De Gruyter

ALKMAN'S COSMOGONY Author(s): John L. Penwill Source: Apeiron: A Journal for Ancient Philosophy and Science, Vol. 8, No. 2 (November, 1974), pp. 13-39 Published by: De Gruyter Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40913347 . Accessed: 20/06/2011 10:03
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=degruyter. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

De Gruyter is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Apeiron: A Journal for Ancient Philosophy and Science.

http://www.jstor.org

13.

'S COSMOGONY ALKMAN

The 1957 volume of Oxyrhynchus papyri brought to light an interesting document which has now found its way into Page ' s Poetae Melici Graeci as Alkman The only readable portion of this papyrus (fr. 2, cols, i and fragment 5. the first ii) provides the remains of a commentary on two of Alkmanfs poems; obscure is significant for the glimmer of light it sheds on the notoriously contains , according history of early Sparta,2 while the second (col. i.22ff.) to the commentator, the fruits of the poet's excursus into the realms of natural philosophy. 3 if this fragment is to be taken at its face value it shows that a cosmogony was composed in seventh century. Sparta of a wholly current cosmic genealogies different order from the normal run of Hesiod-style in this early period, in that it employed the concept of a divine demiurge. It would thus be the earliest known use of the "craftsman" analogy in a Greek cosmogony,4 and as such should be of great interest to students of early Greek thought . Unfortunately, however, one quick reading of the extant part of the comto show that it is quite impossible to take it at face mentary is sufficient terms (uAn, couched in blatantly Not only is the exegesis value. peripatetic apxn xe'Aosabound), but from col. ii.2X onwards the commentator succeeds in destroying any real confidence we might have felt in him through giving an text of xou Tpixos axd-ros which his own quotation from the original explanation Furtherof the poem a few lines later (ii. 25f.) shows to be nonsense. 5 on Hesiod Theogong more, West ha3 demonstrated by reference to the scholiast 116 that late commentators are quite capable of avowing the presence of a cosmic demiurge in an early cosmogony despite the total absence of such a to argue Hence it might seem quite reasonable work.6 concept in the original that the poem with which our commentary is concerned was not a cosmogony at that all, and that" all we have here is an example of the type of exegesis in Iliad to the his and successors of 20, theomachy applied Rhegium Theagenes shield in Iliad 18.7 Homerikos to the forging of Achilles1 or Herakleitos of ArisSuch an idea might well appear to be supported by the silence totle, who says nothing about Alkman when dealing with the cosmogonical theories of Homer and Hesiod and of the old poets and mythographers generally. There is in fact only one reference to Alkman This, however, proves nothing. extant works, and this is merely to record that in the whole of Aristotle's g "they say Alkman the poet and Pherekydes of Syros" both died of morbuspedicularis, or collecwhich reads more like information gathered from some medical treatise life and works. tion of anecdotes than from a first-hand knowledge of the poet's Moreover, this passage contains the first known reference to Alkman in the whole and he is not met again until we find him being annotated of Greek literature; of Aristotle's Thus the most likely explanation grammarians. by Hellenistic silence (if one is needed) is that he had not read Alkman - a suggestion pergenre in the haps supported by the total absence of any treatment of the lyric Poetics. Indeed, it is unlikely that Alkman became at all well known before in the Hellenistic of comprehensive libraries the establishment period and the his style is of such as a full-time profession; rise of literary scholarship poet. obscurity (v. infra) that he would tend to become a specialist's but the others still remain. We may thus dispose of this last objection, We must therefore look for some external evidence to support the commentator's the coming-to-be of the world. contention that Alkman is here describing

ApeironVol. VIII (1974) No. 2.

14.

A glance through the surviving Such evidence is fortunately available. in matters well outside the fragments of Alkman shows that he was interested He was notorious among later writers range of the average Greek lyric poet. so much tribes into his poetry; and fantastical for introducing outlandish so that Alexander Polyhistor wrote a whole book itep! t&v nap' 'AAxyavitotux&s He has a penchant for learned (Fr. Gr. Hist. 273 nos . 95, 96). 9 etpnyevwv witness his naming of various species of birds^O and the mention allusions; in the Louvre Partheneion (fr. 1 Page) of three different and exotic breeds for the obscure and the unusual with respect of horse. ^ This predilection world suggests wideand biological of the geographical to the constituents and scholarly learning on the part of Alkman. And there ranging interests The language is another striking feature of his poetry which should be noted. of the second part of the Louvre Parthhe employs is obscure in the extreme; Bowra was led to remark eneion (which is almost wholly free from mutilation) so formidable that almost of interpretation that it "presents difficulties on This is surely deliberate every single sentence has been disputed."12 the obscurity in expression goes hand in hand with obscurity Alkman's part; Alkman is the effect. and pedantry in nomenclature to create a specific It should not, therefore, surprise poeta doctus of seventh century Sparta. us too much to learn that he composed a cosmogony at some time in his career; a highly individual a cosmogony, moreover, which, as I hope to show, displays character both in terminology and in the motif it employs. but it is possible of course prove nothing; Such general considerations to go further. First, we already have a fragment of Alkman that could quite i tefer to fr. 20. easily be an excerpt from a cosmogony. 13 Spas 6' eanxe TpeTs,Se'pos xal xe^yotxinwpavip i xav xai xexpaxov to /np, oxa odXXei ye'v, eadi'nv 6* a6av oux eaTL. This passage is most naturally taken as an account of the creation of the at least a passing interest in the origins of seasons, which would indicate I shall have more to say about this fragment later. the present world order. Secondly, one of the few things of which we can be sure with respect Now it happens that to fr. 5 is that Alkman spoke of an entity called Poros. conPoros figures in another passage of Alkman, and in a highly significant leaving Line 14 of the Louvre Partheneion is unfortunately mutilated, text. at this point provides but the scholiast : us with the single word ] YepcaxdToi otl tov n<5pov the interesting eipnxe tov auxov t$ oitb tou 'HaLo6o(u) exegesis resxei,on the basis of which editors have quite legitimately yeuodoXoynyevv The preceding line ends ] ap hZoo. tored ndpos to the beginning of the line. is that Alkman considers Aisa and conclusion TtavTfov: and the inescapable Editors for the most part take ucxvt&v Poros to be "the oldest of all ..." and insert the necessary genitive rather than substantive, to be adjectival The word that gives the best sense line 15. of at the noun beginning plural aiffiv); thus the Loeb edition gives lines is %euv (or, to use Alkman's dialect, 13-15 as: xpaxnoe (speculative) y]ap Alaa itavx&v xai Ildpos] yepaitdTOi A aia)V'0ni]e6iAosaXxa. ^

