 1.43-6: 39, 41 1.45: 75 1.46-80: 20, 27 1.47: 204 1.53-5: 34, 35, 38 1.57: 118 1.59-61: 41 1.64: 35 1.65-6: 35 1.66: 118 1.73: 75, 100 1.78: 75 1.97: 143 1.107: 56 1.146: 160 1.217-8: 31, 39, 67,199 1.221-235: 67 1.268: 199 1.269: 144 1.304: 287 1.310: 190 1.326-67: 16 1.340: 166 1.349: 118 1.358: 117 1.361: 185 1.392: 261 1.418: 132 1.436: 66 1.443: 100 1.468-539: 181

335

Index of Sources Cited

3.448: 54 1.494-501: 238 3.450: 108 2.78: 217 3.456: 160 2.83: 203 3.482: 202 2.106: 251 3.482-503: 296 2.109-58: 5, 11, 16, 88, 159, 161, 286 3.485: 42 2.127: 160 4.4: 35 2.233-52: 264 4.4-7: 181 2.242-53: 266 4.17: 202 2.251-2: 266 4.21: 42 2.289: 223 4.110: 216 2.314: 184 4.113: 190 2.315-6: 85 4.170: 217 2.336: 70 4.189: 108 2.376: 229 4.190: 54 2.451: 55 4.206: 225 2.410-425: 22, 34 4.212-29: 290 2.423: 110, 132, 199 4.224: 58 2.460: 287 4.225: 229 2.480: 144 4.233-319: 19, 42 2.543: 119 4.235: 110 2.588: 33 4.254: 69, 239 2.612-28: 78, 130 4.256: 215 2.612-6: 132 4.263: 93 2.620: 110, 132 3.5-6: 181 4.285: 176 4.330: 263 3.7-8: 132 4.334: 237, 258 3.8-19: 21, 130 4.342: 214 3.12: 150 3.21: 33, 150 4.385ff.: 295 3.36: 287 Orphica (P Derveni) col 2 line 7: 110 3.46-7: 11,20, 88, 189 -,fr. 285.59 (Kern): 229 3.107.38: 62 Orphic Argonautica 153: 253 3.108-9: 63 1301: 252 3.111: 63 Orphic Hymns: 25, 50 3.116: 119 2.11: 136 3.137: 64 4.8: 71 3.138: 64 10.1: 60 3.148: 125 12.12: 191 3.170-82: 5, 62 28.6: 136 3.317: 161 36.4: 178 3.448: 118 36.5: 136 3.356: 100 40.1: 60 40.3: 54, 110 3.380: 54 3.400; 54 40.10: 145 3.444: 108 43.11: 72

336

Index of Sources Cited

45.1: 146 50.4: 72 51.2: 73 52.2: 146 55.2: 177 59.20: 136 67.3: 164 82.1: 73 85.5: 136 fr. 211: 142 fr. 213: 142 o.T. Genesis xxx.37ff.; 116 Prov. 16.18: 229 Ovid: 274 -,Amores 1.1: 172 1.1.24: 173 -, Ars Amatoria 2.24: 146 3.11-52: 179 -, Fasti 2.853: 273 3.736ff.: 142 -, Halieutica: 14,304 -, Metamorphoses: 12, 15,48,302 1.81: 82 1.149-50: 43 1.156ff.: 80 3.339: 91 3.353: 120 3.582-691: 137 9.642: 176 1O.298f.: 77 10.728: 77 11.25-7: 268 15.379-81: 300 15.474: 101 - , Remedia Amoris 187-97: 122 - , Tristia 4.7.18: 147 Paean Delph., i.1: 46 Parmenides: 173 - , Aletheia fr. 28.b.1-3: 171 fr. 28.b.1.24-32: 171 fr. 28.b.2: 171 fr. 28.b.3: 171 Parthenius: fr. 4: 94 -,fr. 28.1: 48

Paulus Silentiarius: Anthol Gr. 5.221.4: 136,239 6.64: 96 -, Descriptio Sanctae Sophiae 562: 215 978: 215 Pausanias: 3.25: 91 3.25.7: 87, 91 8.29.3: 186 9.31.7: 120 10.4.4: 82 Philemon: fr. 93: 82 Philippus: Anthol. Gr. 6.5.7: 137 6.38.8: 137 7.187.2: 149 7.383.6: 289 11.33.2: 145 16.106.4: 218 16.137.5: 286 Philo Judaeus Senior: SH 681.3: 40 Philochorus: FGrHist. 328 F.14/16: 132 Philodemus: Anthol. Gr. 11.44.4: 145 -, Poem. 2.49: 154 Pindar: 237, 253 -, Isth. 1.60: 72 -, Nem. 1.15: 71 3.44: 141 6.26: 178 6.56: 195 10.90: 120 11.21: 40 - , 01. 2.27: 121 2.91: 195 6.63: 61 -, Pae. 9.10: 61 -, Pyth. 1.16: 163,279 1.17-8: 279 3.4: 48 3.6: 92 3.98: 176 3.99: 143 4.41: 136,239 4.182: 197 9.65: 139 11.38: 230 11.39-40: 231

