Transactions

of the American

Philological

Association

133

(2003)

51-97

Heraclitus

the Paradoxographer:

Ilepi

'Atcigxcov, On Unbelievable Tales*

JACOB STERN
The Graduate School, City University ofNew York

InMemory

of Professor Seth Benardete

summary: The text of Heraclitus

and Commentary, survives

the Paradoxographer (so LSJ, although "Mythographer" would be better), which is here translated with Introduction
to the present in a single 13th-century manuscript.

Of the author nothing is known, although he appears to belong to the late 1st or 2nd century a.d. The text includes 39 items inwhich familiar myths are briefly told and then interpreted through rationalism, euhemerism, allegory, or collections this text is of particular etymology. Among extant mythographical interest precisely because it exemplifies in brief compass such a range of ancient strategies for the interpretation of myth.

A. THE
a single

AUTHOR
13th-century

AND

THE

TEXT
Vatican 305, preserves for us the text

manuscript,

which
*

is here translated

and annotated.1

It is not until the end of the work

to thank a number It is a pleasure of colleagues for their help: Professors Felicia L. Robert Donald and David Hansen, Fowler, Lidov, Mastronarde, Joel J. Bonaparte, Hardy Sider; to Professor Alan Cameron special thanks for allowing me to read his unpublished I dedicate this article to the memory colleague the date and friend. appar

manuscript,

of Professor 1 The scribe was

in the Roman World. Greek Mythography Seth Benardete of New York University, Theophylactus For a description Nicander Saponopoulus

and

of the manuscript

ently either 1254 or 1269 (Repertorium der griechischen Kopisten 800-1600:3

dem Vatikan] 50: inter alia #233). of the contents Theriaca; and de Antro and Heraclitus I shall be Porphyrius nympharum; of the manuscript Quaestionum Anonymous it contains

[Rommit
443 ad

see Mercati Homericarum

pertinentium reliquiae de Vita Homeri; Ps.-Herodotus the author of the last of these

Iliadem

de Incredibilibus;

About (-Quaestiones Homericae). Allegoriae same not as that he is the Heraclitus arguing

Paradoxographus.

52

Jacob Stern

that this manuscript identifies the title and author: x?Xoq fipocKA^vcoi) 7cepi As to the title ("On Unbelievable ?rc?GTCDV. Tales"), it is the same as and is likely to have been borrowed from the better known work of Palaephatus, though whether by a copyist, an epitomizer, or the author can hardly be de termined. The author himself is identified simply as "Heraclitus." By this name he was known to Eustathius, the 12th-century Byzantine scholar and com mentator twice refers to him by name, on one occasion (1504.55 Stallbaum) specifying "the Heraclitus who proposes to render un believable tales believable."2 But apparently he is named by no one else prior to the Vatican manuscript mentioned above. He is distinguished from others who of the same name by LSJ as "Heraclitus Paradoxographus," although he might better have been called "Mythographus," since he is hardly a paradoxographer in the usual sense of that term. (I shall, nonetheless, follow convention and to use LSfs epithet.) The standard modern continue edition is the 1902 Teubner Festa (Mythographi graeci III.II, 73-87); prior to Festa in 1843 (Mythographoi, by Anton Westermann ethica etphysica, 75-96). 313-20) and T. Gale in 1671 (Opuscula mythologica But who is he? Hardly the famous pre-Socratic philosopher by that name, nor is he likely to be any of the other Heraclituses of whom antiquity tells of Nicolaus there were notable editions us?with one possible exception. A certain Heraclitus an thor of extensive work called the Homeric Allegories tiones). Could our Heraclitus be the same? is identified as the au (npo?Ari|LiocTa; Quaes on Homer,

The majority opinion, with which I concur, is that this is not likely to be the case.3 The Homeric Allegories, as its title suggests, offers fairly detailed influenced by Stoicism or by what interpretations, apparently allegorical Dawson (51) calls "eclectic Hellenistic philosophy," of various episodes in the Iliad and the Odyssey in terms of both toc (pt>aiK(xand toc Tronca.4 These are
2

See also

1859.45

and

a clear

reference

to Heraclitus

14 at 1709.31-32.

Cf. Buffi?re

1962: viii. 3 Buffi?re n'avons

1956:232 raisons

pas de

Que Fauteur All?gories. car le nom ?tait fort courant. en raison de l'extr?me enim

more at 1962: ix: "En r?sum?, nous decisive slightly but is nom ? Fauteur des le de attach? d'Heraclite, suspecter positives ce ne serait pas impossible, se nomm?t aussi Heraclite, des Apista fudges Que les deux Heraclite de ton entre n'en les deux fassent qu'un, c'est Festa refertum improbable, (1902: cum lin): his

diversit? libellum

uAllegoriarum pragmaticorum, 151; cf. Decharme

satis bona

Alexandrinorum rhetorum identity of lusibus

ouvrages;" doctrina

etiam, palaephateorum the 409, who accepts

Nestle componere nequeo;" the two and on that basis dates our

"vers l'?poque Heraclitus probablement." d'Auguste 4 263 n. 43: "Although he makes See also Dawson not an orthodox Stoic like Cornutus."

use

of Stoic

concepts,

Heraclitus

is

Heraclitus

the Paradoxographer, nepi

'Atugtc?v

53

presented in a complex and elaborate style and are accompanied by polemi cal attacks on Plato and Epicurus for their failure to understand the true mean 7i?pi Arc?GTCOv also offers epics.5 Although Heraclitus' ing of the Homeric occasional allegorical interpretations of episodes in the Odyssey, the tone and the details of the interpretations themselves?are is in the Homeric found substantially Allegories: there is no assault on Plato, no philosophical terms in of toc (puaiic?, and allegorizing an utter simplicity in language, style, and thought.6 It is, of course, impos language?not different from what sible to say that a single individual could not write two works whose language, style, and subject matter vary as greatly as these two do. But I should rather think in this case that the opposite possibility is the correct one: that some one?a or epitomizer?in the name late antiquity attached copyist in the erroneous belief that the "Heraclitus" to an anonymous m?>\ Aiugtc?v tomention

work was by the author of the Homeric Allegories. Either way, not much is or is for known the author about Homeric of the lost, gained nothing particular Allegories either. I shall follow the majority opinion and consider the two authors to be separate individuals, though the occasional connections between the two works will be a regular topic in the Comments below. The author who is the subject of this article I shall call simply "Heraclitus" unless a confusion might arise, inwhich case I shall add "the Paradoxographer." When referring to the other I shall take care to specify him as author of the Homeric Allegories. Heraclitus, Where the author came from it is impossible to say, but some speculation about his date is possible. He refers in item 39 to the Hellenistic poet Aratus, author of the astronomical poem Phaenomena. The citation leads Nestle ( 151 ) to the conclusion that Heraclitus "geh?rt also fr?hestens ins 3. Jahrh. v. Chr." and the TLG Canon of Greek Authors to state simply "post 4 b.c.?" Gantz appears equally unsure, referring at one point to "the (Hellenistic?) Apiston of one Herakleitos." My own view is that the citation of Aratus cates that Heraclitus (560) Peri

indi was probably alive during the 1st or 2nd century a.D., when Aratus' popularity was established through the Latin translations of Cicero and Germanicus7?in truth a time rich in rationalistic and allegori cal readings of myth. Such a dating is suggested, if not actually confirmed, by the vocabulary of the 7i?pl Atugtcdv, for included in the text are a number of
5 See Russell 191 for Heraclitus' attitude to Heraclitus There toward both Plato, Plato the "false and Epicurus accuser "owe in Homeric of Homer," the origin of

in fact, according and Epicurus; to Homer." their own doctrines which for their brevity 1956: 232 seem

are, however,

a few passages

like Heraclitus

Paradoxographus: aucun

e.g., 33

(Heracles),

Allegories 70-73

(Odysseus). 6 Buffi?re 7 Hopkinson

calls

the style "sans

appr?t."

138; Sale

160-64.

54

Jacob Stern

words, and forms of words, which appear to belong especially to the 1st cen tury b.c. or thereafter. I note in particular the following: fjTT?co in the active voice (item 16);opocGi?"eye" (13, cf. ll);7tpo?A,?7tcu (H);7tpoG7c?0?ioc (16); XCopi??G0oci "depart" (8,14); and possibly also dc?Anyopeiv (39). In addition, we may note one other minor piece of evidence, for what itmay be worth, the fact that in item 35 Heraclitus follows the later Roman version of the myth on this item). Altogether, then, (see the Comment there is not much by way of evidence. We may speculate that our author came from one of the urban centers of the late 1st or 2nd century a.D.; that his work, of Philomela and Procne whatever length may have been, was probably epitomized like the works of Palaephatus and Conon during the Byzantine period.8 Neither the title nor the name of the author can be guaranteed, but there is no good reason not its original as the nepi Ak?gtcov of Heraclitus the Paradoxographer. The text, amere fifteen pages in the Teubner edition of Nicolaus Festa, is comprised of 39 separate items. In each of these amyth is briefly told?or alluded to in a way which implies that it is so well known as not to require to refer to the work then interpreted. For the most part the myths which are treated are quite familiar; the few exceptions, for example Glaucus of the Sea (10) or Lamia (34), will be dealt with specifically in the Comments these fall into four main categories, which follow. As for the interpretations, telling?and by Heraclitus which at times overlap: (1) rationalism; (2) euhemerism (an important sub set of rationalism); Each of and these will be dis (3) allegory; (4) etymology. it is sufficient to note that this range of inter cussed below. For the moment most the notable feature of this brief collection. Other is pretation perhaps such collections, from the Hellenistic period to the Roman Empire, exist, but for the most part they collect tales around some common theme but do not o?Antoninus offer interpretations of them: e.g., theMetamorphoses Liberalis, a collection borrowed for the most part from Boios of metamorphosis-tales of Parthenius, a collection of love the 'EpcoTiKOc and Nicander; 7toc0fipocTOc a collection of myths Catasterisms of the and Pseudo-Eratosthenes, stories; inwhich Conon characters are transformed common into constellations. theme?for Still other collections seem to have no consistent

example, the ?ir|yf|G?i? of or the omnium-gatherum The closest of Apollodorus. Bi?^ioGrjicri is the similarly named nep\ of Heraclitus analogy to the rcepi Atugtow Atc?gtuw of Palaephatus; here in fact we do find a collection of myths each are only of of which is subject to an interpretation, but these interpretations
8 The extreme conciseness We of some also note this is due items in the collection that they have of a few items been (e.g.,

implies

individually 22 and 38),

abbreviated. though

the obvious

whether

incompleteness to an epitomizer is unclear.

Heraclitus the rationalistic is unique

the Paradoxographer,

?lepl

'Akigtcov

55

type. In truth, the brief text of Heraclitus the Paradoxographer in the range of interpretations that it offers for the myths that it its primary interest for students of mythology is cites; and correspondingly that it exemplifies in brief compass such a range of ancient strategies for the of myth.9 A brief description be in order. will terpretation interpretation B. RATIONALISM is that myth is a principle of this mode of interpretation mistake of history. Some event in the past?a casual or oddly metaphoric remark, a surprising invention or innovation, or some other unexpected hap misunderstood and from the misunderstand pening?is by contemporaries a to is arise. believed The ing myth interpreter's job is nothing more compli cated than to discover narrative. the historical event which is behind the fantastical The prime exemplar A71?GTC?Vof Palaephatus, whom of this approach in antiquity is the 7cepi the Suda identifies as the 7iai8iKa of no less Geryon, we learn from Palaephatus, was not a The fundamental of these four main modes of in

than the philosopher Aristotle. monster with three heads; he was an ordinary man from the city of Three was who therefore called tricranite Geryon. Confusion about "Tricarenia," tops, theword, nothing more than a false etymology or bad pun, produced the myth. So too Pandora was hardly molded from clay; she was instead the firstwoman to use the cosmetic known as \j/ijllu6iov?we might say she was the inventor of the a who later of fools. This story offers a typical ex mud-pack age perplexed eupeTTj?, the "first discoverer/ ample of the rationalistic motif of the TcpuVro? inventor." A further example is the case of Medea: it is hardly likely thatMedea had the ability to rejuvenate old men by dismembering them and boiling them in amagical cauldron, as the myth relates; rather, we learn from Palaephatus that she was the inventor of hair dye and the steam bath, from which old men is thus emerged, as we might say, revitalized and rejuvenated. The marvelous repudiated, the myth subjected to an apparent scientific scrutiny. As D?tienne has noted (14), the illusion that myth must reflect reality is "irrepressible." This rationalistic method is an approach tomyth found principally in the ancient analysis
9 Festa

historians

is to construct
1897: 246 n. in Heraclitus.

and geographers, whose prime interest in this mode of a historical bridge to the mythic past.10 Most of the
1 comments on the double 62 quoted use of rationalism by Dietz and allegorical in schools exist,

terpretation then:

See also Veyne

81 n. 38: "Two

the criticism

by the majority 10 Lightfoot periods Bietenholz blend

of legends by historians and the allegorical of legends interpretation of philosophers, the Stoics." Dietz to the mix. adds euhemerism including 230 speaks of "the seamlessness with which the mythical and historical the indifference with which folkloric motifs attach to them." See also

and

40-41.

56

Jacob Stern
of a Theseus or a Heracles?or aMoses, for that matter?does not vio

myth

late our sense of reason, and that part which does the rationalizer can explain away as merely a confused report of simple historical events. Belief in the historicity of the heroes thus becomes easy and uncomplicated. Examples of the approach can be found in the earliest Greek historians?Hecataeus, Pherecydes, Hellanicus?and throughout the historical tradition, for example in such authors as Dionysius Scytobrachion, Diodorus Siculus, Pausanias, and Plutarch.11 As we shall soon see, it is possible to discern the last stage of this mode of analysis in antiquity in the handbooks of the rhetoricians. Through these rhetorical works, we may suppose, the rationalistic method became fundamental part of the educational system from the 1st century onward. a It

is, furthermore, amode of analysis which we recognize in our own day, for despite Plato's emphatic rejection of it as absurd (Phaedrus 229c-d), it dies hard. C. EUHEMERISM The type of rationalism which we have discussed up to this point avoids the crea rationalizing of myths of the gods. It is the heroes, and the monstrous tures they encounter, with which it is primarily concerned, since its funda mental intention is to establish the historicity of those heroes by the elimina tion of the "unlikely," the non-eiKo?, from their myths. But there is a form of rationalism which deals with myths of the gods?the form which we call to us primarily from The of outline Euhemerus' views is known "euhemerism."

the summary statement in the 5th book of Diodorus Siculus (5.41-46) and the Latin fragments of Ennius' Euhemerus' Sacra historia. The thesis is quite simple: that what we call the gods were nothing more than humans, great men on our and women of the past whose deeds, inventions, and benefactions behalf them to be highly regarded during their lives and to receive respectful worship after death.12 Perhaps the most familiar instance of this Theseus (31), approach comes from the end of Plutarch's pseudo-historical caused the gods Hades,
20-27, 27-31

where

Persephone,
38-43; Nestle

and Kore appear as a human

133-48; Rusten 93-94; Dowden

royal family
42-45; Stern

11 See Wipprecht 1996:10-16; Brown

of mythological rationalization notes 1996: 71-72 that rationalization in the early historians Fowler an occasional naive acceptance of myth. that it sits alongside method; 12 230: Euhemerus 1956: 245-47; Buffi?re Grant 49-50; Lightfoot for surveys kind of rationalism, asserting that gods were humans deified for to show Hellenistic

in the historians. is not a universal

"exhibits their

special

benefactions

Bietenholz

to divine honours." kings how they too could attain wrote with that Euhemerus the intent to popu agreeing "perhaps doubts whether larize the cult of contemporary Euhemerus himself was rulers," correctly s.v. "Euhemerism." a euhemerist in the full later sense of the term. See also Geffcken towards mankind... 39-40, while

Heraclitus

the Paradoxographer,

FEepi 'ArciaTC?v

57

with a surprisingly fierce pet dog named Cerberus. From an earlier period we also find the method employed notably by Dionysius Scytobrachion13 and in has at least this much Conon,14 among many others. Such euhemerism common with the more straight-forward form of rationalism, that ultimately an attempt to explain the ways of gods as it is an effort to of such unlikely beings by asserting, once again, that the existence very deny myth is nothing but human history misunderstood. D. ALLEGORY The third form of analysis which will be found in the text of Heraclitus' 7iepi 'Atuotcov is that which seeks to find what Plato (Republic 378d) called the the later tradition refers to as its ?Xknyopia: bnovoxa of the myth?what that or its "other-speaking."15 The topic, of course, is to say, its "under-meaning" is immense and there are only a few aspects which I intend to consider here. The term dcMinyopia in antiquity covered amuch larger area than itsmod ern equivalent; itwas used to refer to any form of interpretation narrative inwhich ameaning other than that which was obvious face was claimed. Ancient on the Homeric of myth or on the sur it is not so much

allegorical interpretations centered for themost part or the Hesiodic texts. Two motives behind such allegorical

seem to have been paramount.16 The first, and according to interpretations T?te the original and most important, was the desire of certain philosophical schools, especially the Stoic school, to discover in the great epics of the past the first principles of their own physics and their own ethics.17 Homer, itwas

1975: 110; Lightfoot 32F7, F8: Rusten 102-12; Henrichs 224, who says of see also that he "took a swingeingly Euhemerist Dionysius Scytobrachion approach;" Haussier 7. 14 so also Servius 228-30; (see Dietz 73-75). Lightfoot 15 See Plutarch Moralia 19E (where Plutarch of this form of analysis). disapproves 16 See Dawson was a defensive, 12-13: "Some classicists insist that ancient allegory to save venerated cultural classics from the rationalist, philosophical and Plato. readers thus trans Xenophanes begun by given impetus by Allegorical lated seemingly immoral myths of gods and goddesses ac into ethical and cosmological counts. Other classicists from its very origins, was a philo argue that ancient allegory, to treat writers as hermeneutic and poetry of myth sophically sophisticated designed apologetic critique effort and scientists" (12). See also Zeller philosophers 17 See the two articles cited in the Bibliography. "... allegorical (1934:107): position interpretation 355 n. The 1 and Lamberton 15-22.