15.

a i&v to see that Poros to rely on the conjectural However, it is not necessary of all gods" "oldest is given the status of an c/r-figure - either in these lines it is legitimate and as I believe to assume that of all or "oldest things": it tranbe in another, what Poros is in one of Alkman 's poems he or it will or Urwesen; with one of Alkman fs UrgStter that fr. 5 is in fact dealing spires with commentator on a different one moreover whom a different poem identifies The case for in Hesiod's that appears the first entity cosmogony (rh.116). fr. 5 actually strengthened. being a cosmogony is thus considerably it would if we can believe anything our commentator says, Thirdly, of Alkto give a cosmogonical interpretation appear that he is not the first ' he writes man's text. of his exegesis Towards the beginning (i.26-8) [ ev [d].ye$a 6e [xa 6]oHo0vxa ntiuv y]exa xas e]-K%r'o 6]e Ta'5iTj xrj 4)6[^ 'AXjxyav (pug [loXo(yeT) set we shall on nature: "In this ode Alkman discourses tcov Xoiic&Iv'iceilpas : ^ of the rest." the attempts forth what appear to us to be the facts following This can only mean that the commentator is consciously drawing on what has inThese would presumably scholars. been said about this poem by previous surof whose work on Alkman only the title clude the Athenian Philochoros, an expert on 328 no. 24) , and the Laconian vives ( Fr. Gr. Hist. Sosibios, at least three books whose itep' 'AXxyavos comprised ( Fr. Gr. affairs, Spartan Hist. 595 fr. 6) and appears from the one remaining fragment to have taken the interalso authorities If these learned form of an exegetical commentary.16 that it preted Alkman fr. 5 as a cosmogony, then there is much more likelihood was so in fact. I believe for writing there is no case In view of these considerations of a cosmogony on to a non-cosmogoff the present conimentary as an imposition in the contained Of course we cannot accept onical many of the details poem. of Alkman 's own views is to the only safe way to a reconstruction exegesis; words rather than those of the commentator. base our arguments on the poet's that Alkman certain what it is reasonably I shall commence therefore by listing himself wrote in this fragment. The commentator 1. 2. col. col. quotes i.22f. ii.3 the following lemmata: x [e ai]&v ydXiaxa

- Mo)]aa Xiaaoyai a 6e tG) %[

3. 4. 5.

col. col. col.

ii.20 ii.21 ii.

25ff.

icpeayfus xa' xpi'xog axdxos

18 - 5yap]1 7 xe mcuaeXdva xa' xpi'xov . (or - as) axdxos <eu)$> xds (or xSs) yapyapuyds

and GETIZ figured in the We may also be quite sure that the words IIOPOZ,TEKMfiP text, since it is their presence that the commentator is trying to original This is the sum total of our knowledge as to Alkmanfs own words explain. that can be gained from a preliminary reading of the papyrus, and must thereof any discussion. fore form the starting-point

16.

Let us begin with the first lemma. Since this appears immediately after the conclusion of the commentary on the previous poem, it must be taken Hence we may assume from the opening lines of the one we are discussing. that Alkman began his odef as was commonly done, with a prayer to the Muse. Muse was somewhat out of the ordinary, However, it seems that this particular for the commentator, after noting the composition of the chorus who performed the ode20 and declaring his intention to set forth xa 6oxo0vxa nytv, continues r ns [yev] Mo'5aa[s] Suyaxepas u>sMiyvepy[os.] Tag eyewith the remark (i.28f.) (4.7.1 = [veaXdynae. .This statement receives support from Diodorus Siculus Alkman fr. 67) : ev ols eaxi xa! 'AXxydv, duyaxepagontocpaivovxai oXiyoi xfov TtoinT&v, (sc. xas Mouaas) Oupavouxa! Tns. However, in the two other extant instances where Alkman invokes the Muse he addresses her as "daughter of Zeus". 21 Now that both the commentator and Diodorus were wrong; but it does it is possible statenot seem likely that Diodorus or his source22 would make much a specific I suggest ment regarding Alkman unless there were some grounds for doing so. that the basis for this assertion was provided by our present poem. Although from the minutiae of the commentit is perhaps dangerous to draw conclusions remains that he does not say, e.g. form of expression, it nevertheless ator's M&aa Aiaaoyai xe.oiwv ydAiaxa] oxt 6 'AXxyav $uyaxepas aicotpaivexai xas Mo'5aas because Alkman Oupavou xa' Tns, "'Muse, of the gods 'tis thee I most invoke1: rather he is of Heaven and Earth"; that the Muses are daughters believes " saying (in a sentence not immediately following the lemma) , (Notice that Alkman here makes) the Muses daughters of Earth, as Mimnermos too gives their That is, Alkman goes on himself to say exactly who this Muse is ancestry." of Earth; that he addresses among the gods" - to wit, the daughter "especially, instance of such a belief and the commentator is merely citing a parallel Alkman thus about the Muses' (or some Muse's) ancestry in another poet. commences his song with a prayer to a Muse more primeval than her whomhe to suppose that he chooses and it is not unreasonable elsewhere invokes; because he wants the aid of a goddess old enough her "especially" precisely to tell "how Heav'n and Earth/Rose out of Chaos. "23 and Lemma no. 2 introduces us to the crucial passage of the papyrus; All that remains of it it is most unfortunate that it has been so mutilated. must be extremely hypothetical.2 4 and any reconstruction it ex 6e xujic[; The only certainty is that in this or some preceding lemma lost in the break the between cols, i and ii Poros, Tekmor and Thetis made their appearance; figures who, according to the commentator, fulfil the chief roles in the cosmois lost to us, we must As Alkman's own version of their activities gony. see if anything more can be extracted from the commentary than these three I begin with a summary of the sequence of events given by the commentnames. ator (in the section beginning at X[eyei] o3v 6 'AXxydvii.8ff.): A. B. C. D. E. In the beginning The coming-to-be The coming-to-be Tekmor arrives there is n uXnitdv[xu>v xexa]payyevnxa! cncdnxos. udvxa. of 6 xaxaaxeudtcoov] of Poros. after Poros has "passed on" (napeXSdvxosii.13).