337

Index of Sources Cited

11.40: 92 -,fr. 131.1: 136,239 -,fr. 169a.50: 300 Plato: Phaedo 111c-113c: 74 - , Symp. 180E: 125 - , Anthol. Gr. 9.823: 103 9.823.3: 204 Pliny: Epistulae 7.4: 305 -, Naturalis Historia 8.118: 263 P1utarch: 306 -, Ages. 8.6: 44 -,Ale. 2 - , An seni res publica 19: 93 - , Artaxerxes 2.68lff.19: 249 - , Demosthenes 2: 304 -,Isis et Osiris 35 (365b): 142 PMag.Par. 1.56: 146 Po1yaenus: Strat. 7.41.1.2: 184 Po1ybius: 5.104: 234 Posid. Asclepiad.: Anthol. Gr.5.209.2: 190 Proclus: Chrest. 1: 195 Pto1emaeus: Geogr. 7.2: 287 Quintus Smyrnaeus: 64,241,244,296 - , Posthomerica: 1.157: 237 3.171: 64 4.549: 237 7.459: 237 7.569-75: 306 8.31: 224 9.172-7: 306 10.286: 225 11.62-5: 306 11.272-7: 225 11.276-7: 225 Rhianus: Anthol. Gr. 6.34: 295 Rufinus: Anthol Gr. 5.72: 42 -,fr. 118: 102 Sappho: fr 40: 51 fr. 125: 46 schol. in A.R. 176.16: 94 schol. in A.R. 2.498: 139 schol. in Soph. Ajax 883b, line 1: 70 Seneca Senior: Contr. 2.2.12.12: 147 - , Contr. Excerpta 2.2.1.32: 147 338

Simias: Anthol. Gr. 7.203: 184

-,fr. 26.7: 45 Simonides: Page, PMG 539: 195 Page, PMG 520.4: 225 -, Anthol. Gr. 7.504.3: 200 Sophoc1es: 86 -, Ajax 8: 275 398: 46 365: 64 638: 92 695: 137 861: 92 914: 147 -, Ant.: 82, 85 342-6: 83 349: 83 785: 34 791: 49 1305: 286 -, El. 436: 247 1154: 115, 170 1190: 92 -,Fr. 29: 84 314,94: 265 403: 35 792: 296 866: 86 -,Ichn. 151: 32 -, Oed. Col. 660: 249 1088: 295 1245: 191 -, Oed. Tyr. 8: 226 209: 180 1103: 34 1214: 115, 170 -, Phi!. 39: 212 203: 92 1205: 268 Soranus 2.60: 93 Sozomenus: Hist. Eccles.: Pref. 1.5-6:4 Strabo: Geographica 5.4.9: 280 7.3.9: 244 8.3.14: 77 13.4.11: 143 15: 287

Index of Sources Cited

16.2.7: 186 Strato: Antho!' Gr. 12.238.3: 128 Suda 3886: 90 Suidas \>333: 151 Tacitus: Germania 18-19: 165 Theaetetus: Anthol. Gr. 16.221.6: 73 Theocritus: 71, 89, 95, 180, 303 -, Anthol. Gr. 9.47.9: 254 -, Idyll1.15: 183 1.39: 137 1.87: 125 2.20: 148 2.55: 49, 166 2.55-6: 221 3.26: 137 5.18: 87 5.27: 255 6: 91, 277 6.8: 190 6.28: 54 7.3: 278 7.29: 269 7.137: 194 7.146: 48 10: 257 10.42: 257 10.48: 183 11.66: 140 13.12: 274, 285 13.36: 181 13.64: 235 16.10: 134, 136 16.49:195 16.96: 57 17:12,203 17.1-2: 203 17.58: 141 17.77-135: 43 17.91-2: 171 17.135-7: 203 20.36: 101 21.6: 100, 160 22: 171 22.5: 184 22.27-134: 184