13 FGrHist

Tate's following fairly represents was in its very first germs not positive, in its aims: that is to say, it was practised defensive in order to make more the explicit the students doctrines which of the poets believed to be actually in the poets' contained and not simply to defend the poets against censure." words,

58

Jacob Stern

or by a divine inspira based on his own wisdom, as Dio have been unaware, or simply because, was it the of his customary practice suggests (53.3), day, expressed Chrysostom in allusive narrative form and in "symbols and riddles" the fundamental prin schools.18 Such a reconciliation of Homer and ciples of various philosophical Hesiod with his own philosophy was the goal of the Stoic Chrysippus, accord ing to the Epicurean Velleius in Cicero's de Natura deorum (1.41): ut etiam veterrimi poetae, qui haec ne suspicati quidem sint, Stoici fuisse videantur.19 If Cicero's interlocutors are to be believed, the claim was most frequently made under-meaning by the Stoics. But those who assert the secret philosophical of Homer or Hesiod are surprisingly eclectic, willing to find in the ancient epics evidence of various aspects of pre-Socratic or Platonic philosophy aswell.20 So, for instance, the appearance of Athene to Achilles at Iliad 1.194-200 is in terpreted as alluding to the Platonic tripartition of the soul; the salacious story of Aphrodite and Ares is said to exhibit an Empedoclean principle, the union of (pi^?ocand ve?ko? to produce apjaovia. So also the myth of Circe is allego rized as an allusion to the Pythagorean cycle of transmigration from human to animal which the prudent Odysseus these interpretations was recognized
Nam modo Stoicum ilium ne statum Peripateticum, faciunt,

asserted, by an intention tion of which he might

is able to escape.21 The arbitrariness of even in antiquity (Seneca Epistulae 88.5):

virtutem solam probantem et voluptates modo vi modo

refugientem Epicureum, tam exigentis,

et ab honesto laudantem modo

immortalitatis quietae

civitatis

pretio quidem et inter convivia genera

recedentem, cantusque

tria bonorum

inducentem,

Academicum,
omnia sunt.

omnia

incerta dicentem. Adparet nihil horum esse in illo, quia

they make him (se.Homer) a Stoic esteeming only virtue, flee ing pleasures, and not departing from the honorable even with an offer of im mortality; but sometimes they make him an Epicurean praising the condition of an undisturbed citizenry passing its life in party and song; sometimes a Peri patetic putting forward three kinds of goodness; and sometimes an Academic For sometimes
18 30. T?te 1934: 107-8; Dawson Cornutus 76.3-5; 19 13 on this "ancient sarcastic remark" See Dawson other hand, rejects (49-53,62) the consensus that the Stoics

and

cf. Pease

276. Homer

Long,

on

the

interpreted

and Hesiod

is an anti-Stoic He argues that Velleius' remark (i.e., as being crypto-Stoics). so 237. others Pfeiffer In he among disputes polemic. arguing Epicurean 20 40. Whitman 21 see Heraclitus Homeric of Iliad 1.194-200 For the Platonic Allegories interpretation see Homeric For Aphrodite and Ares 1962: xxiii-xxv). 17-20 69; (cf. Buffi?re Allegories allegorically Cornutus Plutarch 34.12-13; 126 and Pseudo-Plutarch 40-42). 101-2. For Circe and transmigration see Pseudo

(and Lamberton

Heraclitus saying that everything

in him, since all are.

the Paradoxographer,

Ylepi A7cigtc?v

59

is uncertain.

It is apparent that none of these things is

Yet a second motive for such allegory is not somuch the positive intention in Homer, as the defensive in of discovering basic philosophical principles tention of acquitting Homer of the familiar charges leveled against him by Plato, and the Epicureans.22 It is not that Homer is immoral or Xenophanes, in his myths of the gods; it is rather that there are allegori impious (aae?fic) to the myths which need to be discovered. Of this approach to cal meanings the epics the best example from antiquity is the already mentioned Homeric Allegories of Heraclitus. Homer is not engaging A sentence in its opening paragraph is famous: "If in ?cXA,nyop?a, he is guilty of aae?eioc ('impiety')."23 By an analysis not only of individual names but also of narrative episodes in the Iliad and the Odyssey this Heraclitus demonstrates his belief that Homer composer of allegory" and he "offers his own allegorical as the recovery and reproduction ofthat authorial intention."24 So, readings for example, that Aphrodite should act like a pimp in bringing Helen to Paris is not an example of to ?npm?q in Homer;25 it is rather ("the unseemly") illustration

was an "intentional

of the ?cppoauvn the pun on ("the folly")?note erotic affliction (HA 28.4-5). Examples could Aphrodite?which accompanies be multiplied: the binding of Zeus by Hera, Poseidon, and Athene (HA 21, (HA 26); the Ai?c Arc?rn 25);26 the lameness of Hephaestus (HA 39); the Homer's
cases the device 10: "In some difficult of allegorical in a use... to in be into order avoid of literal pas terpretation brought interpretation which of the gods." So also Dawson 24,38 sages in Homer gave an unflattering picture minded like Heraclitus defenders countered of Homer 41,51: "Philosophically charges was a scien of immorality and impropriety that Homer actually presenting by insisting 15-16; Wilson could tific and philosophical 23 For a translation and world view by means of the seemingly offensive portions of the 22 Lamberton

Iliad and the Odyssey' (51).

especially literally, as censure and 'unfitting' myth; when read 'allegorically,' however, 'impious' they are seen to be not at but all indirect of wis expressions myths profound philosophical as were dom" reads the Iliad and Odyssey (39); "Heraclitus though they intentionally as written of moral and scientific truths" (39-40). See in addition by Homer allegories Long deserve see also interpretation allegorical assumes 96-97: Russell that what he is uncovering "'Heraclitus' is actually the intention of the author. This seems to be the general assumption throughout antiquity. Homer was thought to have been fully conscious of all the moral and scientific facts that were read into him." 25 a is favorite of word of Homeric author Heraclitus, ?7ip?7T?? Allegories: e.g., 26.5,28.4,60.3. 26 See Dawson 48-50. 45-48 who 1962: xxxi-xxxix, Buffi?re supports 24 47. For the "intentionalist" nature Dawson arguing of ancient that Heraclitus was not a Stoic. 159-67 of the opening pages Dawson 24,39-40: of Heraclitus "If read see Russell 190-93. the Homeric See also P?pin epics do indeed

60

Jacob Stern

(HA 58.4), and so forth. We may acknowledge Tate's strongly ar 0?opa%?a assertion that the positive intention of discovering philosophical gued prin or Hesiod was the earlier and more fundamental in Homer incentive ciples behind Yet it can hardly be denied that the ethi the allegorical movement. nature in familiar Homeric or Hesiodic of troublesome whether cally myth, in no particular well-known form or free-floating text, was also a substantial

force behind the impulse to allegorize. It is also the most obvious motivating reason why, although rationalism generally treats the myths of heroes, alle gory for the most part treats myths, especially ethically questionable myths, of the gods. Such divine myths, for example, are the exclusive concern of Cornutus' allegorical treatment of myth in his Theologiae Graecae compen dium: e.g., 27.5-6 (the binding of Zeus) or 34.20 (Ares and Aphrodite).27 its critics in antiquity: these ranged Allegory, of course, was not without from the editors and philologists of the Alexandrian Library to Seneca and Plutarch.28 The complex position of the last of these has been well summa rized by Dawson
As a moralist

(65):
faced with too many unacceptable myths, Plutarch takes a posi

tion that largely rejects the extreme solutions of Stoic etymologists likeCornutus and allegorists like Heraclitus. He is unconcerned to demonstrate that a par ticular philosophy lies hidden on every page of Homer, behind every morally
shocking be found to show he wants Instead, myth. on the "surface" of the poetry.29 that something of moral value can

But this particular extension scope of this Introduction. E. ETYMOLOGY

of the topic of allegory

is beyond

the limited

to identify "etymology" as a separate form of mythological terpretation though in truth it is amethod employed both by rationalists one is of and the oldest of forms interpretation, allegorists mythological I have chosen

in and be

in Theogony and most notably in Plato's ing especially employed by Hesiod to pursue a full analysis of this method, not It is intention here my Cratylus.30 was more in of the allegorical method. Within it than the discussion the any
27 75 n. 31; Dawson See Dietz Pseudo-Plutarch 36; and compare 28 see Pfeiffer On the Library 167,239-42. 29 See also Dawson 64 for Plutarch's belief that "allegorical readings 96 and 102.

distort

the author

s own

to lay things out inways that reveal his own implicit moral intention judgment." Cf. Long 61. 30 In the Theogony 144-45 197-99 207-10 see, e.g., (Titans). (Aphrodite); (Cyclopes); see Fowler For etymology in the 5th-century (esp. Hellanicus) mythographer/historians

1996: 72-73 with additional bibliography in n. 73.

Heraclitus text of Heraclitus

the Paradoxographer, ?ep! Arc?aTcov

61

the Paradoxographer, as we shall see, etymology is employed purposes. It is first, in the rationalistic mode of Palaephatus, a playing with words to discover in language the historical error in understand ing which can be used to explain the origin of the myth: so, for example, both for two main (3) and Heraclitus (19) rationalize the myth of the Spartoi by Palaephatus name sense in the the of "scattered taking people," as opposed to the (to them) erroneous meaning of "Sown Men."31 And secondly, in the allegorical mode, it is a search for the deep mythological meaning of a god or hero in the ety mology of the name of the character: this latter approach is that which is fun damental to the etymologizing inHesiod and is perhaps most fully illustrated from classical antiquity Here we find numerous in an effort to discover "true meaning" in the Theologiae Graecae compendium of Cornutus.32 instances of the etymologizing of the names of gods the fundamental

of the name:

from the "foresight" (i.e., the Stoics) call ?lp?voioc (32.1-3); Cronos and Rhea from "time" (%povo?) and "flow" (puai?), i.e., rain (5.10-11; 7.4).33 So the name reveals the essence of the god, an essence more often than not in Cornutus which contains "at least embryonically, important insights of Stoic physics and ethics."34 The habit of etymologizing was particularly criticized by Cotta the Platonist and Velleius the Epicurean in their dialogue with the Stoic Balbus in Cicero's de Natura deorum (1.36-37; 3.39-40). To the former "Balbus's interpretation of the gods ... is an illicit transformation of mere metaphors into realities;" to the latter "Balbus's Stoic etymological is atheistic because analysis actually

the significance of those gods?i.e., is etymologized so, for example, Prometheus (TcpourjOeioc) of the universal soul which the moderns

31 For Veyne to correct

further examples 67: "In order to make mistakes that often

in Palaephatus the transition are simple in Servius.

see Stern

1996:

18-20.

Dietz itwill Dietz

74 n. 28 quotes thus be sufficient 74 also discusses

to history, from myth over words." confusions

and Dawson 24-38. The former notes that (159) especially Cornutus "tire les anciens et de la physique." po?tes dans le sens de la cosmologie 33 For Cronos and Rhea see P?pin 157. See also Dawson ex 29-33 for the additional amples of Ares and Hades. 34 Dawson a do presuppose 30; see also 32-33: "Cornutus's interpretations background set of Stoic a that describe beliefs from the generation of the cosmological progression kosmos by the action of the logos to its periodic or dissolution in a grand conflagration is This well to Cornutus's is in what known; sequence ekpyrosis. already goal investigate ways ancient myths reflect the Stoic this true story of the cosmos. account and contact between the principal However, point of the myths is provided not by the of names." See also Grube 136 and Long is "an etymologist, not an allegorist" (54).

rationalistic etymologizing 32 See P?pin 156-59

overt

philosophical plots but by the hidden meanings mythical that the Stoic Cornutus 53-57, who demonstrates

62

Jacob Stern

it reduces the gods tomere forces of nature."35 Yet as Rollinson has observed that the allegorist could avoid (26-27), itwas through such etymologizing in his method. the charge of arbitrariness The allegorical meaning of the lies in narrative in its the fundamental mythic reality residing words?espe cially in the names of its characters.36 It is, therefore, only through such ety that the allegorist discovers the correct direction, from among mologizing many possible directions, for his analysis of "under-meaning" Ilepl to go.37

F. THE The

EPIGRAPH

OF HERACLITUS*

'A7UOTC0V

text of Heraclitus' rcepi 'Akigtcov is not, like that of Palaephatus, pre ceded by extended general remarks which identify and explain the interpre tative methods which are to be followed, but it does have a very brief epigraph: "The r\ GepocTte?oc p?Gcov tcov 7iapoc cp?aiv rcapaSeoouivcuv avaaK?-?f] or Curing of Traditional Myths inWhich Nature Is Vio to two of the fun and Gepoateioc?refer lated."38 The key words?dcvocaiceufi damental modes of interpretation which have just been discussed and which are exemplified in the text. The first term, avaGK?\)f|, comes from the preliminary rhetorical exercises as 7ipoyu}iv?c>u?:Ta or praeexercitamina. The ancient rhetorical hand

Deconstruction

known

and Theon books, themselves known as Ilpoyopv?apata, by Hermogenes in the 4th or 5th, list and exem in the 2nd century a.d. and by Aphthonius (or refutatio) plify as a specific rhetorical exercise for students the avaaKeuf| are in terms of a set list of topics (totcoi) which of myth.39 Such avaoKeuai
52-72 54-55. for criticism of the technique of ety See in general Dawson Seneca and Plutarch. by mology 36 an ever-present 58: "Old Stoic etymology be Dawson drew upon correspondence nature tween word and (lekton) correspondence implied by meaning (physis)?a (logos), 135: "Their [sc. the Stoics'] interest in etymology See also Grube Cornutus's etymologizing." was that there was a natural relation between great. They believed things and their origi a relationship to be onomatopoeic." or true (eTuuxx) names, which was usually believed nal 37 See Dawson 6: "It [sc. etymology] has often been presented by ancient interpreters as a 'rational' or 'scientific' way of justifying the attribution of another, less-than-obvious to a word 35 Dawson

meaning

some sort of acceptable or of to an otherwise incom meaning giving counter In of hermeneu the could this way, expression. charges etymologist prehensible foundations of meaning." the original with the claim to have uncovered tical willfulness 38 see Festa 1897: 244-45 and in Gale or Westermann; The epigraph is not printed 1962: viii. Buffi?re 39 a translation texts see Rabe and Spengel; will be found For handbook of Aphthonius For a full 2.4.18-19. in Butts. See also Kennedy in Nadeau; of Theon 62, and note Quintilian discussion enemies of ocvocoKeufi of tradition." see Lausberg 493: "it takes up the partisan Grant 59. Cf. Festa 1897: 243-45; position of rationalistic

Heraclitus can be found

the Paradoxographer, ?epi

A7ugtcdv

63

in essentially the same form in all three rhetorical handbooks. The myth is to be analyzed and "deconstructed" by the student according to specific categories: itmight be oc?uvoctov (impossible); ?rciGocvov (unbeliev able); \j/?i)??? (false); aaoccp?? (unclear); ?7tp?7t?? (improper), and so forth.40 An amusing example isHermogenes' of the tale of Arion from deconstruction 1.23-24: it is, says Hermogenes, Herodotus that Arion was rescued aSuvaxov he should by a dolphin; but it is dcmGavov that in such dire circumstances wish to sing a song. It is precisely these categories?the impossible, the un so are forth?which believable, the improper, the false, and employed in the nepi A7UGTC0V of Palaephatus and, as we shall see, more generally through out the rationalistic tradition. And it seems to be clear that the use of this term in the epigraph to Heraclitus' nepi Arc?aTCOV ismeant to al to lude those interpretations within his text which fall into the deconstructive or rationalistic mode: that is, the term ccvocGKeuri refers to the identification of the "impossible" or "unbelievable" in the myth; thereafter, the rationalistic rhetorical method discovers the "mistake" which created the "unbelievable" tale. And it that this tedious appears equally clear that it is from the npoy?uv?cajLiaTa form of rationalistic enters of the educational system from analysis myth which it has never departed, nor been successfully expelled.41 The historians and geographers who employed the rationalistic method had at least a pur heroes by the removal pose, the asserting of the historicity of the mythological of the unlikely from their biographies. But in the hands of the rhetoricians becomes mere idle play. term in the epigraph, Qzpaneia, appears to make reference to The second the allegorical interpretations which will also be found in the text of Heraclitus the Paradoxographer. Here we encounter a technical term which was borrowed this method of deconstruction from the Stoic tradition in which the ethically problematic nature of myth was frequently described in amedical metaphor: the myth was said to be af flicted with disease (to vogouv, to kocx?kto?>v, to GocGpov) and to require a "cure." So, for instance, Plutarch (Moralia 20F) refers to "true" opinions about the gods in literary texts as "healthy" (uyiocivoDGOci). In Heraclitus, the au thor of the Homeric Allegories, The narrative of the Homeric "antidote," which one of the terms employed is avTUpapuocKov. epics, the author informs us, is in need of an is the allegorizing of its apparent impiety (22.1): "For this

40 See Hermogenes ch. 5; and for a full list of such "commonplace Prog. 5; Aphthonius see Butts 243. in Theon arguments" 41 493: "The refutatio See Lausberg is a weapon of historical criticism and a weapon of in From an erudite the struggle between world views. exercise it sank to enlightenment the level of school teaching."