Poros and Tekmor become apxn and The coming-to-be of Thetis; and Thetis acts upon the uXn as a bronzexe'Xos respectively, smith upon bronze. these points one by one to see what may be gleaned

I shall now consider therefrom.

17. A. fiAn, as has been pointed out by others, cannot have been used by Alkman in the sense of "matter" or "material cause". 25 Moreover, it is largely lost labour to try and discover what, if anything, in Alkman's text His remark is best could have been interpreted as uXn by the commentator. of Alkman's account, in the best Aristotelian taken as a "rationalisation" Alkto bring it into the framework of his own thought pattern. tradition, state of man himself may or may not have chosen to describe the pre-creation felt no need to do so) ; but even if he did, it would things (Hesiod certainly not have been in the abstract philosophical terminology of the commentator.26 (For further remarks on this matter see below, n. 34.) ndvxa is something of a puzzle. The identity of 6 xaxaaxeuaccov B. him with Modern scholars who have dealt with this fragment have identified But it seems inherently unlikely that even Thetis, despite the gender.2? this commentator would (a) make such an elementary grammatical mistake, and xov >taxaaxeua[covxa] (b) mention in extremely vague terms (efxa[Yeve]adai xivctcpnatv Doubtless in uavxa) at line 11 a figure he introduces by name in line 15. Prime Mover, without the commentator's eyes he corresponds to Aristotle's he may therefore whose influence none of the later events could take place; that he is based on one of be a pure invention. However, it is possible the figures in Alkman's poem; I shall say more about this later {infra p. 29 ). We have already noted that this entity figures elsewhere C. Poros. in Alkman's poetry, in a context which confirms its early appearance on the world scene. There has been some dispute as to how one should interpret The usual English translation this figure and what its coming signifies. of Poros in line 14 of the Louvre Partheneion gives "Device" (so e.g. Edmonds, (P.-W. s.v. Poros) renders "Betriebsamkeit" . Bowra) , while Herzog-Hauser and elaborations Since the discovery of the present fragment, other suggestions is the way of contriving things have been made: thus Bowra on fr. 5, "(Poros) and sets them going . . . [elsewhere] ndpos is closely related to Aiaa and seems and now on fr. 1.14, as opposed to destiny" ( glp 26); to stand for initiative "Just as somewhere else he makes [Poros] a shaping power in his cosmology, and evidently means it to signify 'Device1 in the sense of the intelligence so here he must have done something of the same which shapes situations, kind" ( ibid . 40) . Similarly Lobel (55) gives "way of contriving things or and is followed by his reviewers Barrett (689) "the way or means beginnings," Schwabl (1467) of doing things?" and Page (20) "the way of contriving"; with the West in his first article offers "Findigkeit." gave "'provision' in his second he is less specific, (1.155); accessory idea of 'apportionment'" saying merely that Poros is required to cure the primeval substance of being of Frankel is "6ffene MSglichkeit The (oder aitopos (2.2)." " (290)interpretation ;29 his reviewer Burkert gives simply "Weg" (827). Zuganglichkeit) It seems, therefore, that, although the actual meaning and significance it is nonetheless of Poros may be in dispute, generally agreed that it cona hypos tasis of some abstract idea. stitutes However, a study of the instances of itdpos as an ordinary word down to the end of the fifth century suggests that this is most unlikely. Etymologically , the word is part of the neipa) group (v. Boisacq s.h.v.), which also includes nepdvn*rcepovav,Ttdpitn9 itopi'ca),uopeuu),itop^yds. netpa) itself carries the basic meaning "pierce"; in Homer it is most commonly used of spitting or skewering meat ( Jl. 1.465 = 2.428 = Od. 3.462 =12.365 = 14.430, Jl. 7.317 = 24.623 = od. 19.422, Jl. 9.210, Od. 3.33, 14.75, H. Merc. 121) , but also of harpooning

18.

fish ( Od. 10,124;, of wounding with a spear (JI. 16.405, 2.0.479, 21.577), of boats of heroes their way through "cleaving" a passage through water (od. 2.434), fighting a seething mass of warriors ( II. 24,8 = od. 8.183 = .13.91 = 13.264; , and, figurwith pain of one "pierced" ( II. 5.399;. itdpos is formed from netpw atively, in the same way as itdxos from iceixu>, andpos and cntopdfrom auetpw, cpddpos and cpdopd is and as e.g. from (pdeipa), and ayopa from ayeopa): destruction") cpSdpos ("ruin, of the action the result of the verb <p$etpu) ("destroy") and iyopd ("assembly") of of the action of dyetpw ("assemble"), so itdpos will be the result the result or "passage" of iteipw ; left after whatever the action the "hole" literally, Let us now examine how the word is the icdpos has been iceitapyevov. now contains used in writers down to the end of the fifth century. (1) Literal uses.