22.54-74: 171 22.136: 120 24.75: 199 24.81: 183 24.87: 184 24.105-33: 183 24.107: 183 25.13: 96 25.188: 296 25.279: 108, 259 26.27-32; 130, 148 26.29-30: 148 27: 129 27.22: 134 27.72: 94 Theodoridas: Antho!. Gr. 7.528.3: 255 Theognis: 11: 267 458: 92 911: 230 1231-4: 49 Thucydides: 66, 248 2.48: 247 Timotheus: Sylloge Constantini 2.270: 201 Triphiodorus: 84: 184 294: 250 Valerius Flaccus: Argonautica 7.124ff: 256 Varro: De re rustica: 304 -, Disciplinae: 304 Virgil: 43, 120 -, Aeneid: 3.225-9: 197 4.119: 174 4.302: 176 4.412: 49 5.105: 174 6.847-53: 43, 46 8.184-279: 187, 188 8.202: 188 8.648: 174 9.30-1: 286 12.749: 294, 295 -, Eclogues: 4: 305 4.6-7: 43 4.30: 141

339

Index of Sources Cited

3.89-91: 8 5: 171 - , Georgics: 8, 12, 17, 20, 129, 139, 303 3.89-94: 104 1.1-5: 98, 171 3.91: 105 1.5-42: 98 3.92-5: 8 3.196-8: 8 1.131: 141 1.139-42: 27, 99 3.209-41: 173 1.139-40: 100 3.237-41: 8 3.346-51: 8 1.139: 101 3.371: 294 1.160-75: 111 3.470-566: 247, 249 1.316-34: 106 4: 200 1.431: 180 4.151: 127 1.466-514: 46 4.201: 270 1.483-486: 46 4.315-566: 19, 196 2.1-8: 203 2.9-34: 203 Xenophon: Anabasis 7.8.12: 253 2.39: 205 - , Cynegetica 1.1: 99 2.39-42: 203 6.15: 109 2.42-4: 202 13.7: 98 2.315-45: 121, 122 - , Memorabilia 1.6.2: 256 2.323-335: 123 Zonas: Anthol. Gr. 6.185: 163 2.474: 43 Zosimus: Anthol. Gr. 6.183.3: 99 3.1-5: 179 3.42-5: 179

340

Index of Greek Words

Kuf3EpVTJTTJe; 39 Ku6o~iJ.oe; 45 KU-&TJPEW 124, 174 iJ.aKap 41 iJ.aTEUOO 94 iJ.EyaMToop 105 iJ.EooppayTJe;74 iJ.ET01TVEOO 283 iJ.TJxavTJ 83 voooax-&TJe; 212 ~ou-&oe;

270

6pE~oTEpoe;

6pE~TpEepTJe;

184 32

lTaYKoLpavOe; 205 lTaA~pPOLf36oe; 281 lTaiJ.iJ.TJTE~a 60, 168 lTav-&oLVOe; 154 lTap6aA~e; 291 lTapEVELpOO 93 lTEP~KOOKUoo 241 lTEP~iJ.Ox-&EOO 241 lTEP~OOOKOiJ.Oe; 161 lTEp~OOOVOOe; 161 lTEp~eAC!;OiJ.a~ 162 lTep~cpaTJe; 69 lTo-&oe; 90 lTOAUapKTJe; 203 lTOAUppaLOTTJe; 213 lToAuppafuyoe; 150 lTOAUOiJ.apayoe; 193 lTOAUTPOlToc; 31 lTOVTOYEVELTJ 177 lTp6lTpo-&~ 258 lTpolTpoKaAUlTTOO 237, 258 lTpOlTpOT~TaLvoo 237, 258 lTpOOToAexfJe; 239 lTTOEOO 55 lTUp066KOe; 279 pa~OTTJPLOe; 72 p~VTJAaTOV 265 po6aA6e; 256

oKUAaKoTpocpLTJ 66 of3EvVUiJ.~ 83 OTaXUTJKOiJ.EOO 195 342

OUTJf3oAoe; 185 OUiJ.lTOVEOO 200 OUVWLVOO 301 ouv~lTlTEUoo 169 LXETA~' 48, 113 OXETA~E 53 TaVaTJXETTJe; 194 TavuppOLSOe; 260 TEXVTJ 81 TTJAEx-&ooV 243 T~-&aooTpOcpOe; 119 Tp~x-&a6~oe; 99 66aTOlTATJ~ 193 *6lTE~Ka-&Eoo

94 291 6lTOOTTJPLSOO 215 6lToep-&a60v 294 6l\Jopoepoe; 34 61TEK6uo~e;

epaoe; 53 cp~A6TTJe; 113, 114, 123 epUAOV 39 epUTTJKOiJ.EOO 136

xaAKoXLTOOV 72 X~iJ.apOKTOVOe; 112 WiJ.TJOTTJp 296 we; 7 ooOTE 7

Hypomnemata Untersuchungen zur Antike und zu ihrem Nachleben 147: Mischa Meier

142: Dag Haug

Das andere Zeitalter Justinians

Les phases de l’évolution de la langue épique

Kontingenzerfahrung und Kontingenzbewältigung im 6. Jahrhundert n. Chr.