64

Jacob Stern

there is but one ?vTup?ppocKov, to demonstrate that the myth has aGe?eia same we been allegorized." In the author also find the term Geparceuco em ployed in the same sense (6.1 ): "Since the trope of allegory is found inHomer, shall we not cure (GeparceUGopev) what seem to be unhealthy statements use the in him the of about this defense ((pocuXco??%8iv) gods (a7to?ioyia)?" by used It is this latter term, GepocTceuco, and its cognate Gepoc7ieia which typically are in this sense by the later Byzantine critics who clearly inherit the famil

iar terminology from the earlier Stoic tradition. So, for example, in Eustathius the two words are used in the special sense of "curing amyth by allegorical that interpretation." On one occasion Eustathius notes (123.16 Stallbaum) those who understand Hera as dcf|p, Poseidon aswater, and Zeus as divine vou? are "curing the myth" (tov toio?>tov p?Gov Gepa7i?t)0\)Giv). Elsewhere, in a number of similar allegorical contexts, we find in Eustathius such expressions as GepocTte?octou puGou (1382.49), to udGikov Gepome?eTou (1550.61), and even f| (pi?OGOcpo? GepocTte?oc( 1597.51 ),"the philosophical curing of themyth." to in addition cites these the de Ulixis erroribus,42 cases, Festa, 14th-century an allegorical treatment of the wanderings of Odysseus, which has an epigraph that promises to "cure the unsoundness of the myth" (to u/dGo-o GocGpov ... terms and The Gepa7iet)0\)Ga).43 Gepa?ieia GepaTteuc? are therefore found in this special sense from the time of Heraclitus, author of the Homeric Alle gories, to the Byzantine period and are clearly part of the Stoic interpretative the appearance of the word Gepa7ieia in the epigraph to indicates that the epigraph was added rcepi Atc?gtcov in the Byzantine period or that itwas placed there by Heraclitus himself in the 1st or 2nd century it is now impossible to tell.44 tradition. Whether the text of Heraclitus' We may, however, safely conclude that whether the brief introductory epi or by his Byzantine graph was added by the author himself copyist or are terms the technical and ?vaGK?i)i| Geparceia epitomizer, explicitly meant to refer to the rationalistic are found in the text of Heraclitus' and the allegorical modes of interpretation which rcepi Atc?gtcov. And to that extent they in the

offer a very brief summary of the approaches which will be illustrated text of Heraclitus the Paradoxographer.

329-44. Festa 1897: 244-45; the text will be found inWestermann 43 see 1329-51 of The author was Matthew, Cameron: ; ( ) Ephesus Bishop in even Pfeiffer." Compare X Pi. O/. 2.162b. 44 in the MS of Parthenius Cf. the so-called manchettes and Antoninus 246-56: "It can no longer Lightfoot from the authors themselves" (248). see seriously be upheld that

42

the text "took

Liberalis,

and derive

the manchettes

Heraclitus

the Paradoxographer, Uepx Atcigtcov

65

G. HERACLITUS, L Content We

Ilepi

'A7UCJTC?V

and Method.

a text turn now specifically to the text of Heraclitus the Paradoxographer, which consists, aswas noted at the beginning of this Introduction, of 39 briefly told and interpreted myths. In terms of subject these 39 items are randomly arranged within the corpus. So, for instance, five items deal with the myth of three with the myth of the Argonauts Heracles (18,20,21,31,33); (8,17,24); four with the myth of Perseus (1, 9, 13, 27); and seven with the myth of No sequencing is apparent in any of these, (2,11,14,16,29,32,39). Odysseus and in fact roughly a third of the corpus deals with what might be called free floating myths (10); the Pans Next from no obvious or well-known literary source: e.g., Glaucus (25); or Lamia (34). to be observed is that the four modes

of interpretation which have are text. In some in all within Heraclitus' been discussed above represented is found within a particular item. So, for in stances, more than one mode stance, in both 1 and 24 we find a treatment of myth which is fundamentally rationalistic, but in each item the final sentence is allegorical. Similarly, item 3 appears to exhibit not only a rationalistic and allegorical approach, but also to engage in euhemerism. Yet despite these few instances, for the most part the methodological approaches are kept distinct. a. Rationalism. amples the Comments ex First, the rationalistic mode. Many of the mythological in this category will be found also in the collection of Palaephatus, as on the individual items will demonstrate. Inmost instances

the details or even general basis of Heraclitus' rationalizations will differ from in a few cases Heraclitus' those of Palaephatus; rationalizations will be fun damentally the same aswhat can be found in Palaephatus. It is also notewor it thy that, as frequently in Palaephatus, so too inHeraclitus' rationalizations will at times be the case that significant details of the myths are left totally unrationalized: in item 19, for example, the "dragon's teeth" are unexplained; in item 34 Lamia's eyes in a cup are without any apparent explanation. On the other hand, sometimes Heraclitus will rationalize a detail which he has iswell known: in item 14. inHeraclitus which are essentially the Typical examples of rationalizations same as what can be found in Palaephatus are items 5 and 12: the Centaurs 1) and Atalanta (^Palaephatus 13). In these two cases the spe (^Palaephatus cific form of the rationalization is identical to the Palaephatean, although the to specify in his opening sentence, assuming the traditional myth so, for example, the "cur-like" dogs in item 2 or the Sirens' music

not bothered

66

Jacob Stern in Palaephatus are much more extensive. But in a number of other

versions

cases it seems clear that Heraclitus

and Palaephatus are drawing on different sources: in item 2, for example, "Scylla," Heraclitus offers a rationalization? that Scylla was a famous prostitute?which is fundamentally different from rationalization

Palaephatus'

of Scylla as a ship with a dog-figure on its prow (Palaephatus 20).45 In each of these examples, and in others in the text which are fundamentally of the myth, we note also the common rationalizations features of the rationalized

or "deconstructed" myth: the narrative is said, or to be "false" (5,18, 36), "impossible" (4, 5), "laughable" (7), clearly implied, or otherwise "unbelievable" is simple: history has (19, 26). The explanation In the case of the centaurs it is a 7tpcoTO?eupeTTj?, an been misunderstood. inventor whose of Asclepius On E?)p?Toc?. So too in the case discovery confused his contemporaries.46 10) we find instances of 7tp?>TOi (26) and Atlas (4; cf. Glaucus the other hand, in the case of Pasiphae (7), or for example the

Spartoi of item 19, the rationalization depends on a simple confusion of words: Taurus was not an animal, but a human being; the Spartoi were not "sown people," but people who had been "scattered far and wide."47 The interpreter's job has thus become nothing more than to correct the "false" and "impos sible" by explaining what is "true" (??T|0??: 15,21,23) or "likely" (e?ko?: 13,18). in the text of b. Euhemerism. of the sort just discussed Rationalism is limited in its application tomyths of heroes and the monsters never rationalizes myths of the encounter. Palaephatus they occasionally not for atheism is his intention, but rather by employing the Olympian gods, to defend the historicity of the heroes through the elimi rationalistic method Palaephatus nation Heraclitus in their myths which is "unlikely." But in the text of of anything the Paradoxographer we do find the rationalistic method applied tomyths of the gods: the particular form of rationalism discussed above which is called euhemerism. So, for instance, in item 3 (and presumably also in the identical item 6), where Caeneus' sex-change from female to male is inter

preted as a transition from youthful ?pcopevo? (i.e., "female") to adult man (?v?pcoGei?), it is Festa's opinion, based in particular on the absence of the
sources of Heraclitus 410 for a discussion of the different See especially Decharme note with Decharme We may, in addition, and Buffi?re 1956: 236 that and Palaephatus. see seems particularly with Heraclitus obsessed 2,8,14,16. ?xa?pai: 46 see Fowler in the early mythographers 1996: 1975: 111. For 7ipcoxoi eupexai Henrichs 45

73-74 with additional bibliography in n. 87.

47 For additional cf. Festa 1897: examples 245-47). of rationalization It is to be noted in Heraclitus that the see items 8,13,15,20, not occur the false 35 in (and stem yeu?does

Heraclitus ness

times in Palaephatus); it occurs many Heraclitus indicates (although ouk ?Xrfi?q. he rationalizes the words of the myths with, others, among

Heraclitus

the Paradoxographer,

Ylepi Arc?GTcov

67

so-called anaphoric article, that the second appearance of the name Poseidon to the god men refers to a human being?acuiusdam nomine Poseidon'?not tioned in the previous line.48 So too in item 9 (cited as a parallel in Festa's apparatus) the same grammatical subtlety leads to the conclusion that the first appearance of the name "Hermes" refers to the god, whereas the second ap pearance refers to a human being of the same name who is playing the famil iar role of the Tip?TO? eupeTri?. In 28 and 34 the euhemerizing of Zeus (and in 28 also of other gods) seems beyond question. The recording of the traditional myth in each case assumes the god; the interpretation relies on the assumption that the narrative is not about a divinity, but rather a human king. In both instances the key word is ?aaiA,euc/?aoiA,8iL)Cu, the precise word that Euhemerus himself had used to of Ouranus, Cronus, and Zeus;49 and the precise word also that in an earlier period Hecataeus (fr. 26 Fowler) had used to euhemerize (fr. 30 Fowler) to euhemerize Prometheus. Finally, Geryones, and Herodorus we may mention a possible additional example of euhemerism in the treat ment of Selene in item 38, though here the text is apparently flawed and the meaning not completely clear. On the other hand, in item 30 it is noteworthy that Zeus appears as a god without being euhemerized. c.Allegory. In addition to euhemerism, there are notable gorical interpretation in Heraclitus' instances of alle "euhemerize" themyths

rcepi Atugtcov?here again a mode of absent from the Atc?gtcov of Palaephatus. mythological rcepi analysis entirely In these allegorical examples from the text of the Paradoxographer we find no search for the origin of the myth nor any that the explicit presumption were the con origin is to be located in an error or mistake in the past?these cerns and presumptions of the rationalizing mode of analysis. Nor in these cases does the "deconstruct" the myths. Instead, allegorical Paradoxographer he accepts the myths as the tradition presents them and offers interpretations of them, based on his understanding of the "under-meaning" or "other-speak ing" of the narratives. Such allegorical interpretations in the Paradoxographer are entirely in terms of to: f|0iKa, as opposed to toc (puaiKOt, i.e., in contrast to the interpretations inHeraclitus' Homeric Allegories which frequently treat di vine myth allegorical in terms of the natural world,50 in the Paradoxographer the only we are or find in terms. ethical moralistic interpretations

48 Festa 1902: ad loe. explicitly the article at this point, asWestermann rejects inserting had done. 49 For ?aai^euc/?aaiAeuco see FGrHist in Euhemerus 63F2, F3 passim. 50 Heraclitus Homeric 65-66 treats the episode of Proteus So, for example, Allegories n. "as an account of creation" 226 (Lamberton 256).

68

Jacob Stern

We may take as a first example the elegant allegorization of the single eye of the Cyclops in item 11: "that the Cyclops had only one mode of percep tion?his that he never used reason to foresee anything."51 This eyesight?and instance exemplifies the special role of Odysseus in the allegorical tradition. As early as the Homeric Allegories and the pseudo-Plutarchean Essay on the the euxppcov or (ppoviuo? man, had be Life and Poetry ofHomer, Odysseus, come the Stoic model of prudence ((ppovnaic)?a significance he maintains the tradition.52 for So, instance, inHeraclitus Homeric throughout allegorical Allegories as the symbol of the victory of and 78 we find Odysseus vices: savagery (the Cy (ppovnoi? pleasure (the Lotoseaters); clops); impudence (Scylla); wastefulness (Charybdis); and gluttony (Circe).53 In the text of Heraclitus the Paradoxographer this special role of Odysseus in 70-72 over various the allegorical tradition is represented not only by item 11 (the Cyclops) but also by item 16 (Circe)?here, as also in item 2 (Scylla) and by implication in item 14 (the Sirens), the prudent Odysseus resists the temptations of an eTaipa. examples of the allegorization of myths of Odysseus, or more gen will be the Paradoxographer erally of myths from the Odyssey, in Heraclitus found in items 29 (Proteus), 32 (Calypso), and 39 (the Cattle of the Sun). We inHeraclitus the Paradoxographer might note that of the seven Odyssey-myths Additional the allegorical interpre only one is also treated by Palaephatus.54 Apparently tation of Odysseus as the man of prudence and endurance influenced the 1st ?r 2nd-century Heraclitus much more than the earlier rationalist Palaephatus. in the Paradoxographer Further examples of allegorical interpretation sources. a From Iliad 8.367-69 of myths known from variety of classical Odyssey from Euripides' Alcestis 357-62 11.623-26 we know the myth of Heracles' are and

escape from Hades, and and Plato's Symposium 179d the similar myth

21: "whenever a per of Orpheus' ascent; both are allegorized in Heraclitus ... son endured a long and dangerous people said that he had been journey move to inanimate rocks and trees delivered from Hell." Orpheus' ability his song is a myth known from Aeschylus' Agamemnon 1629-30, and in Aulis this myth 1211-14; Euripides' Bacchae 560-64, and Iphigeneia 23. So also the myth of the Helmet of will be found allegorized inHeraclitus through

51 52

See Westermann See Buffi?re

376.XLIII. 1962: xxiv-xxv; Lamberton 41-42; Keaney and Lamberton 24-26 (and

126 and 136). sections 53 24-25. Dowden 54 As mentioned above, ize the myth, although "mixed case." the

Heraclitus last sentence

2 (Scylla)=Palaephatus 20. Both 2 is apparently of Heraclitus

authors allegorical:

rational ergo %.

Heraclitus Hades

the Paradoxographer,

?lepx Atugtc?v

69

is known from Hesiod's Aspis 226-27 (cf. Pherecydes FGrHist 3F11) 27: the helmet is "the bourn to which the and it is allegorized in Heraclitus dead man goes, where he can be no longer seen." And finally the myth of the

in Heraclitus 17, is known from Pindar bulls, allegorized fire-breathing Rhodius 4.220-42 and Apollonius Argonautica 3.1278-353. Pythian We might at this point revisit a topic which was raised in section D of this and inquire whether the text of Heraclitus the Paradoxographer for allegorizing which lends support to either of the two supposed motives were discussed there. The immediate impression is that support is given by Introduction this text to neither the allegorical sophical position of the two competing motives. On in Heraclitus presents interpretations which is intended to be authorized the one hand, none of a recognizable philo or bolstered by its ap

parent presence in an authoritative classical source. In fact, Heraclitus never allegorizes in terms of toc (puaiKa and his "ethic," such as it is, is hardly recog to any specific philosophical school. Nor does he at any nizable as belonging item 39?specifically the possible exception of the untypical On the other mention any classical author as a source of such philosophizing. is particularly interested in rescuing hand, it hardly appears that Heraclitus time?with by allegorical interpretation any specific classical author such as Homer Yet itmight be argued?and here is Hesiod from a charge of aae?eia. Heraclitus is sufficiently interested in rescuing fundamental point?that tradition from the "Platonic" attack that he moralizes whole mythological or the the

by his allegorical interpretations whatever myth from whatever source comes to hand: this is seen in almost all the examples of allegorical interpretation which have just been discussed. Though many of these are familiar Homeric myths, others come more generally from Hesiod or from early lyric or classical tragedy. So it is themythological

tradition in general, rather than any specific author, that is effectively defending against a charge of Heraclitus the Paradoxographer impiety and irrationality: so, for example, Odysseus shows his moral superiority to the ?Taipa Circe ( 16) and Orpheus farfrom being amagician is a civilizer and it appears, belongs to an age of skeptical disbe culture-hero (23). Heraclitus, tradition which is no longer lief: fundamentally he plays with amythological a source of serious belief, but inwhich he can discover by allegory and occa sionally by rationalization a simple ethic which he thinks the tradition requires if it is to be saved from a general charge of implausibility and impiety. to the topic of etymology in the text of d. Etymology. Next, we move Heraclitus the Paradoxographer: here we find a number of distinct uses. First, as was illustrated above, etymological word play appears inwhat we may call as nothing more than simple punning; the "Palaephatean" rationalizations
presumption is always of an error in the past?some quasi-metaphoric ex

70

Jacob Stern

by literal-minded simpletons of a arose. This word-play may myths be onomastic: Kpio? (24), A?cov and Ap?cKcov (15; 20), and Tocupo? (7) were not animals but rather humans with the names Ram, Lion, Dragon, and Bull. Or itmay appear as rationalistic punning of the type which is quite common in the 7cepi 'ArciaTCOV of Palaephatus: Medusa (1) did not turn men to stone; rather she was a prostitute whose beauty "petrified" them; Perseus (9) did not have winged sandals for his feet, but as a swift runner "he flew;" or, in the example cited above, the Spartoi (19) were not "sown people," but rather people "scattered far and wide." In some cases the 8Ti Kai v?v ("still now") motif will be employed?a motif in the texts of Antoninus found frequently Liberalis and Conon, where it is regularly used to introduce the aetiology of some on-going cult or religious celebration.55 But in Heraclitus, is used exclusively as also in Palaephatus, the "still now" motif of verbal expressions. Typically, these will be citations of used to explain amyth is speech to confirm that ametaphor

pression was misunderstood, apparently bygone age, and from the misunderstanding

contemporary is seen clearly in item 9: we begin with a simple, still in use. The paradigm runner a swift named Perseus; people said metaphorically that fact, prosaic as literal fact, whence the he had wings on his feet and this ismisunderstood myth of Perseus' winged sandals arises; the whole is confirmed by the obser vation that we still even today say of swift runners that they fly. The identical we begin with paradigm is found in a number of other instances: so in item 1 a beautiful eTaipa who was said to "turn men to stone"; from a misunder of this metaphor the myth arises which is confirmed by the fact that standing "we ourselves also say: he saw her and was turned to stone"; similarly in 21 "still now" we say of those who have escaped great dangers that they have been rescued from Hades; or in 32 of those who feast inwealth that they are "among the gods." In two instances the logic seems to be reversed: it is not that amis expression from the past explains the origin of the metaphoric but rather that the myth, myth explains aword in present use. So in 37 themyth of Argos, represented with eyes all over his body, explains the word "panop understood tic"; and in 25 the "Pans" explain the origin of the word kovzxku, "gang-bang." In the rationalizing instances which have just been discussed the word-play as ameans appears to be little more than an idle search for double-entendre of discovering the allegorized the mistake which will examples within an effort to discover

damental, which is the basis of the allegory which

55 Lightfoot 226-27; see also Fowler

reveal the origin of the myth. But in seems to be more fun the text the word-play in etymology the deep meaning of the myth is claimed.
73.