The only author of the period who certainly "Hole through a solid object". (a) employed the word in this sense is Empedokles: fr. 100.17 of the mouth of the fr. 3.12 of the passages or "pores" in the body by means of which klepsydra; itdpos in this literal sense appears to have been sense-perception is possible, v. Plato Meno 76c, Theophrastos an important item in Empedokles1 philosophy: de sensu 12, et al.

is used by later writers referring to "holes" in the presocratics Tcdpos ' s circles throughwhich the stars and moon e.g. the "passages" in Anaximander = DK 12 A 11), the "channels of perception" appear (Hippol. Ref. 1.6.4f (aiadnTixoi Ttdpoi)in Herakleitos by which menderive intelligence fromto itepie'xov ( Sext. adv. math. 6,129f. = DK 22 A 16), and the "passages" which carry sensations to the brain in Alkmaion(Thphr. de sensu 26 = DK 24 A 5) ; but of course it is by no meanspossible to say whetherthe philosophers themselves used the word. (b) "Passage" in the sense of "way through"or "across" some obstacle. (i) sense in "Ford" (i.e. the "way across" a river - the predominant Homer). So II. 2.592, 14.433 = 21.1 - 24.692; H. Apoll. 423; H. Merc. 398; Pi. 01. 1.92, 2.13, 6.28, 10.48; Soph. Trach. 564; Eur. Pho. 730, 825; Thuc. 7.78, 80. So Pi. "Strait" (i.e. the "way through"a land mass for ships). Nem.4.53 ('idviov ndpov= straits of Otranto), 9.41 (? perh. should be under (i)), fr. 189; Aesch. Pers. 747, 875, Supp. 546; Hdt. 7.176, 8.15; Eur. I.T. 253; Thuc 6.48 (of the straits of Messina, thoughperh. better here interpreted as "the way across fromItaly to Sicily"). "Passage through"shallows. So Hdt. 4.179. Used of Darius1 bridge over the Danube Hdt. 4.136, 139, 140, 7.10. Used of Xerxes1 artificial causeway over the Hellespont: Aesch. Pers. 722; Hdt. 7.34, 35, 36, 8.111, 115, 117, 126, 9.120.

(ii)

(iii) (iv) (v)

More generally, "path", thoughstill retaining the idea of traversing an (c) obstacle, so that the division between the uses listed here and those under (b) artificial. is somewhat

19.

(i)

Of the "paths" of the sea (cf. the use of iteipw at Od. 2.434 noted So Od. 12.259 (itopous aXds) ; Hes. Th. 292 (6ia3as above p. 18 ). itdpov 'ftweavoto); [Arion] fr. 1; Aesch. Supp. 844, Pers. 367, 453; Soph. Ajax 412; Eur. fr. 304.2 (by which time simply = "journey across the sea"), Hyps. fr. 64.103. Of the "path" formed by a river on its journey to the sea; hence "river-bed" or simply "river". in Aeschylus but only two (Common instances elsewhere.) So Bacchylides 9.42; Aesch. Pers. 493, 501, 505, 864, Sept. 378, Prom. 532, 806, Cho. 72, 366, Eum. 293, Eur. H.F. 839. 452, fr. 69.4;

(ii)

So Aesch. Prom. 280, (d) Simply "path", "fairway", "course", "route". Supp. 546, Aga. 910, 921 (the last two of the purple cloth on which Agamemnon walks), Eum. 770; Soph. Phil. 704; Eur. I.T. 116, 1325, 1388, Hyps. fr. 64.85; Hdt. 7.183, 8.76. As an extension of <c) (i) above itdpos is found in Euripides meaning simply (e) so And. 1262, Hel. 130, Tr. 82. "sea"; (2) Metaphorical uses. "Path of life". Pi. Isthm. 8.16 (eXiaawv 3iou itdpov) - life itself being (a) viewed as the "obstacle" to be traversed; the usage probably derives from (1) (c) above. "Paths of the mind". Aesch. Supp. 94 (ddonioi xe Teivouaiv itdpot, sc. (b) If this is indeed metaphorical, it presumably derives from Atos itpaiu'6a)v). but it could well be literal, in which case it belongs rather (1) (c) or (l)(d); - cf. R.B. Onians, The Origins of European Thought/Cambridge, 1951, under (l)(a) p. '29. "Path of song". (c) Emp. fr. 35.1 (eXe'5aoyou es itdpov uyvanO- again most likely deriving from (l)(d). (d) "Way out of" (sc. trouble, which is regarded as an obstacle to be traversed; this usage based on (l)(b)). So Lyr. ad. 1019.7 Page (tu - s.c. T'5xa - 6* ayaxavi'as itdpov eXdes ev aXyeai) ; Aesch. Prom. 59 (aynx<*vu>v ndpov) ; Eur. Ale. 213 (itdpos xaH&v) , I.T. 897 (absolute); At. Knights 759 (otynxavwv itdpoos). (e) "Way to achieve" - viewing the obstacle to be traversed in this case as that which lies between one and the desired object; again based on (l)(b). So Aesch. Supp. 806 (etyepuyas ito'pov), Prom. Ill (x^xvrIS itdpos); Hdt. 2.2 (itdpov to'5tou aveupetv) , 3.156 (itdpos aXtifoios); Eur. Med. 260 (itdpos avTiTtaaaSai) , Pho. 984 (xpnycrrujv itdpos) , Ale. 1162 (a6oxn'TU)vrcdpov) = And. 1287 - Bacch. 1391 - Hel. 1691 - Med. 1418, H.F. 80 (itdpov aurrnp i'as) , Supp. Ill (xPnyctxcav itdpou); Ar. Peace 124 (udpos o6ou) , Eccl. 653 (uyaxLcav itdpos) . Hence absolute: (f) "way", "method", "device". I.T. 875, I. A. 356; Ar. Wasps 308 (a parody of Pi. Thes. 769. (g) Absolute in the sense of "profit", "revenue": So Aesch. Prom. 477; Eur. fr. 189 - see (l)(b) (ii)) , Ar. Frogs 1465.