Trois études de linguistique homérique

2003. 739 Seiten, gebunden ISBN 3-525-25246-3

2002. 176 Seiten, gebunden ISBN 3-525-25241-2

146: Christian Utzinger

141: Maria Lühken

Periphrades Aner

Christianorum Maro et Flaccus

Untersuchungen zum ersten Stasimon der Sophokleischen „Antigone“ und zu den antiken Kulturentstehungstheorien

Zur Vergil- und Horazrezeption des Prudentius

2003. 324 Seiten, gebunden ISBN 3-525-25245-5

2002. 336 Seiten mit 3 Registern und 2 Tabellen, gebunden. ISBN 3-525-25240-4

140: Thomas Heine Nielsen 145: Dana R. Miller

The Third Kind in Plato’s Timaeus 2003. Ca. 256 Seiten, gebunden ISBN 3-525-25244-7

Arkadia and its Poleis in the Archaic and Classical Periods 2002. 680 Seiten mit zwei Abbildungen, gebunden. ISBN 3-525-25239-0

139: Sandra Zajonz 144: Martin Paul Schittko

Isokrates’ Enkomion auf Helena

Analogien als Argumentationstyp

2002. 344 Seiten, gebunden ISBN 3-525-25238-2

Vom Paradeigma zur Similitudo 2003. 235 Seiten, gebunden ISBN 3-525-25243-9

143: Eckhard Stephan

Honoratioren – Griechen Polisbürger Kollektive Identitäten innerhalb der Oberschicht des kaiserzeitlichen Kleinasien 2002. 368 Seiten, gebunden ISBN 3-525-25242-0

Ein Kommentar

138: Christian Mann

Athlet und Polis im archaischen und frühklassischen Griechenland 2001. 344 Seiten, gebunden ISBN 3-525-25237-4

Hypomnemata Untersuchungen zur Antike und zu ihrem Nachleben 137: Claudia Klodt

133: Paul Schubert

Bescheidene Größe

Noms d’agent et invective: entre phénomène linguistique et interprétation du récit dans les poèmes homériques

Die Herrschergestalt, der Kaiserpalast und die Stadt Rom: Literarische Reflexionen monarchischer Selbstdarstellung 2001. 138 Seiten mit 8 Abbildungen, gebunden. ISBN 3-525-25236-6

136: Christian Hänger

Die Welt im Kopf Raumbilder und Strategie im Römischen Kaiserreich 2001. 303 Seiten mit 11 Abbildungen, gebunden. ISBN 3-525-25234-X

2000. 89 Seiten, kartoniert ISBN 3-525-25230-7

132: Andreas Bagordo

Beobachtungen zur Sprache des Terenz Mit besonderer Berücksichtigung der umgangssprachlichen Elemente 2001. 178 Seiten, gebunden ISBN 3-525-25229-3

135: Fortunat Hoessly

131: Tobias Reinhardt

Katharsis: Reinigung als Heilverfahren

Das Buch E der Aristotelischen Topik

Studien zum Ritual der archaischen und klassischen Zeit sowie zum Corpus Hippocraticum

Untersuchungen zur Echtheitsfrage

2001. 331 Seiten, gebunden ISBN 3-525-25233-1

134: Sigrid Mratschek

Der Briefwechsel des Paulinus von Nola Kommunikation und soziale Kontakte zwischen christlichen Intellektuellen 2002. XIV, 732 Seiten mit 16 Abbildungen und 2 Karten, gebunden ISBN 3-525-25232-3 (Titel ist zur Zeit vergriffen)

2000. 237 Seiten, kartoniert ISBN 3-525-25228-5

130: Jürgen Paul Schwindt

Prolegomena zu einer „Phänomenologie“ der römischen Literaturgeschichtsschreibung Von den Anfängen bis Quintilian 2000. 249 Seiten, kartoniert ISBN 3-525-25227-7