In the text of Heraclitus

1996:

Heraclitus the allegorized myth

the Paradoxographer,

Tlepi A7cigtc?v

71

item 23, provides an example in the words of Orpheus, as they are applied to the bestial, and Gnpico?ei?, 7C?Tpcb8ei?, ?ev?pco?ei?, stony, and tree-like nature of humanity before it is led to civilized life by puns; rather they reveal the es Orpheus. The words are not misunderstood sence of the allegory. Further instances will be found in the elegantly brief item 27 (the Cap of "Hades" allegorized as the x?Xoq where "the dead can be no longer seen") or in the play on words of "seeing" (atoOncnv, ?p?aecoc, and as an 7cpo??ieTCOVTa) allegorical explanation of the single eye of the Cyclops in item 11. 2. Language Next we turn to the language of Heraclitus: this, as was noted in the opening section of this Introduction, is for the most part unremarkable and simple. The syntax is correspondingly uncomplicated, although at times the sense can be quite puzzling because of the extreme conciseness of the items; it is un this was a feature of the original or is the result of later epito Heraclitus' mizing. vocabulary is standard, aside from a few uncommon words, which in fact he is usually in the act of defining; see, for example, items 25 and 37. As was mentioned items of vocabulary indicate a earlier, occasional date for the text and therefore its author after the 1st century b.c. One finds a larger number of abstract nouns and moral or ethical terms in Heraclitus clear whether This is clearly the result of the items of allegory which have no counterpart in Palaephatus. We note the may following typical examples: (ppovipo? of Odysseus in 2; aia?noi? in 11; ?eicn?aijnovia and ?oyiapo? in 23; (in a positive sense) and euae?eiv the most remarkable instance?the whole of item 16 inwhich and?perhaps a philosophically-tinged vocabulary allegorizes themyth of Circe: ?p?aiceia, e?voia, rcpocntoc?eia, ?7u9uu?a, ?Xoy?aTcoc, f|8ovf|. In this regard also we may use of the abstract noun i)7ro?r|\j/i? and its verb observe Heraclitus' -u7toA,ajn?(ivc?by which he elucidates not so much the "truth" of amyth as and euhemerism inHeraclitus the "notion"?i.e., the interpretative or allegorical "notion"?behind it: clear will be 6 in 8 found 11 (Teiresias); (the Harpies); (the Cyclops); 12 examples and 17 (Atalanta (the Fire-breathing Bulls); and 28 (Boreas Hippomenes); and Oreithyia). That the noun U7io?n\j/i? appears nowhere in Palaephatus is an indication of how much broader the range of in is Heraclitus. explanation than one sees in Palaephatus.

3. TheNature of theBook
Finally, we may ask whatis the text before us? It is unlikely, I think, that it is a random collection, although the text which survives to the present has most

72

Jacob Stern

probably

suffered abbreviation, and in at least a few of its 39 items it is clearly It seems more probable that the work is guided by an intention incomplete. to illustrate in short compass a variety of approaches for understanding some

of the more

ancient myths. In this regard it is important to ob problematic serve that 19 of the 39 myths treated by Heraclitus are the Paradoxographer also treated in Palaephatus' rcepi 'AmoTCov but that in only 5 of those 19 cases

are the interpretations by the two authors the same. In the remaining 14 cases the treatments of identical myths are fundamentally dissimilar. Sometimes same so both authors rationalize the myth but do quite differently: e.g., the myth of Scylla (Heraclitus 2; Palaephatus 20). In other cases Palaephatus ra a myth which Heraclitus treats allegorically: tionalizes e.g., the myth of So in of the initial (Heraclitus 23; Palaephatus 33). Orpheus spite impression, it is the case that in only 5 of the 39 items does Heraclitus actually follow his predecessor. We may speculate that by Heraclitus' day a list of "problematic myths" This, no doubt, was based in part on the commonplace. text of Palaephatus' rcepi 'Ati?gtcov, but there must also have unepitomized as been other sources, since Palaephatus did not use allegory or euhemerism had become

interpretative tools and even his specific rationalizations were not consistently followed by Heraclitus. These problematic myths then became the standard examples, used over and over again, to illustrate and expound competing tradition could be systems of interpretation through which the mythological to a doubting, audience. made reasonable or meaningful skeptical My own 7t?p! 'Atiigtcov is a handbook, perhaps the rem suspicion is that Heraclitus' nant of a Schoolbook for the education of the young, designed to accomplish this purpose. If so, itwould be analogous to the rhetorical npoyuuv?auocTa, the Theologiae Graecae Tabulae of Hyginus.57 compendium of Cornutus,56 and possibly also the

56 Dawson

See the address 36: "Cornutus

to 7ia??; Ttai?iov composed after having

1.1; 28.11;

41.19;

52.5;

76.2. who

his work been

for late adolescents trained by a

See also Long came to him in classical

53 and for in lit

struction

in philosophy." "a primer erature." 57 ... and are known b.c. 225: from the fourth of century epic "Epitomes Lightfoot are clearly school on papyri at least as late as the third century continue a.D., where they a formed describes how such techniques exercises large part (Augustine [Conf. 1.17.27] sources are cited in n. 48, esp. Quintilian 1.2.27. Additional of his own education)." Cameron citing passim stresses and the connection of mythological collections to "the schoolroom,"

in philosophy The work was

grammatikos

Greek

Quintilian

Juvenal.

Heraclitus

the Paradoxographer,

flepi Atc?gtcdv

73

'HPAKAEITOY, nepi
Heraclitus, On Unbelievable

'Atugtc?v58
Tales

r\ Geparce?a p?Gcov tcov nap? (p?aw 7iapa8e?op?vcov: ?vaoKeufi or Curing of Traditional Myths in Which The Deconstruction Nature IsViolated

1. riepi Me?oucm?
<?>aai TauTUv arco^ioouv xovq

1.Medusa

9eaaauivou?
arcoTepovToc

auTTjv, Kal Ilepa?co?

auTrj? ttjv K?(pa?r|v,

They say that Medusa turned anyone who looked at her to stone and that when Perseus cut off her head awinged

horse ??;eX9e?v ?nnov rcTEpcoT?v. e%ei ?? emerged. ouTO). auTu eTaipa Ka^f] ?y?veTO ?>? But here is how itwas. Medusa was TOV ??OVTa aUTT]V ?K7l?,T|KTOV a beautiful prostitute. Any man who saw so to to stone, oiov ?rco?,i9o\)<39ai. her was amazed?turned yev?pevov ourselves say, "He saw her ?iyojiev ?? Kai r\[ieiq "i??v auTr|v speak.60 We to stone." ?? and was turned ?7C8^i0(?9r]." Ttapayevouivou Ta te But when Perseus Medusa arrived, ?lepa?coc 8V ?pcoTi yevouivr)

?)7r?p%ovTaKaT?\paye Kal ttjv eamfic fi^iKiav KaT?(p9eipev arco?eGaaa ?? innox) tt]v f]?iK?av Kal toc vn?pxovxa yilpa? ?yripaoEV. f] y?p Kecpa?-rjto xr\? fj^iKia? av9o? ?cmv, o ?<pdXev a?Tfj? ? riepaeu?.

fell in love with him: she squandered61 her possessions on him and ruined the prime of her life.And when she had lost
these?her sions?she youth suffered and her posses old a "whorse"62

age. For the head

crown63 seus took of youth?which from her.

is the flowering
is what Per

Compare Palaephatus 31, where the Gorgon s head is rationalized as the head of a golden statue of Athene which Perseus put on his ship and stones is oddly rationalized as a group of man-sized where the p?trification Comment: set in the market-place of Seriphos by its citizens before they flee from Per seus and abandon the island (as Festa 1897: 247 notes, the rationalized ver For a different sion of Palaephatus ismore confused than that of Heraclitus).
rationalization see Pausanias 2.21.5.

2. riepi IkuMu? A?yeTai nepi TaUTU? oti KaTrjc>9i? r\v ?? auTU to?? 7iapa7cX?ovTa?. vnaic?Ti? ?Taipa Kal ??/? 7tapaa?Tou? Juxiuou? te Kal kuvco?ei?, jae9' (bvto?? cj?vou? Kaxr\aQiev, ?v oi? Kal tou? 'O?uao?oo? ETaipou?. auT?v ?? co? (pp?vipov ouK fi?uvfi9r|. Ka?rj

2. Scylla They say thatScylladevoured passing sailors. But Scylla was a beautiful prostitute who lived on an islandwith her glutton
ous and cur-like64 hangers-on. Together

with

these she would devour65 her cli

among them Odysseus'

ents66?and

companions. But with Odysseus him self she failed: he was too sensible.

74

Jacob Stern

with

Compare Palaephatus 20, where Scylla is rationalized as a trireme a dog-figure on the prow. More often Scylla was rationalized as a dan at the strait of Messina: Sallust Histories 4.27; Ovid Meta gerous promontory Servius on Aeneid 3.420; Tzetzes on Lycophron 46. See 14.73-74; morphoses Comment: also Polybius 34.2.12-34.3.10 (=Strabo 1.2.15-16). Heraclitus Homeric Allegories 70.11 allegorizes Scylla as "polymorphous
shamelessness."

3. riepi Kaiv?co?
A?yETai toutov rcpcnxpov yovaiKa

3. Caeneus

It is said that Caeneus

woman, into whom a man?one Poseidon who

was
could

at first a
turned not be

??Ta hnb uogei?c?vo? y?yov?vai, y?v?a9ai av?pa aTpcoTOVx?^k? Kal Gi?ripco. outo? ?? ?v v?o? ?pcou^vo? ?y?v?TO rioa?i?covo?, ?v?pco9?l? ?? KaTfjc \|A)%f|V ?y?v?TO bn' uiya? o??evO? KaTa7tovn9fjvai ?uvauevo? ou?? ?copoi? ei;a?Aayfjvai xa?-Ko? Kal ai?ripou- ovk?? y?p xpuao? Kal
apyopo? ?upr|To.

later

wounded by bronze or iron. as a boy had been But Caeneus

Poseidon's he became No beloved.67 a man, one his could Thereafter, greatness overpower of when spirit him,

emerged.

nor get him to change with bribes of bronze or iron. For gold and silver had not yet been discovered.

Comment:

Cf. Palaephatus 10,where the myth is rationalized, rather than, as an here, given allegorical interpretation. See the discussion of Sergent 247 49: the transition from ?pcojifivo? to adult man ismythically (and possibly also ritually) represented as a transformation or passage from female tomale. to manhood compare, most famously,

For such a passage from girlishness Achilles among the maidens. The rationalization somewhat

of iron and bronze as items of bribery necessitates the comment that gold and silver had not yet been dis final laughable in such covered: an example of the theme of illud tempus, which is common (Stern 1996: 21-22). Homericus* version of the See also Cameron's discussion of mythographus Caeneus myth at II. 1.264; and for themyth in general seeAcusilaus FGrHist2V22. rationalizations 4. riepi "At^xvto? Outo? 7iapa???oTai cp?pcovoupav?v ?7tl tcov bub pcov, o ??uvaTov Kai auTov ?vTa. ?vTip ?? o\>pav?v KaTa x? ?v ?aTpoXoyiav ao<po? Ttp?TO? KaT(?7tT?UG?, KpO^?yC?V ??
X?ipcova? Kal u?Ta?oA,occ*** acrcpcov 4. Atlas

The tradition is thatAtlas carries heaven on his shoulders, which is impossible, even though68 Atlas himself is under
heaven. Atlas was a wise man who was the

Kal ?uori?
tov Koapov.

?pu9?\)9r| (p?p?iv ?v aincp

first to observe the principles of as storms and tronomy. He foretold

Heraclitus

the Paradoxographer, ??pl

'AmaTcov

75

changes [in thewinds and the risings69 ] and settings of stars, and so the myth arose that he carried the cosmos within
himself.

Comment:

For Atlas

rationalized

as an astronomer

(=Diodorus Siculus 3.60.2): Scytobrachion FGrHist32V7 itwas believed that the whole cosmos was borne on Atlas' Buffi?re 1956: 238 and Rusten

see Dionysius "... and therefore

suggests allegorically Atlas he was gaining "knowledge of heavenly things." It is an instance of the theme of the 7tpa>TO? ebpEir\q, for which see Stern 1996:20. Compare Aeolus in Palaephatus 17, who is also rationalized as an astronomer (cf. Polybius 34.2.4-10 [=Strabo 1.2.15]; Pliny Nat. 3.94,7.203; and Servius on Aeneid 1.52); as Dietz comments (73): "this explanation [sc. of the myth of Aeolus] does not reject the entire fabula outright, but seeks to purge it of its poetic or im treatment of Ouranos (Diodorus probable fictions." Compare Euhemerus' ... about the motion Siculus 6.1.8): "a king of the stars." See knowledgeable Bolle 27. For a Stoic allegorizing of Atlas cf. Cornutus 48.10-12: "Atlas, who sup the things which ports the heavens by tirelessly [ocTa?xxuicopc??] producing come into being in accordance with the ?loyoi..., is also the whole cosmos" (Hays 97). 5. L??pl KEVTa?pcov Kal ttjv A?y?Tai K?pl t? nf|^iov OoA?nv y?yov?vai ?upu?i?, Ta p?v
?7t?vco tcov ?ayovcov ?v?pcov ?%ovTa?,

shoulders" (see extension FGrHist 31F13 Herodorus 109). By that when Heracles took the pillars of the cosmos from

5. The

Centaurs

It is said that around Mt. Pelion andMt.

Pholoe there were creatures of double

t? ?' arco (to?tou) to? uipou? rcav ouk ?Xr\Qkq ?? to?to. ?uo y?p ?7C71COV. ev (pvaeiq eiq ?in?Aayuiva? auv??9ouoa? ??uvaTov ?cooyovr|9f|vai Kal Tpacpfjvai. ??X ?ri Tfj? tcov uittcov
%pr|a?co? Ka9iaaVT?? ouan? ?yvcoGTOu, rcpcoToi TOC ?(p' l7T7tC?VKaT?Tp??OV

form: above the flanks they had the bodies of men; but all the restwas horse. But this is not true. For it is impos sible for two different creatures joined together in this way to be born alive or
to grow. Rather, at a time when horse

7t??ia 5tr|aT?UovT??, cpavTaa?av

a7??T??L?Gav toi? ftpcOTco? 9?aaa

T?

back riding was still unknown, these were the first to sit upon their horses. They overran and plundered the plains. And to those who first saw them from a distance they gave the appearance of
being made of two creatures.

uivoi?
y?yovoT??

paKp?9?v,
(p?a?cov.

cb? ?K ?uo?v ?iai

76

Jacob Stern

Comment:

Cf. Palaephatus 1,where Again the theme of the rcpcoToc ??>p?TT|?. the same rationalization?at much greater length?is given. The same ration is found in Diodorus alization for the double form of the Centaurs Siculus Cyropaedia 4.3.19-20; Pliny Nat. 7.202; and Tzetzes by Heraclitus

4.70.1. Cf. also Xenophon Chiliades 7.10-48.

Oddly enough, the rationalistic explanation of the Centaurs and Palaephatus seems "plausible" to Nash (289). 6. nepi Outo?
yuvaiKEia? KaTCX

T?ip?oioi) p?TaGxe?v
Kal TT]V aUTT^V

6. Teiresias

X?y?Tai
\)7t?^T|\|AV

Tfjc
T\V ?7tl

Teiresias is said to have partaken of both

woman's and man's nature.70

?v?p?ia?