20. to mean "device" This survey makes it clear that the use of ndpog absolutely was not particularly commoneven in the fifth century, and that it developed from the figurative use with genitive or infinitive meaning "way of achieving" which first appears in Aeschylus. Moreover, the one instance in Aeschylus - Prom. 477 oias xe'xvas xe xal itdpouseynadynv where the word is used absolutely to the need who feels of the the on a deliberate poet, part metaphor suggests illuminate his unusual use of rcdpous by adding the commoner, readily comprehThus I think this passage clearly shows that in the earlier ensible xe'xvas. part of the fifth century itdpos on its own would not readily be taken as meaning and by It is not until Euripides that such a usage is possible; "device". in other respects as well (cf . (1) his time the word had become less specific use of ndpos = "path" is more more matter-of(e) and (1) (d) , where Euripides1 uses of the word are On the other hand, the earliest fact than Aeschylus1). either "fordM ( (1) (b) (i) ) or the "paths" in Homer it signifies all concrete; of neipw which result from the action of the sea ((1) (c) (i) - the sea-routes xeXeuSov). Moreover, as used at Od . 2.434 yev n ye (sc. vnos) xal nw/rceipe navvuxi'n and only of the eight uses in Pindar seven are concrete ("ford" or "strait") this last being a conscious metaphor and having nothing to do one figurative, the single instance in Bacchylides with the meaning "device" (see (2) (a)); and of the twenty-nine places where the word is is concrete ("river-bed"); found in Aeschylus it has a concrete meaning in twenty-four and a figurative This evidence regarding one in only five (including that cited under (2)(b)). that times strongly indicates the use of udpog in archaic and early classical of Alkmanfs Poros than those which we must seek a more concrete interpretation have hitherto been supplied. 3^ The fact that early uses of the word very often refer to waterways and means of crossing them may at 'first sight be thought to give some support to to have been the primeval state the "waste of waters" which West now believes 31 Alkman's in of the world Citing the ndpous aXds of od. 12.259 as cosmogony. the we might then say that the coming-to-be of Poros signifies a parallel, which could serve as a locus opening up of some path across these waters, as West points out,J^ a seastandi for the presumed demiurge Thetis - herself, of Poros must fail before the Unfortunately this interpretation goddess. enunciated above (p. 15) , viz. that what Poros is in one of Alkman's principle "Path through the primeval waters" may look poems it will be in another. "Passage", well enough here, but it surely cannot mean this at fr. 1.14. we want, but across what "path", or "hole" is indeed the sort of translation or through what is it to be? Let us put this question in a different way, having regard to the derivation and basic meaning of udpos; what, in Alkmanfs view, is likely to have been the entity which required itapnvcu as the first event in the coming-to-be of the cosmos? The answer, I think, lies in the following often-quoted fragment of Euripides (fr. 484 N.) :
xou' eyos 6 y'3$os otXX' eyns ynxpbs Ttdpa yi'or is oupavds xe yald x' ?|v yopcpn enel 6' xwpio%r)oa.v aXXnXoov 6i'xa xi'xxouai itdvxa xave6u)xav eis cpdog, 6ev6pn9 itexeivd, Snpag, ous %' aXyn xpecpeu yevog ie Svnxuiv.33

in Alkman; and the resulting It is the yopcpn yua oupavou xal yns that is neTcapyevn that now exists between Heaven Ttdpos is none other than the "gap" or "passage" on fr. 1.14 so rightly says, Alkman's Poros is the as the scholiast and Earth; clear that the motif of It is becoming increasingly same as Hesiodfs Chaos.34

21.

of earth and heaven as the first a the separation stage of cosmogony played of the about the origin large part in Greek non-philosophical speculation It appears in Hesiod in two guises universe. (see Kirk-Raven loc.cit.): first in the bald statement?! of all tol yev upuhioxa Xaos y^t* and (Th. 116), in the myth of the castration later of Ouranos by his son Kronos (rh. 154 ff.). in the fragment of Euripides We find it also cited above and at Diodorus Siculus 1.7.1 ( xcxxayap xhv e apxns t&v oXujvauaxaaiv yi'av extv i6eav oupavdv xe xai a*' aXXnXwv xbv yTW, yeyeiyyevns aux&v xns cpuaews* yexa 6e xauxa 6iaaxdvxu)V x&v atDydicav while in the "Orphic" yev xdayov itepiXa$etv Sitaaav xnv ipcayevnv ev auxij auvxaiv); tradition ff. (= DK 1 B 16): we. have Ap. Rhod. 1.496 n'ei6ev (sc. Orpheus) 6' is yoaa *at oupavbs r)6e SaXaaaa xo npiv en' aXXnXoici ytq ouvapnpoxa yopcprj veiMeos e oXoolo 6iewptev aycpis exacxa* n6* is eyne6ov atev ev atdepL xexyap exouaLV aaxpa aeXnvoa'n xe xal neXioio xeXeudot, kxX. and the account = DK 1 B 13) : of an Orphic cosmogony given by Athenagoras (18, p. 20 Schwartz

unb 3tas xoO ysY^^k^os oSxos 6 *HpaxXfjseyewT'ozv uitepyeye^es (J)dvso auynXr)po'5yevov in Tiapaxpt3ns ets 6uo eppayn. to yev o5v naxa xopucpnv auxou Oupavbs elvai exeXea^n, xb 6e kcxxo) evex^^v rfj .