(puoeco?,

It is the same notion

in the case of Caeneus.

Iwrote down

Kaiv?co? ?ypa\|/ap?v. Comment: both

Initially it seems that the first sentence means that Teiresias had sexual organs at the same time, but the familiar myth and the analogy and Teiresias

to Caeneus (3) imply a sex change instead. The stories of Caeneus are also linked together at Antoninus Liberalis 17.4-5. For a structural analysis of the myth see Brisson. 7. riepi naoupom?
Ta?Tnv ou%, cpaGlv ob? noXXoi ?paGOfivai vopi?ouGi, Tau tou pou, KaTa

TT]v ?y?^nv ?aGi^iGGav),

?vTOTiicov,

?cpou

(y??,o?ov

y?p tcov

aKOlVCOVTjTOU GUVOUG?a?

COp?%9ai TT|V

?vo? ?? tivo?
d) Taupo? r\v

7. Pasiphae They say that Pasiphae fell in love with a bull. But itwas not the bull in the herd, asmany people believe: that the queen yearned for a sexual union impossible
to consummate71 rather a local man, is ridiculous. whose name It was was

ovofia.

GUV?pyop ?? xpr\aa\i?,vy\ rcpo? ttjv Kal y?yovu?a ?7ii9uuaav Aai?atao Ka9' ?poiOTT]Ta tou ?yyuo?, ?y?vvnae Tau pou (ui?v), ov ol rcoA^ol Mivco p?v ekoc^ouv, Tau pop?? EiKa?ov KaTa ?? Guv9?Giv MivoVcaupo? ?K?,ri9r|.

Taurus. To fulfill her passion Pasiphae found an accomplice inDaedalus, and, becoming pregnant, she bore [a son] to Taurus. The with a resemblance people called him Minos' son, but they said he looked like Taurus. And by a joining together of the names he came to be called Minotaurus.

Comment:

Cf. Palaephatus 2, where, with much else, the same rationaliza tion of Taurus as aman appears (similarly in Palaephatus 15); so also Demon Philochorus FGrHisf 328F17a Theseus 16.1,19.3 FGrHist327?5; (^Plutarch 7). See, in addition, Servius on Aeneid Pasiphae is fabula presumably because 6.14 and Dietz 67: "The account unnatural of it tells of something (con

Heraclitus

the Paradoxographer, by Servius with

Ylepi 'An?axcov the myth

77

tra naturam)r In this it is contrasted which he calls historia. 8. riepif ApTiuicbv ? |?t>9oc 7iapa???o)K? Ta?Tac t? to? Oiv?co? yuvaiKa? UTtOTrr?pou? ???7ivov ?pKa?.ovaaq. bnoX?fioi ?' ?v

of Phaedra,

8. The Harpies The myth has been handed down that the Harpies were winged women who
used to snatch72 away Phineus' dinner.

One may suppose that they were ti? TauTa? KaTacpayoUGa? ?Taipa? oiKiav to? Oiv?co? Kal ?ivai, tt]v prostitutes who devoured Phineus' es tate and then went off and left him a?Tov Kal ttj? KaTa?ucouGa? even the bare minimum of ?vayKaia? Tpocpfj??v??f| K?%cop?G9ai without an a?To?, aid ?? ?Ga ?vaKTT|GaiTo food. But if he ever got anything else, and devoured73 returned ?g9i?iv Kal a?9i? it, rcapayivouiva? they always and then they departed again?which is %0)p?^?G9ai, O GUVr)9?? 7lOl??VTa??
?Taipai?.

typical of prostitutes.

Comment:

but Phineus'

Cf. Palaephatus 22, where the grasping Harpies are not prostitutes, evil daughters (cf. Tzetzes Chiliades 1.219-23). it is not emphasized here, it is likely that the speedy departure Although and return of the prostitutes is intended to rationalize the fact that the mytho logical Harpies arewinged: speed is likened to fire. cf. Heraclitus 9,14,35; and contrast item 17where

9. ??pl ri?pG?C?? ToUt?) iGTop??Tai tov fEpuf|v n??ika

TiTepcoToc ?e?coK?vai. npbq ?pouov yuuvaoiav fEpuf|? y?p ttjv ?7i?vor|G?V,

9. Perseus

It is recorded that Hermes

sandals Now to Perseus. Hermes was the

gave winged
inventor of

?V |l ???OKIUO? f|V ? ri?pG???. ol yo?V t? Ta%o? 9aupa?ovT??, 9?co|i?voi,

7tT?p? ??7COV 7lpOGT?9??G9ai TOI? 710GW

training for foot-racing, and itwas there that Perseus gained renown. The people
who saw him, at any rate, marveled at his

a?To?,

Ka9?)? ??c?)9a|X?V^?y?iv
OTl "?Vcn."

?ni

speed; they said he had wings74 attached

to his feet, just as we are accustomed to

TCOVTa%?CO? Tp?%OVT?)V,

say about swift runners: "he flew." Comment: alizations Again the theme of the rcpcoTo? ??p?TT|?, common in such ration on 4). Hermes is (apparently) euhemerized by (see the Comment 32F7 FGrHist Siculus 3.60.4) as the (=Diodorus Scytobrachion things formankind," and Festa would discover euhemerism 3: see the discussion in section 9, as he does in Heraclitus

Dionysius "inventor of many here in Heraclitus In Cornutus his winged

G of the Introduction. Hermes is the ?,oyo? sent from heaven, and (20.18-20,22.3-5) sandals are the winged words (?7rn). Cf. Pseudo-Plutarch 126.

78

Jacob Stern 10. Glaucus of the Sea is reported to have been a prophet of the sea. But Glaucus lived on an island and

10. riepi rtax?Kou to? Oa^aGG?ou Outo? 9ataxGGio? ?vacp?p?Tai uavTi?.

vtjgov y?p o?to? o?kcov, a??vi to??

Glaucus

Tiaparc?iouGiv
7toi??G9ai tov

?GT)paiv?v
nXovv,

<b????
tcjc

TipoX?ycov

GUjii?riGOp?va.

invariably signaled to those who sailed by how they should make their jour
ney?predicting for them what was go

ing to happen. and essentially different rationalization of the see 27 the in 1996: for narrative Stern (sources myth Palaephatus on man?a For version the wise of variation Heraclitus' the 57). rcpcuTOC 17. Heraclitus 4 and Palaephatus ?\)p?TT|??compare Comment: of Glaucus H.n?plK?)Kta?7C0? To?tov ?v ti? bnoX?fioi ?iaiTcbp?vov en ?pnp?a v?pcov ?c7i?ipov ??vai, 7i?7ioi9?vai ?? xr\ ?ia, p?av a?a?naiv ?%ovTatt\v ?nb th? ?paG?coc, ta>yiGpcp ?? un??v 7cpo?A,?7tovTa- ov ? Gocpo?
'O?UGGEU? KaT?7r?VT|G?.

For an extensive

11. The Cyclops One may suppose that because the Cy clops lived in solitude he was ignorant of laws and relied on his strength; that he had only one mode of perception?
his to eyesight?and foresee75 he never anything. used The reason clever

Odysseus Comment: Heraclitus

got the better of him.

Homeric Allegories 70.4-5 allegorizes the Cyclops as the savage spirit in each of us?called "Cyclops" because it "steals" (?7tOK?x?7t(ov) our judgment. Odysseus was able to incapacitate it by the counsel of his the most if by a branding iron." In Plato Laws 680b the Cyclopes illustrate called ?uvaGT?ia (see also Strabo primitive form of government, See also Westermann 376.XLIII, where "as Palaephatus says" 13.1.25,1.2.9). the Cyclopes were so called because they "inhabited a circular (K\)K?,OT?pr|)
island."

words?"as

12. riepi 'ATa?xxvTn? Tf\? I^oiv?coc Kal T?utoji?vou? Toutou?

TCOOp?l,

(paGlv ?7io^?OVTco9f]vai
TT|? 7E?pl aUTC?V

?v

12.Atalanta, the daughter of Schoeneus, and Hippomenes They say that on themountain Atalanta

and Hippomenes were turned into lions. Here is the notion behind that. At TOia?TU? O?GU?. |l?GT|u?piaC OUGU? ??gt|^9ov e?? ti G7if|A<aiov y?V?G9ai midday the two of them went into a to be cave, wishing By chance together. 9?^ovT?? u?t' ?XXr\k(?v KaTcx tuxtjv
U7lO^T|\|/?C0? there ?? ?,?ovT?? ovt?? ?v tco GnnXaiw voured KaT?(payov a?TO??* ?GT?pov ?? tcov ?K??VC0V ?? JlLT| came 9r]p?C0V ?CJ?^9?VTC0V, were lions in the when cave who the de beasts them. Later

out, but Atalanta

and Hippomenes

Heraclitus

the Paradoxographer,
?7c did not appear,

Tlepi 'A711GTCOV 79
those who were waiting

(paivouivcov,

|Li?Tapop(pco9fjvai

??la?0V a?TOU? O? 7lpOG??p?UOVT??.

for them assumed

transformed.

that they had been

Comment:

13 offers the identical rationalization for the myth, Palaephatus not Hippomenes. but there Atalanta's partner is named Melanion, 13. Uepi OopK??cov u?p?GTavTai p?a ?pcxG?i Ta?Ta? 7lpO? TTJV xp??av Xpf?G9ai ??l nap? ttj? ?%ou p?Ta^ap?avouoac on?. ??ko? ?? ?oTi Tp?i? yuva?Ka? TU(p?co9??aa? ?onycp ?vl %pf|G9ai Tipo? tt]v 7cop??av. [?v?paTa ?? a?Tcov ri?(ppr|?co, 'Evuc?, Ltepac?). ?qyu?xxTTOv ?? Ta xpUGa pfj?a.] 13. The Daughters of Phorcys imagine that the Daughters
used a single eye, each one

People
Phorcys

of
get

ting it in turn for her own use from the one who had it before. It is likely that they were three blind
women for were who traveling Pephredo, made use of a single [Their and guide around. Enyo, names76 Perso, and

they guarded the golden apples.] Comment: Cf. Palaephatus 31, an extensive rationalization of the myth of the The Eye appears as a character more explicitly than here in

Graeae, where
Heraclitus.

14. Ilepi l?ipr|V?)v toc p?v TaUTa? Sixpue?? pu9o^oyo?ai GC?jia GK?^T]?pv?9(0V, T? ?? <?,OUtOv) ?? yuvaiKcov ?%ouaa?, ?noXXveiv ?? tou? 7capa7c??0VTa?. fjaav ?Ta?pai T? ?l' ?py?vCOV pOUGU ?K7lp?7C?l?TTJ
Kal y^uKucpcovia, Ka?Auxcai, KaTT|o9?0VT0 ai? o? TCC? 7Cp0G?px?p?V0l

14. The Sirens The myth is that the Sirens were of double form?with the legs of birds, but [for the rest] the bodies of women?and that they destroyed those
who sailed But the past Sirens them.77 were prostitutes, re

markable
instruments They were

for their playing of musical

and for their sweet voices. and any also most beautiful,

ouaia?. ?pvi9cov ?? gk??t| ?^?yovTo ?'XEiv, ?Ti Ta^?co? ?nb tcov ?no ?a^ovTcov toc? o?oia? ?xcopi?ovTO.

man who visited them soon found his

wealth eaten away.78 They were said to

have the legs of birds79 because they departed speedily from those who thus
cast away their own property.

Comment:

Heraclitus

rationalizes

he has not mentioned

pare Pseudo-Plutarch (Keaney and Lamberton ther allegorical

the beauty of the Sirens' music, even though it in his initial summary of the traditional myth: com 147 using the Sirens-episode as a general praise of music and Hoekstra 119-20 for fur

27). See also Heubeck interpretations of the Sirens.

80

Jacob Stern
15. Chimaera

15. ??pl Xiuaipa?

TauTUv "Ounpo?

in these describes Chimaera (pnai ??Kovoypa(pcov a words: in "A 07Cl9?V lion ?? ?pCXKC?V, front, dragon behind, "7Cp?a0? ^?COV, a in the middle p?aon ?? %?paipa." y?vovco ?' av t? she-goat."80 tcov toticov toioutov. The truth would be as follows: a yuvfi ??,r|9?? woman ruled over her territories ?uo Ttpo? i)7cr|p?G?av who KpaTouoa two had in her service, named brothers ??E^cpo?? ??%?V ov?paTi A?ovTa Kal
7capcxG7iov?o? ?? o?oa Kal Leo and

Homer

ApaKovTa.

c^?vokt?voc
pO?p?VTOU.

?vnp?9r|

bnb BzXXe

treaties

Drago. and a

She was slayer of

a breaker guests, and

of so

Bellerophon

put her to death.

Comment:

Cf. Palaephatus 28, which quotes the same line of Homer, but rationalizes Chimaera as amountain guarded in front by a lion and in back a Plutarch Moralia Strabo 14.3.5; Servius on Aeneid snake also 248C; (see by 6.288; and Anonymous Ttepl 'Arc?aTcov [Westermann 322.VIII]). Heraclitus 17. See also Buffi?re 1956: 235. is followed by Tzetzes on Lycophron 16. riepi KipKnc Ta?TUv ? p?9o? 7iap(a?)??coK? 7iotc? jLi?Tapop(po?aav ?v9pc?7touc. fjv ??
?Taipa, Kal KaTaKU^ouaa tou?

16. Circe The myth has been handed down81 that

Circe transformed however, men was with a a potion. who Circe, prostitute

C^?VOU? T?
rcavTo?aTtf]

7UpC0TOV ?p?GK?ia
rcpo? Euvoiav,

?7i?O7uaT0

y?vop?vou? ?? ?v 7cpoo7ca9??a KaT??X? (p?po Ta?? ?7ti9i)jLi?aic ?^oyioTco? TOC? p?VOU? 7CpO? fj?OVa?. flTTUGE?? Kal Ta?TUv 'O?uogeu?.

bewitched her clients82 at first with ev ery sort of willingness to please and led them on to be well-disposed toward her. But when their passion for her grew, she controlled them through their lust, as carried along in they were mindlessly
their pleasures. got the better of her also.83 Odysseus

For allegorical interpretations of Circe see Heraclitus Homeric Allegories 72.2; Phidalius of Corinth FGrHist 30F2 [Jacoby 501]; Pseudo Plutarch 126. To the first of these "Circe's potion is a vessel of pleasure. The Comment: drink from it and, for a momentary surfeit, they live a life more wretched than that of pigs. So the companions of Odysseus, a foolish lot, were bested by their own gluttony, whereas the wisdom ((ppovrjoi?) of Odysseus over Homeric Heraclitus Circe's Allegories 73.13). sensuality" (cf. prevailed Pseudo-Plutarch, on the other hand, uses Circe, whose name he traces to theword licentious (Keaney and Lamberton "cyclic," as a symbol of Pythagorean metempsychosis into beasts, the wise Circe while transforms 24): companions Odysseus' a to See Buffi?re 1956: 237. is avoid such also able transformation. Odysseus Note potion"). that the Paradoxographer's allegory does not explain tcotco ("with a

Heraclitus

the Paradoxographer,

Tlepi

'AmoTcov

81

17. Ilepi 7ruputv?cov Ta?pcov Ti? ?v bnoX?fioi Ovuttiv cp?aiv nvp nvE?v ecj auTfj?, o 7iavTcov ?cmv ?vaip?TiK?v; aypioi ?? Kal Tpa%?i?
OVT?? TCpO? TTjV ?va?p?CUV TCOV

17. The Fire-breathing Bulls Who would accept the notion that a mortal creature breathed firefrom itself, since fire is destructive of all things? The bulls were wild and savage? swift for the destruction of whatever they saw.And so in their case their quick
destructiveness was likened to fire.84

opa9?vTcov ?c^??(; r\oav. TCX%?1 7l?pl aUTOU? ?vaip?TlKOV ??K?a9n nu pi. Comment:

to ouv ?v

For the first sentence compare Palaephatus 28 on the folly of imag a that beast of mortal nature could breathe fire. ining For an etymological euhemerizing of the fire-breathing bulls see Diodorus 4.47.3 (and see Dietz 74 n. 28) 18. Lteplu?pa? Ilo?A)K?(pata)v iaTop??Tai 9npiov, ou% outco? ?^ovTo? TaXr\Qovq. ??ko? ?? 18. The Hydra85 It is recorded that the Hydra was a many-headed beast,86 but this is not the
truth.

V?oaoo??

auTTiv

?axr|K?vai

noXXovq,

o? auvovT?? ?or)9ouvT?c
(?XXvov u?t'

auT?j to??
auTTi?.

T?Ko?ar| rcpocuovTac ?n

Kal

It is likely that she had many off spring who stayed by their mother's side, aided her, and along with her killed
any who came near.