The motif is of course a commonone all over the world, representing mythically and symbolically the process of the differentiated world being produced from ^5 the undifferentiated. If this is what Alkman means by the appearance of Poros in his cosmogony, we must now examine whether a similar interpretation will fit Poros in fr. 1. As far as it can be reconstructed, the extant portion of this latter poem opens with a list of the Hippocoontids who were slain by Herakles. Then comes the Poros passage (13 ff.): ] ap hZoa. navxujv hou ndpos] yepoaxaxoi* ''5%r'6' om]e6iXos aXxa* Is ipavbv itoxTfa^a) yn xls avd]p(j5ftu)v xdv 'A(ppo6i'xav ... yn6e itri]pTixu) yayfjv (the following lines name other goddesses) In his second article, West puts forward a similar proposition in respect of this passage as he does on Poros and Tekmor in the cosmogony (cf. supra p. 17): i.e. its failure is the "Strength without wisdom, airopos, eaiaios, fails; Others, as we have seen (ibid p. 10), prefer triumph of ndpos and Alaa. "36 something like "Device", despite the fact that, as we have also seen, such a But if we accept Poros rendering is most improbable for this early period. as meaning the "gap" between earth and heaven here too, it makes very good sense in the context. In the previous lines, Alkman has been enumerating slain heroes; line 13 in fact is the beginning of a new section of the ode, in which the poet moralises upon their deaths, "Aisa and Poros, oldest of all beings, (defeated them)37f he says, "their strength, shoeless, 38 collapsed; let no man fly to heaven, nor attempt to marry Aphrodite.11 The prohibitions are an expression of the common Greek maxim that man should not try to overreach himself; but the form of the expression here is interesting. What in

22.

Alkman himself fact stops man from "flying to heaven and marrying goddesses?" it is not the lot of man to mix with divinFirst, Aisa: gives the answer. the "path" that now divides earth from heaven ities. 39 Secondly, Poros: Thus for the "Doom and Device" is incapable of being negotiated by man. 40 the which the Loeb translation gives for Aisa and Poros, we should substitute equally alliterative pair "Portion and Passage". "Poros having passed on" says the commentator1 s paraphrase D. Tekmor. As the language employed to describe this of Alkman, "Tekmor follows. "41 somewhat with the event (which is given, moreover, in oratio obliqua) conflicts commentator's equation of Poros with apxn and Tekmor with xeXos in the next clause (oratio recta) , it may be that we have here something fairly close in I think meaning if not in actual phraseology to what Alkman himself said. to infer, therefore, that Tekmor appears subsequently to Poros it is legitimate it is a (just as Gaia etc. appear subsequently to Chaos in Hesiod) ; i.e. figure that appears upon the cosmic stage only after Heaven and Earth are we must now attempt to determine what his coming signifies. separated.4 2 fall broadly into two categories, Modern interpretations according to whether or not they connect Tekmor in *the cosmogony with Aisa, who is coupled Lobel (55) The majority do not: with Poros in the Louvre Partheneion. West gives "boundary or end", and is followed by Page (20) and Bowra (26); of differentiation11, renders "principle in his first article adding that "it event (sc. in rather than a specific or potentiality represents a principle while in his second he gives the basic meaning the cosmogonical process)",43 is recognisable as "boundary -mark or sjlgn" , saying again that "(it) of Texjjoap to but this time adding (as a parallel of differentiation", as a principle 21 ) that Tekmor is of Poros - cf. supra pp. his second definition 17, West is followed by necessary to save the world from being axexyapxos. ^ Vernant (49 - cf . supra n. 28) , who also makes much of the later astronomical of xe'xyap. Barrett (689) gives "Final consummation?" and Schwabl significance of the other school of thought is Frankel, (1467) "Erfullung". Representative . . . ' (bindende) Festlegung1 " , who interprets Tekmor as a "Variante zu Schicksal so aktiv 'iber die spekulative "er Alkman that elsewhere of verfiigte saying Denkweise, dass er den Namen und Begriff des einen Partners frei variieren His reviewer Burkert, however, counters this interpretation konnte."45 , das nie gleich alaotmit "Dagegen spricht jedoch schon das Genus von Texyop ein Paar bilden kann" - and instead gives rWegzeichen" ("doch gehort iccJpos zum 'Weg1 ( ndpos) ... als Hilfe und Bestatigung" ) . 46 However, it is xe'xywp if in one passage Alkman calls Poros and surely better to agree with Frankel: Aisa "oldest of all beings", and then in another gives the pride of place to to suppose that Aisa and Tekmor Poros and Tekmor, it seems not unreasonable With this in mind, let us now revert to the method stand for a similar idea. i.e. in the case of Poros; of inquiry which has already proved successful an examination of the occurrences of the word xexywp(or xe'xyap, to give it its more usual form4 7) in writers down to the end of the fifth century. The word xe'xyapoutside Homer normally carries the meaning of (1) "that by which something may be shown or proved", thus correspondclue", f" "sign" s.h.v. II) inq to the post-Homeric use of the cognate verb xexyoa'poyca(v. L.S.J. It is often merely a poetic equivalent to mean "judge from signs and tokens". of xexynptov. So Hes. fr. 273 (Merkelbachand West) = Mousaios B 7 (DK) (f)6i>6e xou^xo xe xat eadXwv xe'xyapevapyes: oaa dvnTOiaiv eveiyav/aSavaxoi, 6eiAS>v Tio-deoSai,

23.

"Sweet is it to know this too, what things the immortals dealt out unto mortals, the noble and the worthless"^**) ; Vl.Nem. a clear sign (that distinguishes) 11.44 (to 6' ex Albs avdpwitois aacpes oux eitexai/xexyap); Aesch. Supp. 483 (is l6o)ql xna6* aq>ieu>sxexyap), Prom. 454 Aga. 272, 315 (coupled with a'5y3oXov) Cho. 667, Eum. 244 (of Orestes1 tracks), fr. 530.30 Mette; Hp. Mul. 2.123 (aXXncu 6e &X'j) icn xe'xyap taxexai, = "symptom"): used of heavenly bodies Horn. Hymn. 32.13 (xe'xywp 6e $poxots xai an'ya xexuxxai, of the Moon) and Eur. Hec. 1273 (xuvbs TctAaivns afjya, vauxi'Xois xe'xyap). to mean something different. Homer's (2) xexywp, however, appears to XI. 1.526 - but this would be the only instance True, "siqn"* could be applied in nine uses, should and it seems safer to assume that another interpretation conbe given here too. In fact, as Leaf says on II. xe'xywpis closely 7.30, "foretell". of xexyaipoyai in the sense of "ordain", nected with the Homeric use rendera better Leaf therefore sense as "a thing established"; gave the basic would be "ordained in mind the Homeric xexyaipoyai, thing", ing, however, bearing "ordained end" , or simply "ordinance" . Thus when Zeus says of his nod (II. 1.525f.) xouxo YaP e eyeev ye yex* adavaxoicu yeyiaxov/Texyuip , he is emphasising that that to which he gives his approval is irrevocably ordained to happen; when Apollo says to Athene (il. 7.30f.) uaxepov a'5xe yaxn'aovx', eis 5 xe xexyiap/'lXiou eupwaiv, he means "they the time when will fight on until they find the 'ordained end' of Ilion (i.e. Ilion is fated to fall)" - the phrase xexyu>p'IXlou occurs on three other occasions when Poseidon travels to Aigai, he takes in this sense (II. 9.48, 418, 685); three paces to 6e xexpaxov I'xexo xexyajp/Atyas (II. 13.20f.) - i.e. he reaches his "ordained goal", the place he himself has determined as his destination (it being a god's prerogative xexyai'peadai) ; and when Eidothea comes to the rescue of Menelaos and exclaims (Od. 4.373) is 6n 6n$* evl vn'a^ ep'5xeai% ou6^ xt xexyoop/eupeyevai 6'5vaaoa, she means "you cannot discover the appointed end (sc. of your troubles)" - these lines being repeated by Menelaos himself in The final Homeric example is a little the first person a little later (4.466). when in II. 16 the trace-horse of Patroklos' chariot is killed by difficult; Sarpedon's spear and threatens to cause chaos in the rest of the team Patroklos' 6oopixXuxsos eupexo squire Automedoncomes to the rescue - xoto ybv Auxoye6cov -The normal practice here is to translate xexycop(472) - by cutting the harness. it can, however, be made to conform to its xe'xywp by "remedy" or "solution"; if we view the whole situation as some sort of normal Homeric signification puzzle, the solution to which is already "determined" or "ordained" by the compiler (here probably yolpa, whose influence on the events which culminate in Sarpedon's death at 503 is stressed in lines 431-61). Texuwp in this sense is not solely confined to Homer. It is found (in the form xexyap) in two places in Pindar: Pyth. 2.49 (Seos aitav en! eXiu'6eaai xexyap avtfexai, "God accomplishes his every end upon the thought") and fr. 168 Bowra (iao6ev6pou xexyap ataivos Xaxotaai, "getting as their ordained span the lifetime of a tree", of the Nymphs). It also occurs in Orpheus' song of creation at Ap. Rhod. 1.499 - cf. supra p. 21 and n. 47.

We are thus faced with a choice between two distinct interpossible of Alkman's Tekmor, both of which correspond to known early uses pretations of the word. However, it seems fairly clear that the Homeric sense is the one here, and for the following reasons. required First, to define Tekmor in this nor is West's cosmogony as "sign" or "clue" is in itself quite meaningless; extension of this (which a little sophistry may support by reference to Hes. fr. of differentiation" 273) to "principle much better; differentiation has already appeared, a fact expressed in mythic terms by the coming-to-be of Poros (supra

24.