Comment:

is rationalized the defenders

Cf. Palaephatus as amilitary

38, where the Hydra, amid much complex detail, fort under attack by Heracles; whenever one of of this fort was killed two bowmen would ascend the tower in

his place. For a humorous account of the Hydra as a female sophist?if you cut off one head of her argument, she would send up two to it?see replace Plato Euthydemus 297c. 19. ??pl
Tic

tcov IrcapTcov
o?vaTai oti, to?

that armed men forth when Cadmus scattered87 K?OpOU G7C?ipaVTO?TOU??pCXKOVTO? sprang the dragon's teeth? o?ovTa?, ?(puaav ?voTc^oi ?v9pco7uoi; Cadmus became lord of the region KpaTTjaa? ?? tcov to7ccov ? Ktx?uo? Kal to 9np?ov ?v??,cbv ?i' o auve?aiv?v and slew the beast who had caused the ?lVai TOV T07COV, TO\)? G710 ?pT|pOV place to be desolate. He gathered to
7ttGT?\)Gai

Who

19. The Spartoi can believe

pcx?rjv o?KouvTa? ??? ?v auvr|yay?V, o? e'vorcJun Kal ovt?? 9r|pico??i? ?ir|V?x9r|Gav ??9?? npbq ?XXr\Xovq Kal nXr\v oX?jcov n?vxzq ?naXovxo.

gether there people who had been liv ing scattered far and wide. These, being armed and beast-like, soon fell out with
one another, until all but a few were

killed.

82

Jacob Stern Note that, in contrast to Palaephatus the dragon or its teeth. 3, Heraclitus has failed to

Comment: rationalize

20. Oepi tcov xpuGcov utj?xov

ApCXKOVTCX cpaGi TOCTCOV

the fEG7l?pl?C0V cpu?-aTTEiv. ?vfjp ?? a man who was But Drago amassed ?y?v?TO?paKCov, o? ?KTfj? ?7U|i????a? TCOV ??v?pCOV noXbv ?GCOp?UG? much gold from his tending of fruit trees. He was chased after by some el XpUOOV. TO?TOV ?ia7Cp?7C????9f|p?U Gav yuva?K??, Kal Ta?? ?pcoTiKa?? egant women; they entangled his soul in ?rciBupiai? ?v?r|GaGai ttjv \|A)%f|V their lustful passions and for the future a?To? npbq to Xoinbv ?7rr]p?Tr|v ?G%ov acquired him as a servant and guard of Kal Cp?taxKaTO? KTJ7C0U. their garden. Xpuo? uf^a

20. The Golden Apples They say that a dragon guarded golden apples of the Hesperides.

18 and Diodorus Siculus 4.26.2-4.27.2, where the Cf. Palaephatus a as are rationalized capable of either apples sheep?jxn.X,ov being homonym in and Both Heraclitus Palaephatus agree rationalizing the dragon meaning. as a human guard named Drago (cf. Agroetas FGrHist 762F3a; Servius on Comment: Aeneid in 2.376-78), [Dietz 74 n. 28]; Tzetzes Chiliades though as are in here Heraclitus? the called sheep literally "golden"?not Palaephatus for their excellence. As for the apples inHeraclitus' version but as ametaphor they are presumably rationalized by ??v?pa ("fruit trees") and possibly also 4.484 by GCop??co ("heap"). are three, and In Herodorus FGrHist 31F14 the apples of the Hesperides "three the avoidance virtues: of anger, of love of they allegorically represent
money, and of love of pleasure."

21. ??pl

tcov ?v "Ai?ou

A?y?Tai cb? 'HpaK^fj? KaxeXQiov (ei? tov "Ai?ou) ?vrjMtev ?v?ycov Kal coGauTco? 'OpcpE?? Kep??pov, E?pu??KT|v x\\v yuvaiKa. t? ?' ??r|9??, oTi ?Tcnv?m ti? ?KpaKpa? aTco?npia? Kal emKivouvou ?ia(v>T?r|Ga? ?GcoOn, ?cpaGKov ?i; "Ai?ou a?TOv ?iaG?
GC?G9ai. o9?V ETl Kal V?V TO?? UXXK

21. People inHades It is said that Heracles descended [into Hades] and that he came back up bring with him, and that ing Cerberus Orpheus did the same with his wife Eurydice. But the truth is that whenever
son endured a long and dangerous

a per
jour

po?? ttovod? Kal 7tapa?otan)c o?o?? Kal vogod? (?ia) ?niGipaXelq Cp??yOVTa? CpaGKOJIEV?cj "Ai?ou
G?GC0G9ai.

ney and came through it unharmed, people said that he had been delivered from Hell. Even today we say that people who survive great hardships or
hazardous nesses have voyages been or rescued dangerous from Hell. ill

Heraclitus Comment:

the Paradoxographer,

Tlepi 'Akigtcov

83

Cf. Palaephatus 39, where Cerberus is rationalized as an ordinary dog, penned up in Taenarum, whom Heracles went down and brought out; see further the Comment to item 33. Heraclitus' explanation of themetaphoric of the descent into Hades is one of his nicer allegories, although it meaning fails to explain explicitly Eurydice 22. nepi Outo?
to to?

or Cerberus. 22. Phaethon

Phaethon, the son of Helios, was eager

<Pa?9ovTo? 'H?iou covulo? ?7l?9?pr|G?V ?I?

?iaTpo? appa ava?cec ?icp

his father's chariot and drive ?? TO?TOTUOIO?VTO? it. But when he did it inexpertly and p??oai* OC7l??pCO? Kal TCOV ?7CO people were killed by the heat of the sun, a7toMA)U?VC0V ?v9pCO7?C0V a thunderbolt... to? ? Zzbq Zeus struck him with a?TOv Ka?paTo?,
*** ?K?pa?VCOG?V

tomount

Comment:

nor rationalization

The item is obviously incomplete, there being neither explanation of the myth. Cf. Pseudo-Palaephatus 52. A direction that a rationalization of this myth might have taken is suggested by Anonymous 7C?pl 'Ati?gtcov (Westermann 324.XIII): Phaethon was aman who tracked the course of the sun by signs; however, he did not do so accurately but rather a as of which result he imperfectly, perished.

23. ??pl 'Opcp?co? Outo? Kiv?iv X?y?Tai Kal 7t?Tpa? Kal ??v?pa Kal 9fjpa? oicovo?? te. ?inox ?' av ti? ?Xr\Q&q ?ti 9rjpico??i? ovTa? TOU??v9pC07tOU? Kal OUT? ?Qr\ OUT? vopou? ?i?OTa? ??? ??iGi?aipoviav
ocyaycov, KaX?Gaq Kal ?nl to ?UG???iv ovTa? rcapa Kal 7T?Tpco??i?

23. Orpheus It is said thatOrpheus moved

trees, beasts and birds.

rocks and

Truly, one might

men, ing who were bestial and of manners

say that he brought

and laws, knew noth to a proper

fear of the gods; that he summoned these

stony, stolid, tree-like men to piety; that

??V?pci)??i?88
KT|?r|Ga? Ta?TU?

Kal ?i?
xr\q

tcov ?-oycov
?Tu%?.

cpripu?

he bewitched them with his words; and that thus he gained his reputation.

Comment:

Cf. Palaephatus 33, where, in contrast to Heraclitus' allegorical leads the Bacchants interpretation, we find the myth rationalized: Orpheus down from the hills by playing his lyre, but as they descend they hold 9upGOi in their hands, and so it appears that the wood ismoving. Horace Ars po?tica 391-93 offers an interpretation closer to Heraclitus 23: Orpheus caused the rude peasants of his day to stop their brutal behavior, and so the story arose that he had tamed wild beasts. For a straightforward version of the myth see

Conon

45.3.

84

Jacob Stern 24. Helle and Phrixus When Helle and Phrixus were escaping the evil scheme of their step-mother
Ino, their slave-attendant, whose name

"EXXr\q Kal Opic^ou tt]v Tvo?? e7ti?ou^f|v puTpuia? ougti? ?cp?uyov "EXXr\ Kal Opic^o?, 6 7iai?aycoyo?, co f)v Kpi?c ?rcl rctanapiou ?vopa, uiKpo?
%?ipcovoc ovto? ?cpuy?v ?%cov a?To??.

24. nepi 'HviKa

Kal

destruction and became the object of ?X?IV Aeetes' lust. Ram interfered and tried to ?7ll9upT|TlKC?? Op?c^ou GCo9?vTO? TOVA?T|TT|V, T?V ?? KplOV ?iaKCO keep Phrixus from being defiled, but he was flayed and his skin was hung on a ^?ovTa Kal 7i?ipcbp?vov acp9opov nail: they called it golden because Ram ?iaTT|pf]oai tov Opic^ov, arcooapfjvai had kept to his trust. Kal to ??ppa a?To? 7cpoo7taGGa ^?\)9f]vai, xpuGo?v ?? 7ipOGayop?U 9f)vai ?i? t? niGT?TaTov (a?Tov)
y?y?vf|G9ai.

xr\v p?v "E?Anv Gup?aiv?i ?K7l?G??V ?I? TT|V9a?,aGOaV (?9?V to? ?? ?K^ri9r| fE?i?fiG7iovTo?),

was Ram, fled with them on a small boat during a storm. As ithappened Helle fell into the sea (which for that reason was called Hellespont); but Phrixus escaped

There is here, as in Heraclitus 11, no explicit rendition of the tra ditional myth, which is assumed to be known: see Pherecydes 99 Fowler and 17 Fowler; in the latter, as inApollonius Rhodius 1.257-58, the ram Hecataeus speaks to Phrixus. Cf. Palaephatus 30, where, as here, Ram is found as the name Comment: of a human being, but where inter alia the golden fleece is rationalized as a statue of a woman named Fleece (Kco?). Palaephatus rejects the no golden was flayed, but itwill be found in Dionysius Ram tion that Scytobrachion FGrHist 32F14 There see Jacoby 516; Rusten 21). (=Diodorus Siculus 4.47.5-6; to allegory in the last sentence. is a nice shift from rationalization

25. Piept riavcov Kal laT?pcov *** ?v ?p?Gi KaTayiv?p?voi

yovaiKcov ?jccoT?pco ovt??, oTav

25. Pans

and

Satyrs far away from

Kal
tic

...

living

in the mountains whenever a woman

women;

appeared,

koivco? yuvf), 7iap?cp?vr| a?Tp ?xpcovTO. [Tp?ycov ?? Tpi%a? Kal TOC ?lOC TT|V7C?pl ?%?IV GK?^T| ??OKOUV tannp? ?p?A,?iav Kal xr\v nepi Ta?Ta Kal ?i? to?to Aiov?gou ?uaoapiav. cpi^oi tt|v y?p ?pyaG?av tcov ?ujt?taov ?ttO?oUV.] Kal V?V ?? ?Tl tcc? ?I? oti ^?yojjxv nXr\Qoq yuva?Ka?
?7tav??op?V a?Tci?.

they would use her in common. [They seemed to have the hair and legs of goats because of their indifference to bathing and their consequent foul smell. And they were friends of Dionysus because
they used to cultivate grape vines.89 ]

Still today in the case of women who are available for a crowd we say: "we all did
them?the way the Pans do."

Heraclitus Comment:

the Paradoxographer,

Ylepi 'Atiigtcov

85

The final quoted words translate the Greek ?7iav??op?v; a double like the Pans; we All did them). The women are panned; here acted pun (we is the ancient Greek for "gang-bang" (7cave?co): see Borgeaud 75-76. See also Cameron for Pan, the son of Penelope and all the suitors: Thilo and Hagen 223 (to Aeneid2AA) and Wendel 27-28 (I Theoc. 1.3/4c). In Orphic theology Zeus was called "Pan" as ?iaTCXKTCopof all things: Hellanicus FGrHist 4F87 (=202A Fowler). For an extensive Stoic allegory of Pan see Cornutus 49.8-16, where inter in terms of G7i?ppaTiKol X?yoi ("generative them by guujluc^ic ("commixture" or "in arises from principles") Pans is because of his tercourse"); similarly, pursuit of the (water)-nymphs pleasure in the "moist exhalations" from the earth, without which the cos mos could not arise (Hays, 98 and 165, citing the different etymology at alia Pans lewdness is allegorized and what Homeric Hymn 26. ??pl
A?youGiv ?' ?v

19.47). 26. Asclepius

?vn

'Agk?,t]7iio?
auT?v

K?K?pauvcoG9ai. OUTCO. ?aTplKT]V 7ll9aVC?)T?pOV

They say that Asclepius was struck by a

thunderbolt.

Kivr|Ga?

Kal ?xj/coGa? a?TO? ?tco C0?,?TO. o9?V ?l? TT|V 7CUp?TO? CpA8%08?c (p?,?ypovfjv a?Tov K?pauvco9fjvai

?iyouoiv.

The following would be more plau sible: Asclepius was an innovator91 in the art of medicine who brought it to new heights, but then himself died of a
burning fever. It was on account of the

fiery heat of the fever that people say he was struck by lightning. Comment: To be struck by lightning is hardly impossible, nor does it seem to I suspect that Heraclitus require rationalization or allegorical interpretation. has omitted the critical detail: that Asclepius was thunderbolted by Zeus as a

punishment for his defiance of natural law, i.e., raising the dead: see Pherecydes 3.10.3. FGrHist 3F35a and Apollodorus See Cornutus "withering 70.7: Asclepius' name is etymologized from ?7i?GK?tr|Gic, the of death."

27. Fiept TTJ? TO? "Al?OU KUVfj? "Oui ? TT]V"Ai?o? Kuvfjv, cb? Kal ?

?opaTo?

27. The Helmet of Hades [It is said] that whoever put on the hel met of Ades,92 as Perseus did, became Il?pG???, 7??pl9?|I?VO? OCOpaTO? invisible. ?GTl TO ?? KUVfj "Al?O? ?y?V?TO. T??,O? But the helmet of Ades is the bourn 6 T?T??,?UTT|Kcb? ??? o ?neXQ?v towhich the dead man93 goes, where he
yiv?Tai. can no longer be seen.

86

Jacob Stern

Comment:

For the helmet of Hades, worn by Athene, Hermes, and Perseus, see Iliad 5.845; Aspis 226-27; Pherecydes FGrHist 3F11; Apollodorus 1.6.2, sources s.v. will be in additional found Kuven. 2.4.2; LSJ

28. nepi Bop?ou Kal 'QpeuSuia? 28. Boreas and Oreithyia oti It is said that Boreas abducted A?y?Tai '?2p??9uiav Bop?a? TCOV was ?? T?7CC0V Boreas, however, f|p7iaG?V. f|V ?aGlA,?UC Oreithyia: merely the king of those regions. ?Keivcov. fH ?? a?TT] ?rcoA,r)\|/i? Kal p?9o?o? The same assumption and method Kal 7t?pl A?o? Kal Tavupfioouc. also apply for Zeus and Ganymedes: Zeus was a king who abducted ?aGitaucov y?p (6 Ze??) aprc?Cei tov oxto? y?v(?G9ai tay)o ravupfionv, p?Vo?, oti Kal to ? ov ataapov. 6 ?' Kal K?pl 'Ho?? Kal a?TO? TpOTCOC Ti9covo?, Kal 'Ayx?Gou Kal 'Acppo
?ITU?.

Ganymedes?it
into an eagle

was said that he turned

because the eagle is also a

mighty animal. Similarly, for Eos and Tithonus; and Anchises and Aphrodite. for for the text

Comment:

is outright but powerful mortal gods, see so Boreas euhemerized and kings (for Palaephatus 22); presumably Eos were and Aphrodite only powerful queens. There is nothing fantastical, there euhemerism: fore, in their stories, merely humans acting as humans will. In this regard indicates 34, where the same word, ?aGitaucov, compare Zeus in Heraclitus most the euhemerizing. of had been euhemerized course, Zeus, notably by FGrHist 32F7 Euhemerus himself and also by Dionysius Scytobrachion (=Diodorus Siculus 3.61.1-6): for the latter there are in fact two mortal Zeuses, one the son of Cronos and one the brother of Ouranos.

As

it stands the only explanation Boreas and Zeus were not abductor

For the myth of Boreas and Oreithyia see Acusilaus FGrHist 2F30,31 and of the myth, Rhodius 1.211-18; and for an early rationalization Apollonius rejected by Socrates, see Plato Phaedrus 229b-e. 29. riepl npcoT?Co? 29. Proteus It is said that at one moment Proteus p?v ??cop, A?y?Tai oti ?y?v?TO 7tOT? jcoT? ?? Tc?p, ?u^ovoti at another became fire. water, to?? p?v was water to the good, he like %pr|GT0?? co???cop, TOI? ?? 7lOVT|pO?? Clearly, * KaT? OCCJ?aVTipCOpUTlKO? o9?V Ta?TUV but vengeful to thewicked according to their deserts. And so people spread this TT|V (pripr|V7l?pl a?TO? ?l?G7C?lpaV. story about him.

Heraclitus Comment:

the Paradoxographer,

Tlepi 'Arc?GTCov 87

A simple allegorical explanation here, but for an extensive Stoic Proteus in terms of toc cpuGiKci see Heraclitus Homeric Allegories of allegory 66: the episode is said to signify the "passage du chaos au cosmos" (Buffi?re 1962: xvii; cf. 1956: 239) through a process of separation or metamorphosis. Proteus himself represents formless matter (\)Xr\)which divides into multiple shapes, formed by Providence ter Eidothea): the lion=a?9f|p; (?p?voia, who is allegorically Proteus' daugh the dragon=earth; the tree=af)p, etc. (cf. Od

yssey 4.456-58). 30. ??pl to? kuvo? Kal xr\q?Xanexoq Tco p?v kuvI to? K?cpa?,ou ???op?vov ??va? cpaGiv y?pa? o ?v ??n 9r]piov KaTaX,ap?cxv?iv, xf| ?? (T?uur|G?a) ?XamKi vnb iin?evbq KaTa?iap
?av?G9ai. ?icokovto? o?v TO? KUVO?

30. The Dog and the Fox They say that the gift was given to Cephalus' dog of catching any animal it saw; but to the [Teumesian] fox of never being caught by anything. And sowhen the dog was chasing the fox, Zeus

?va ut] Xx>Qr\ to turned them both to stone, so thatwhat xr\v ?XamKa, was ?UO 6 fated would not be annulled. TOU? 7l?7?pCOp?vOV, M9oU? Zri)? OCV TO ?' TOIO?TOV Such a solution would be in keeping ?7l0?T|G?V. ??T| nXaGiia Tcap? ttjv a?Tcov ?uxpoT?pcov with94 the motion of both in the chase.
KaTa tov ?icoypov 7t?,avr|v.

Comment:

Cf. Palaephatus 5, which does not mention the riddle of the dog fated to catch and the fox fated never to be caught but which does rationalize Fox as a clever rogue who plundered the outskirts of Thebes until he was slain (for both Dog and Fox rationalized as human beings see also by Cephalus 1.553-72). Liberalis 41.10. For a straight-forward version of the myth see

Tzetzes Chiliades Antoninus

31. riepl TCOV AlOUT|?OU? 17C71COV OaGl Ta?Ta? ?v9pGmocp?youc eivai. ?ypiai ?? rjGav vopa???. ou ?uva uivou ?? tivo? a?Tcx? ?cp' appa ^??c^ai, ? 'HpaK?rj? ?^euc^ev.

31. The Mares of Diomedes

They say that Diomedes' mares were man-eaters.

They roamed wild?devouring

tures. No one was able to yoke

pas
them to

a chariot, until Heracles did it. Comment: Cf. Palaephatus 7,where Diomedes is a horse-breeder who squan ders his whole estate on horses; these, therefore, were said by his friends to be "man-eaters" (see also Palaephatus 25). is the point of Heraclitus' short-hand version? Presumably the mares were arose "man-eaters" from amisunderstanding of the story that the fact that they were "wild" or "savage" (aypuxi) and "devoured pastures" (vopcx???). For the former adjective compare its use inHeraclitus 17 (the Fire But what

88

Jacob Stern

Bulls). As for the second adjective, vopcx???, it appears capable of a of "feeding" (of animals the root vou-/v?p- has a usual bearing meaning sense of "graze" or "feed," e.g., Odyssey 9.449, Homeric Hymn 4.492; Herodotus arose 1.78.1 ). It is presumably from these meanings that the misunderstanding breathing
that the horses were "savage-feeders," i.e., man-eaters. For the last sentence,

380-86: presumably the horses are tamed of their flesh eating ways by being yoked to the chariot (see Gantz 396). cf. Euripides Heracles 32. Ilepi Ka^u\|/o?? Kal 'O?DGG?co? 'O?uGG?a "A?oyov Ovut?v ?vTa
a?Tfjv ?7tayy??,?,?G9ai rcoir|G?iv

32. Calypso and Odysseus That Calypso offered tomake themor tal Odysseus immortal is contrary to
reason. It was rather that he would have a

?9cxvaTOV, ?XX? to toc rcpo? Tpocpfjv Kal rcpo? ?iou ?n?^auGiv ?cp9ova Kal taxprcp?c ?C^?iv.?9ev Kal f||t???, ?Tav itou Kal Xaiinp&q K?i9cop?v ??co%cop?9a, "?v 9?o??" cpap?V y?yo
v?vai.

splendid abundance for sustenance and the enjoyment of life. That iswhy we
too, when splendid the gods." we feast, lie on say our that we couches are for "among a

Comment:

136, where Odysseus' rejection of Ca Compare Pseudo-Plutarch lypso is said to epitomize the Stoic scorn of pleasure (fj?ovfi).
33. Cerberus This would be the same as the case of

33. riepi Kep?epou Tout5 dv ein o Kal 7t?pl tti? "Y?pa?. o?to? y?p zi%e ??o gkuuvou?, covad Gup?aOiCovTcov tc? rcaTpl ?cpaiv?TO
??vai TpucecpaXoc.

the Hydra.95 Cerberus had two whelps

who always accompanied their father:

thus he appeared to be three-headed.

Comment:

Cf. Palaephatus 39, where three-headed Cerberus is rationalized as a dog from the city of Tricranium: i.e., a tricranite dog (similarly Geryon in Palaephatus 24). In Hecataeus FGrHist 1F27 Cerberus is rationalized as a terrible snake that dwelt at Taenarum and was called "the dog of Hades" be

Plutarch Theseus 31.4 of its deadly bite (cf. Pausanias 3.25.4-5); as the 168a identifies Cerberus Fowler) (=Hellanicus family dog of aMolossian was named Persephone and daughter Kore king named Aidoneus whose wife see For a further rationalization 747-54). (cf. Tzetzes Chiliades 2.406-10, cause Servius on Aeneid See Heraclitus 34. ??pl Aapia?
TGTOpO?GlV pvy?vxo?, "Hpa on, A?o? a?xf] Gup a?xrjv, a7C?9rjpicoG?v

6.395. 21 for the remainder of the myth

34. Lamia

of Cerberus.

It is recorded that after Zeus slept with Lamia Hera turned her into a beast; that

Heraclitus Kal oti fjv?Ka

Kal oti ?g9??1.

the Paradoxographer, T?epl 'Akigtcov

whenever Lamia takes the madness out her eyes comes and over puts

89
her, them

o(p9a?,po??
?aXA,?i, ?v9pco7rou<;

?v pavfj, tou? kotu^uv Kal d? ?C^aip?i

GapKocpay?i e?r\ ?' av Kal toc?e.

in a cup;96 and that she eats flesh and

devours But people. here is how it was: Zeus was a

Ka?-p a?Tfl OUOT|? Z??? ?7l^r|G?aG? ?aaiA,?Ucov, "H pa ?? ouvaprca?ouoa a?TT|v, to?? ocp9a?po?? ecjcopuc^ Kal ' ?I? TOC OpT) ?ppi\|/?V ?9?V ?7ll7lOVC?? ??r| ?7iiKoupoup?vr| ?? o???v (?i? ?? X?) ?710 xa?? ?pnpiai? Kaxayivopevuv a?TTlV ?^-OUTOV Kal ?9?paTC?UTOV
??vai, ??OK?l 9r|piov ?7tap%?iv.

king97 who slept with the beautiful Lamia. Hera seized her, gouged out her
eyes, and cast her into the mountains.

There she lived a life of suffering with no one to help her. [And because] she
dwelt washed be a wild in the wilderness and uncared for, and she was seemed un to

animal.

Comment:

For the story of Lamia see Duris FGrHist76Vl7; Diodorus Siculus Moralia 515F; I Ar. Pax 758; and I Theoc. 15.40c: Lamia Plutarch 20.41.3-6; has children by Zeus who are destroyed by the jealous Hera; in envy of other Lamia turns bestial and orders that their children be taken from them and slain. She was

women

said to be able to remove her eyes and place them in a jar while she slept; but then she replaces the eyes and goes abroad again. The story is rationalized by Diodorus: it is not that Lamia removed her eyes but that she would on occasion become drunk, so people started the story that she could not see?that Fontenrose she had thrown her eyes into a [wine]-jar. See further 100-104 with additional sources in n. 17. (For the parallel to Lilith plucked out her eyes

see Trachtenberg 36-37; compare also Saint Lucy, who and sent them to her fianc? on a plate.) For "unwashed" compare the rationalization

in 25 (the Pans).

35. riepl np?Kvric Kal <S>iXo\xr\Xaq (Kal Tnp?c??) f iGTOpo?vTai opviQeq y?v?a9ai, f| p?v X?^i?cbv, f] ?? an?cov, ? ?? e,no\\f. to?to
?' av "Ituv ti ?%oi o?tco?. Kal 7top9f|aaaai ep?aaai a7tOKT??vaaai tov o?kov, tov ?i? xr\v

35. Procne, Philomela, [and Tereus] It is recorded that these three turned a swallow; into birds: Procne,
Philomela, hoopoe. a nightingale; and Tereus, a

rctancxpiov

Ta%?iav

cpuyfiv ?7coir|GavTO. ? ?? Tr|p?U?, ?rcri ?icoc^a? o? KaT?A,a??V a?Toe?, a?Tov

avaip??. o9ev oi av9pco7ioi, ou

But here is how itwas. Procne and Philomela killed Itys and laid waste their home. They then embarked on a
small boat and made a speedy escape.

?cpav???

cpaivop?vcov a?Tcov, ?i? to ?^aicpvn? oti ??7iov y?v?a9ai

Tereus pursued them but failed to catch them, and so he killed himself. All three had vanished, and because of their sud den disappearance people said that they had been turned into birds.98

a7icopvi9cb9r|oav.

90

Jacob Stern Heraclitus follows the later Roman version in which Procne be

Comment: comes

the nightingale (see Gantz 241 and com pare, for example, Conon 31; for additional references see Brown 223); this is later date. perhaps an indication of Heraclitus' on comments 230-31 "rationalized ending of the Tereus story the Lightfoot the swallow and Philomela in Ps.-Heraclitus
but does not

7t?pi 'Atugtcov 35, where

a metamorphosis."

the cannibal Tereus kills himself

undergo

36. ??pl

tcov 'H?ia?cov

Ta?Ta? cpaalv ?cj ?v9pc?mcov a?y??pouc y?V?G9ai. o? to?to ??, ?XX? ?i?c to 7ucx9o?to? ????,cpo? ??? tov 'Hpi?avov a?Ta? e?a^ov. ?io ol
?t|to?vt??, ?7il tov rcoTauov 7capay?

36. The Daughters of the Sun They say that the daughters of Helios
were turned from women into poplars.

Not so; itwas rather that they threw themselves into the river Eridanus be
cause of their brother's misfortune.99

VOp?VOl Kal TOC? p?v O?% ??pOVT??, Tpia ?? GT?^?%rj aiydpcov, U7t?A,a?ov [?vopa ?? a?Ta? aTco??V?pco9f]vai. ama?? Ooi?n, Aap7t?Tcb, A?y?ir|.]

The people who were looking for them arrived at the river but did not find them. Instead, they found three poplar trunks, and so they assumed that the sisters had been
[Their names were

turned
Phoebe,

into trees.
Lampeto,

andAegle.100]

Comment: miliar myth. 37. Oepi

To?TOV Kal PO?? V?V ?pav

See Forbes

Irving 269-71

for sources and a discussion

of this fa

riav?7iTou
TCCXVTa ?0U^Op?V0V tco Gc?uaTi ?v rcavTl ?7C?,CXGaVTO. o9?V XOIOUXOU? CCKOUEIV ocp9a?, ?xi Kal

37. Panoptes Because he wished to hear101 and to see

?%?W TO??

rcav?7ixac

everything, people imagined Panoptes with eyes all over his body. That iswhy still today we call such people102 "pan
optic."

Ka?o?p?v.

Comment:

Panoptes

is Argos,

the multi-eyed

(Aeschylus Suppliants 304; Euripides Charax FGrHist 103F13=Westermann guard slain by a euhemerized Hermes. Moschus 2.58-59; Ovid Metamorphoses 255-56).

guard of Io slain by Hermes Phoenissae 1115; Apollodorus 2.1.2). 324-25 rationalizes Argos as a human At Argos' 1.722-23 death the peacock further Forbes (see arose: Irving

Heraclitus

the Paradoxographer,

riepi

'A7ugxcov

91

38. riepi 'Ev?upicovo? Kal I,EXr\vr\q oxi Ka9???ovxo? a?xo? A?y?xai l?^f|vr| ?paG9dGa Kaxa?aGa ?piyn a?xco. ?ir| ?' av ? p?v 'Ev?upicov
7ioipr|v a7C?ipo? yuvaiKo?, ?7tl9\)

38. Endymion and Selene It is said that while Endymion slept Selene fell in lovewith him and that she descended and laywith him. Endymion, however, would likely be a shepherd who had no experience of a
woman. passion thereafter who So when for him he was he a woman (sc.... as he conceived and a slept), someone by must It have "(sc.

pnxiKco? ?? G%o?Ga yuvr] a?xo? *** ?pcoxnfel?103 ?? rcap? xivo? xi? d'r),
?'cprj "l??T|Vr|."

asked said

she was,

been) theMoon!"104 Comment: The myth is variously rationalized and allegorized of Endymion 4.57 Wendel 132): (1) Endymion Ap.Rhod. quoted in full at

(see especially! was ameteorologist, a 7ipcoxo? ??p?xr|?, who studied the phases and motions of the moon; as a result he spent his nights awake and rested during the day, so that people thought he was constantly asleep; (2) Endymion was a hunter who hunted during the night when the animals came out to their pastures? with the same result as above; (3) Endymion was simply lazy?hence the ' so act seem for of those who that proverbial "sleep Endymion carelessly they to be asleep. In addition, and most outlandishly: "Die Liebe der Mondg?ttin zum Hirten bedeute die F?rderung des Wachstums der Kr?uter durch den von den Mondd?nsten (R?scher 1.1.1248). See also I erzeugten Nachttau" 3.49 (citing Nicander); Acusilaus 36 Fowler; Pliny Nat. 2A3; Fulgentius Myth. 2.16; Anonymous 7i?pi 'Atugxcov (Westermann 324.XII, XIII [citing Lucian DDeor 19 (cited in Gantz 35). and Plato]); Theoc. xcov 'H?iou ?ocov 39. The Cattle of the Sun I discovered in the Iliad105 the follow riepi xo?xcov o?xco? ??pov r\XXr\yo of the prjuivov ?v 'IXia?i. o?k ?^fjv xo?? ing allegorical interpretation Cattle of the Sun. Among people of old ?p/aioi? i?po9ux??v ?ouc ?pyaxa?. to sacrifice Kal xo?xo cpuGl p?v Kal "Apaxo?, itwas not allowed cattle that in the fields. The poet ?fj^OV ?? Kal ?cja?xf]? xfj? 7tOVT|G?C0?.had worked 39. nepi (pnol y?p fEKa?r| rcpo? A9nvav goI ?' au ?ycb p?c^co ?ouv ??pup?xco7iov a?pr|xr|v i^v outcco bnb fjviv Aratus106 confirms this, and it is also clear from the Iliad, where Hecabe says to Athene: Iwill sacrifice to you awide-browed yearling cow Unbroken, which no man has led be neath the yoke.
Furthermore, them "cattle people of the sun"107 used because to call they

?uyov f]yay?V ?vfjp. o? p?vov ??, ?XX? Kal 'H?iou ?oac

xo?xou? ?kcx?,ouv co? XT]v yfjv

?pya?op?vou? Kal rju?? xp?cpovxa?. oi ?? xo? 'O?uoo?co? ?xa?poi o?%fUXiov

92

Jacob Stern worked the earth and sustained us. So

of Odysseus,

?ouc, ?XXa xo?? ?pyaxa? 9oivr|9?vx?? GcpiiGiv ?xao9a?ir|Giv bnkp p?pov

?^y?' ?7l?G7COV.

in the case of the comrades

they feasted on the Cattle of the Sun-god, but because they sacrificed and feasted on cattle that had that "by their own reckless worked deeds they encountered grief beyond itwas not because
their lot."108

Comments:

39 has a number of special attributes: (1) the first a sentence in has this verb the first person singular parallel in the (though first person plural verb in 6); (2) the citing of awork of literature, the Iliad, (4) the unique use by its name; (3) the citing of Aratus without a quotation; of the verb ?A?nyop?co. These are perhaps enough to suggest that Heraclitus Heraclitus 39 might have been interpolated into the text from some other source. Aristotle famously allegorizes the 350 Cattle of the Sun as the days of the Benardete 36). To Pseudo-Plutarch year (fr. 157R; see Buffi?re 1956:243-45; of Odysseus dem 120 the eating of the Cattle of the Sun by the companions that "the responsibility not to commit the crime was theirs, but their being destroyed if they did was a consequence of fate" (Keaney and Lamberton onstrates 191). To Heraclitus cally represent Allegories 70.12 the Cattle of the Sun allegori over the belly." "mastery Homeric

see Festa's apparatus to author and title are given at the end of the manuscript; 39. 59 contre nature" des ph?nom?nes "La gu?rison des mythes (Buffi?re qui pr?sentent der naturwidrigen 1956: 232 and 1962: viii); "Behandlung (Nestle 151). Mythen" 60 see Pherecydes Conon 3F11 and compare FGrHist For the familiar myth 40, where crew which is named the of Perseus the ("sea (i.e., "frightens") Kfjxo? ship, "petrifies" of the power head. of Medusa's alternate rationalization monster")?an 61 in items 2 and 8 (since Lit. "devoured." The pun is an active part of the rationalization item Scylla and the Harpies actually in the myths is rationalized; "devour"), of Medusa innoq but here and is used and in item 14 it is a dead metaphor:

58 Both

there is no "eating" 62 Thus Pegasus examples as it does 63 Heraclitus the horse.

the Sirens. of a lewd woman as a prefix (Aelian NA can mean 4.11); cf.

165: e.g., ?7C7i?7iopvoc. innocited by Henderson etc. in English: horse-chestnut, horse-radish, has, after his fashion, is meant rationalized I suspect that ocvGo? is "winged." in some way

"coarse,"

and the beheading, the p?trification, to explain the remaining notable

item: that the horse 64 these have not been encircle the dogs which Rationalizes Scylla, even though Heraclitus. mentioned by cifically 65 as in item 8, the pun rationalizes the detail of the myth. See note 61. Here,

spe

Heraclitus
66 ??vo?

the Paradoxographer,

Ilepi

'A7UGTcov

93

or life: is apparently the term for the hetaira's "John" either in ritual ordinary 87 (1989) in ?ranos 16.1 have collected cf. Heraclitus 18, nn. 19 and 20. examples 67 to a human not the in this second is taken by Festa as referring instance "Poseidon" s text, in of the absence of the anaphoric article (Festa rejects Westermann god because which cussion the article of xo? was inserted in section to link the two occurrences G of the Introduction of the name). and compare See the dis Hermes in euhemerism

9. Heraclitus 68 "Because" good. 69

might

seem

a more

likely

translation,

but

the sense,

I believe,

is not

as

Festa identifies the lacuna 70 Or "genitals" (cf. Antoninus 71 to consummate" "Impossible to be united." 72 "Snatch" (?p7Ea?oUGa?) Rhodius 2.189.

and fills Liberalis

it thus. 41.5). ockoivcuvtitoi), a verbal adjective in -xo?: "not

translates

able

employs

the familiar

pun

on

the Harpies'

name;

see, e.g.,

Apollonius 73 See notes 61 and 65. 74 on item 8. For the of the winged emphasize speed; see the Comment Wings myth see 3F11. FGrHist sandals Pherecydes 75 is the basis of this elegant bit of allegory which foresee") Word-play ("eyesight... reason he has to specify: it hardly needs the detail the Cyclops' explains single eye is the "only 76 one mode In Hesiod of perception." are given as 273 the names of the Graeae and Enyo; Theogony Pemphredo an FGrHist 3F11 adds Deino, for which Perso is presumably ("Destroyer") the last sentence, 20; Gantz if it belongs, the Graeae with confuses see For the full of the Graeae 19). story Pherecydes the Hesperides (cited above).

Pherecydes alternative. (cf. Heraclitus

But

77 The Sirens, it is said, died when they failed to bewitch Odysseus

(Epimenides 8

61 and 65; here also the metaphor is dead since the Sirens do not, like the (8) and Scylla (2), "devour." Harpies 79 a bird or As in 8,9, and 35 swift motion rationalizes in the myth. wing 80 in Iliad 6.181 Hesiod (also interpolated 323). Theogony 81 8 for the formulaic Heraclitus words. Compare opening 82 See note 66. 83 A unique internal which for us the number of items in reference, emphasizes see 2,11,14,16,29,32,39. Heraclitus from the myth of Odysseus: 84 to fire; cf. note 79. Note that here speed is likened 85 item 33. Compare 86 The same expression "amany-headed beast") occurs at Plato, (noXxyyciyaXov ?npiov refers to Chimaera, 588c, in a context which Republic Scylla, and Cerberus. 87 as the "sown" The Spartoi are commonly from Cadmus'"sowing" explained people, of the dragon's teeth. Heraclitus via the other sense of the verb GTceipeiv, rationalizes "to scatter." Siculus unfamiliar said In this he is not 19.53.4. armor alone: In Conon and cf. Palaephatus 3; Androtion are rationalized 37 the Spartoi FGrHist324F60a-b; as Phoenician Diodorus whose these

Fowler). 78 See notes

warriors

from ambush style of fighting to that the Phoenicians have appeared sprouted

terrified from

the local Boeotians;

the earth.

94

Jacob Stern

88 Festa's excellent emendation for Bnpicb?ei?. 89 The rationalizing in Festa's opinion, words inside the brackets, note which worked its way into the text. Note the similar explanation Lamia in item

are from

a marginal for the "unwashed" perhaps trodden

thought out with bare 90 Festa's elegant

to have

34. Borgeaud amount "a certain of dirt was (222 n. 18) suggests a on the quality wine effect of the when the grapes were good feet." emendation for vncr|oac; Westermann's acKr\caq would mean

"prac

titioner." 91 4.74 Fowler=Diodorus See Epimenides to the point advanced the art of medicine founder." 92 The word obvious:

Siculus where

5.74.6, he

to whom Asclepius according as its is honored and "originator

rough breathing in the text, no doubt this exact

of the title so that will 23.11.

("Hades")

the pun be

in the two appearances of the disappears on "unseen" more will be (aopocTo?=?-?o??) in Cornutus 5.2-4 (see Dawson 33) and

explanation

found

Heraclitus Homeric 93 "The bourn pun: see Plato

Allegories ... the dead man" 80d, cited

Phaedo

94 For "in keeping with" of." "In violation of" would 95 See item 18.

(to xeXoq by Festa. Prof. Donald (napa) also be possible, but

... 6 TETE^euinKcb?)

is a second

obvious

Mastronarde J. the sense does

not

suggests "along the lines seem as good.

96 As Plutarch and Diodorus

the myth, but it is not

(cited below) show, the cup (or jar or flask) was part of

the cup as the hol that Heraclitus here is rationalizing impossible even a further in which Lamia wandered. is perhaps There low valley of the mountains and opaco ("see"). pun in opn ("mountains") 97 on 28). It is not the a case of euhemerizing An outright (see the Comment god, but as in name who mortal is in question here. The same word, ?ocaiAEUC?v, king of that 28 indicates that the euhemerizing has occurred. Heraclitus 98 as speed or For mythological birds (or wings) interpreted allegorically quickness 14. and Heraclitus 8,9, compare 99 Their brother was Phaethon 52). (see 22 and cf. Pseudo-Palaephatus 100 names in 154 in Festa brackets the of the the sentence, Heliades Hyginus though and Phoebe. clude Aegle, Lampetie, 101 But of course Argos did not have ears all over his body! 102 who well might be said to wish overly-inquisitive busy-bodies, Presumably But note that 7cav07cxr|c is also an epithet of Zeus and Helios and hear everything. s.v.). 1031 accept me to make Festa's of the masculine ?pcoTn0???, participle, suggestion sense than the manuscript's feminine. Festa, I believe, which seems to to

to see (LSJ

better

is also correct

a lacuna before I take it that the sense was as follows the word. (and I have in my place to indicate as much): in parentheses translation the shepherd added the words Endymion he sleeps; he then with women; makes love to him while had no experience but a woman "It must have been the Moon." awakens asked who she was, naively and, when responds 104 is a regular of love The moon, of course, (see, e.g., Theocritus passionate symbol on words or rationalization was here some more of precise play Idyll 2): but if there

Heraclitus

the Paradoxographer,

Tlepi 'Arc?oTcov
in the than lacuna. appears At

95
least in the

or his statement, it seems to have been lost Endymion's sleeping was more one euhemerized is that the Moon explicitly possibility see Diodorus text (for Selene euhemerized Siculus available 3.57). ios Gale followed and Westermann, following by Festa, remarks Heraclitus is not

"immo Odysseia" but of of is that the the Cattle the Sun from the he is Iliad; episode claiming to the the in lines from the which that he found Iliad, episode key asserting understanding to quote. It is true that in quoting these lines he incorrectly identifies he then proceeds scene in Iliad 6.274-75=308-9, in fact the lines from the famous them as coming whereas are not delivered at 10.2923.382-83. But this but by Diomedes by Hecabe, 93=Odyssey error in comparison is a minor 106 Festa, following Westermann, to the point. Aratus was exactly being to the whopper Heraclitus is accused of by his editors. cites Phaenomena the line does not seem 132, although a in the first centuries author a.D., popular particularly

see Sale 160-64. Per into Latin by Cicero, Germanicus, and Avienius: translated a hint here at the date of Heraclitus. there is haps 107 I have tried by each day during the sun-light." Or we might say "cattle who worked to lower case letters to indicate from basis of the the upper allegory here: that it changing but the cattle who had worked the day Helios, during and ate. The ordinary of Odysseus sacrificed inappropriately is confused with the god of the same name. the double-spelling (We might compare an instance where of xoc?po? in 7.) For a counter-case, the sacrifice of ?ouc ?pyoVca? is that the companions see Pausanias 9.12.1. allowable, 108 where the final 1.34, Odyssey in modern texts not the cattle of the Sun-god,

was

light noun

verb

is exouaiv.

WORKS CITED
Benardete, Bietenholz, Bolle, K.W. S. 1997. The Bow P. 1994. Historia 1970. "In Defense Berkeley. The Cult and the Lyre. Lanham, Leiden. In J. Puhvel, ed., Myth and Law among the Md.

and Fabula.

of Euhemerus." 19-38. of Pan in Ancient

Indo-Europeans. P. 1988. Borgeaud, Chicago. Bremmer, Brisson, Brown,

Greece.

Trans.

K. Atlass

and

J. Redfield.

London. J., ed. 1987. Interpretations of Greek Mythology. L. 1976. Le mythe de Tir?sias. Leiden. M. 2002. The Narratives and Text, Translation of Konon:

Commentary

of the

Leipzig. Diegeseis. F. 1956. Les mythes Buffi?re, -, ed. 1962. Heraclite, Butts, J. 1987. The

d'Hom?re All?gories

et la pens?e d'Hom?re.

grecque. Paris.

Paris.

'Progymnasmata Claremont

tary. Ph.D. Cameron,

dissertation.

ofTheon: A New Text with Graduate School. in the Roman Liberalis:

Translation

and Commen

A. (forthcoming). Greek Mythography 1992. F. The Celoria, Metamorphoses of Antoninus London. mentary. D. 1992. Allegorical Readers and Cultural

World. A Translation with a Com

Dawson, ley. Decharme,

Revision

in Ancient

Alexandria.

Berke

P. 1904. La critique

des

traditions

religieuses

chez

les grecs.

Paris.

96
D?tienne, Dietz, Dowden,

Jacob Stern
M. 1979. Dionysos Slain. Trans. M. Muellner and L. Muellner. Baltimore. "Historia in the Commentary of Servius." TAPA 125: 61-97. 1992. The Uses of Greek Mythology. London. "Nuove osservazioni sopra l'opuscolo di Palefato rcepi 'An?Gicov." Studi

D.

1995. K.

Festa, N.

1897.

Italiani di Filolog?a Classica 4: 225-56.

-, ed. 1902. Mythographi libellusmpi Graeci III.II: Palaephatinepl vaticana 'AmoTCOv, Heracliti incredibilibus). quifertur Leipzig. 'AmoTCOv, Excerpta (vulgo anonymusDe

Fontenrose, J.E. 1980 (original publication 1959). Python: A Study ofDelphic Myth and
Its Origins. Forbes Fowler, -, Gale, Berkeley. in Greek Myths. Oxford. Irving, P. 1990. Metamorphosis R. 1996. "Herodotos and his Contemporaries." JHS 116: 62-87. ed. 2000. Early Greek Mythography, 1: Text and Introduction. Volume ed. 1671-70. 1688). Baltimore. In Encyclopaedia of Religion Law. Amsterdam. and Roman Critics. London. In W Killy, ed., Mythographie der and Ethics. Edinburgh. Opuscula mythologica ethica et physica. Cambridge

Oxford. (reissued

T.,

Amsterdam, Gantz, Geffcken, Grant, Grube, Haussier, R. T

1993. Early Greek Myth. J. 1912. "Euhemerism." 1952. Miracle and Natural

G. M. A. R.

1965. The Greek

fr?hen Hays, R. 1983. Lucius Annaeus Theology): Henderson, Henrichs, -. 242-77. Hercher, -. Heubeck, Books Hopkinson, Jacoby, R. 1867. "Miscellen: A. 1987. Introduction,

1984. "Grundz?ge Neuzeit. Wiesbaden.

antiker Mythographie." 1-23. Cornutus7 Epidrome and Notes. New

(Introduction Ph.D.

to the Traditions University 79: 93-123. (listed

Translation, Muse.

dissertation.

of Greek of Texas.

J. 1975. The Maculate 1975. "Democritus Approaches

Haven. on Religion." Mythography." Hermes HSCP

and Prodicus to Greek

"Three

In Bremmer

above).

De

Incredibilibus." Prosaikern."

2: 150-51.

1877. A.,

"Zu griechischen and A. Hoekstra, Oxford. ed. 1923-.

Hermes

12: 148-50. on Homer's Odyssey, Volume II,

eds.

1989. A Commentary

IX-XVI. N.,

1988. A Hellenistic Die Fragmente eds.

F., ed.

J. J., and R. Lamberton, Keaney, Atlanta. Kennedy, G. 1983. Greek

Cambridge. Anthology. der griechischen Historiker. Berlin. 1996. [ Plutarch], Essay on the Life and Poetry

ofHomer.

Rhetoric

under

Christian 1826).

Emperors. Ioannis

Princeton. TzetzaeHistoriarum Variarum

Th., ed. 1963 (original Kiessling, Chiliades. Hildesheim. Lamberton, Lang, C, ed. R. 1986. Homer

publication

the Theologian. Theologiae

1881. Cornutus.

H. 1998. Handbook of Literary Lausberg, M. T. Bliss, A. Jansen, and D. E. Orton. Lightfoot, Long, A. J., ed. 1999. Parthenius

Berkeley. Graecae compendium. Rhetoric: A Foundation Leiden. Oxford. In R. Lamberton and

Leipzig. for Literary Study. Trans.

1992. "Stoic Readings Ancient Readers. Princeton. J., and P. Franchi

ofNicaea. of Homer." 41-66. eds.

J. J.Keaney,

eds., Homer's

Mercati,

De' Cavalieri,

1923. Codices

Vaticani

Graeci,

Tomus

1.Rome.

Heraclitus
Nadeau, R. 1952. "The Progymnasmata

the Paradoxographer,
of Aphthonius

Ylepi 'Arc?axcov
Speech Monographs 273-91.

97

in Translation."

19: 264-85. Nash, "The Centaur's Origin: A Psychological zum Logos. Stuttgart. 1940. Vom Mythos Liberalis: M., ed. 1968. Antoninus Papathomopoulos, H. 1984. W Pease, A. S., ed. 1955. M. Tulli Ciceronis de natura Perspective." Les M?tamorphoses. liber primus. CW77:

Nestle,

Paris. Libri secundus et

deorum

1958. Cambridge, Mass. et J. 1976. Mythe P?pin, all?gorie. Paris. Pfeiffer, R. 1968. History of Classical Scholarship. tertius. Rabe, H., ed. 1969 (original P. 1981. Classical W. H. 1884-1937. 6 vols,

Oxford.

Rollinson, Roscher,

1913). Hermogenis opera. Leipzig. publication Theories and Christian Culture. of Allegory Pittsburgh. der Lexicon und r?mischen Ausf?hrliches griechischen

Russell, Rusten,

Mythologie. D. A.

in 9. Leipzig.

Sale, W Sergent, Spengel, Stallbaum,

in Antiquity. Berkeley. J. 1982. Dionysius Opladen. Scytobrachion. 1965-66. 160-64. "The Popularity of Aratus." C/61: B. 1986. Homosexuality in Greek Myth. Trans. A. Goldhammer. L., ed. 1854. Rhetores Graeci, Vol. 2. Leipzig. 1825-26). Eustathii...

1981. Criticism

Boston.

G., ed. 1960 2 vols,

Odysseam. Stern, J. 1989. -. T?te,

(original publication in 1.Hildesheim.

commentarii

ad Homeri

in Herodotus 87: 13-20. 5.92.n." ?ranos "Demythologization 1996. Palaephatus, On Unbelievable Peri Apiston: Tales. Wauconda, and "Plato and Allegorical J. 1929-30. CQ 23: 142-54 Interpretation." -. 1934. the History and H. Hagen, eds. in Vergilii carmina "On ism." CQ 28: 105-14. of Allegor 1961 (original 1881). publication commentarii, Vol. 1.Hildesheim. Servii

111. 24: 1-10.

Thilo,

G.,

grammatici

qui

feruntur

New York. and Superstition. J. 1939. Jewish Magic Trachtenberg, P. 1988. Did in Their Myths?Trans. P.Wissing. the Greeks Believe vetera. ed. 1914. Scholia in Theocritum Wendel, C, Leipzig. Veyne, Westermann, Whitman,

Chicago.

1983. Scholars Baltimore. of Byzantium. F. 1902. Zur Entwicklung der rationalistischen Wipprecht, Mythendeutung. and Sceptics. Trans. O. J. Reichel. Zeller, E. 1879. The Stoics, Epicureans, Wilson,

bridge, N. G.

historiae Graeci. Braunschweig. A., ed. 1843. Mythographoi: Scriptores poeticae an Ancient The Dynamics and Medieval Cam J. 1987. Allegory: of Technique. Mass.

New

T?bingen. York.