p. 21 and n. 35). Secondly, the fact that Alkman chose to use the Homeric form of the word suggests that he had the Homeric rather than the non-Homeric meaning in mind. 5 Thirdly, xexywpin the sense of "ordained end" obviously has far more connection with alaa than it would in the sense of "sign" or "clue", which at once renders it a more attractive (cf. supra p. 22)interpretation a correspondence between texywp We may, in fact, go further in establishing If we look at the Homeric expression and alaa. xe'xywp 'IAiou, which the Achaians, we are immediately struck by "find" or "discover", it is said, will eventually with alaa - for the "fate" or identical here is practically the fact that tcxvudp "lot" of Ilion and the "ordained end" of Ilion can hardly be called dissimilar with yol'pa, the imin this sense has strong affiliations xexyajp conceptions. Greek cosmo logical thought was well illustrated portance of which in earliest I suggest, therefore, that the arrival of Tekmor in Alkman's by Cornford.51 the arrival of that determinative power which presides over cosmogony signifies that power which elsewhere in Alkmanfs poetry prevents man from world order; ascending to heaven and marrying goddesses,, that which in Homer controls the the payactions even of the gods,52 that which in Anaximander "necessitates" that which in Herakleitos ment of retribution by encroaching opposites,53 preAltaian's Tekmor will thus his measures".54 vents the sun from "over-stepping join the well-known company of Aisa, Moira, the Erinyes, Nemesis, Necessity and of the force which determines that the the rest as yet another manifestation order present in the world shall not be disrupted. The appearance of a determinative power of this type at the dawn of creation of In Damaskios1 account in both Greek and non-Greek material. has parallels the primordial "the Orphic cosmogony according to Hieronymos and Hellanikos", union of earth and water produces "Ageless Time" accompanied by'Avdvxn and that after the egg version given by Athenagoras tells the parallel *A6pdaTia: generated by Herakles broke in two to form Ouranos and Ge (cf . supra p.. 21) , -the and Atropos55 first offspring of this pair were the Fates Clotho, Lachesis to Altaian's Poros followed a sequence of events which shows a marked similarity and Along with this we have the references in Orphic literature by Tekmor. Pherekydes of Syros to the primacy of Chronos , Time, who may well himself have for in Anaximander s fragment been viewed as a sort of determinative power; between the cosmic of damages" in the litigation time appears as the "assessor struck is one In non-Greek by the parallel sources, particularly opposites.56 the idea that provided in the Mesopotamian myths of creation which incorporated 57 been determined. had fate its until be said to exist could nothing of Tekmor given here is It is at once apparent that if the interpretation divergence from that correct, then Alkman's cosmogony embodies a significant For in this latter account, after Chaos, the contained in Hesiod's Theogony. Gap, has appeared, revealing Earth and Tartaros "in a recess of earth", the ^ next arrival on the scene is Eros, whereas there is no mention of the Moirai until nearly a hundred lines further on (217) , where they figure among the in the Eros appears very early (as far as we can tell) children of Night.58 But these authors are among these for whom also. 5$ theogony of Akousilaos, their account of cosmogony i.e. cosmogony and theogony are the same thing: Eros's presence of divine matings and parturitions. is one of a succession hence his early as the driving force behind this process; is therefore essential self-created not was universe the shall we as But for see, Alkman, appearance. What in this way; so for him Eros would be superfluous at this primeval stage. next. what will which a is happens he what and regulate is needed, power gives us,

25. E. First Poros , then Tekmor, and now, seemingly, Thetis, to Thetis. This has occasioned whom our commentator assigns a demiurgic role. express"rather surprising" ions of wonder among modern scholars: (Lobel) , "astonish"ratselhaft" (Erankel) are typical. 60 ing" (Barrett), Certainly we should not have expected to find a Nereid cast as the demiurge from anything we read about Has this document, therefore, these goddesses in the rest of Greek literature. given us something quite new? Burkert and West seem to think that it has. Noting that Thetis elsewhere in Greek mythology is primarily a sea-goddess, they deduce that Alkman's that it belongs to that class of creation myths was a water cosmogony: i.e. Thus Burkert: in which the world arises from a primeval waste of waters. die Urflut "Thetis als die beruhmteste der Nereiden konnte dann vielleicht of water is the presence indication "The clearest and West: reprasentieren"61; West summarises Alkman's cosmogony of Thetis. "62 Later in this same article and as trackless "It begins ... with a waste of waters, characterised thus: g, featureless, ^ 3 ana the appearance of a deity who can make something out of it." The theory is, however, most improbable. It depends to some extent on a misof Poros and Tekmor (cf . supra ) ; but an even bigger drawback interpretation is pointed out by West himself in the very next sentence: "Nothing similar to this is found in Greece. "65 now it is true, as West also notes, 66 that there are traces of a water-cosmogony - or rather, of an Urflut - in Homer and Thales. But in both these cases the Urflut has no need of any agent to act upon it, being Thus in Homer we find perfectly capable of commencing generation from itself. that Okeanos is termed the "begetter of all", 67 which, if it is to be taken as a serious cosmo-/theological statement, merely means that Okeanos was the first parent in some cosmic genealogy; 68 while Thales1 primordial water took on the source of all existing things, that nature of a Milesian apxn, "the original from which they first come-to-be and into which they are finally destroyed, the it describes as Aristotle but changing in its qualities" substance persisting no question in some way alive69 - certainly (Metaph. A3, 983b 8) , and was itself West is here of inert matter needing some divine agent to work it into shape. to the Near East, citing Genesis 1 and Enuma thus forced to go for his parallels it would appear that a elish, and concludes that "in view of these parallels Burkert, moreover, cites Alkman's Semitic-type cosmogony lies behind Alkman.""^ supposed Lydian origins to suggest that any Near Eastern influence we find in But it seems inherently unlikely that his work "cannot be very surprising."'1 would compose for performance at a Greek Alkman, whatever his birthplace,72 an ode whose material was culled from an alien mythological festival religious about tradition. 73 Moreover, in the case of what we have so far discovered Alkman's cosmogony we have not had to go beyond Greece for parallels; indeed, offered above, Poros and Tekmor belong to the mainstream on the interpretation We should therefore attempt to interpret of early Greek cosmological thought. Thetis1 appearance also without recourse to the hypothesis of Near Eastern influence. Little can be gathered from an examination of Thetis1 already known deeds. and She was a Nereid, a daughter of the Old Man of the Sea (II. 1.358, etc.), Like her father, she was capable normally lived in the sea with her father. of sel f-metamorphosis , a power in which she indulged to resist the attentions and goes of Peleus.74 Homer's Hephaistos terms her 6eivn xcu ou6oin (II. 18.394), on to describe how she and Eurynome rescued him after his mother Hera had cast him out of heaven because he was lame. 75 Rescuing the gods from tricky situfor she is also recorded ations seems to have been one of Thetis1 specialties; _as having given sanctuary to Dionysos from the anger of Lykourgos,76 and as having saved Zeus from a plot hatched against him by Hera, Poseidon and Athene. But possibly the most well-known story about her is that she was destined to

26. bear a son who would be greater than his father; Zeus, being warned in time by Metis (or Prometheus or Themis as other versions have it) , ceased his attempts to seduce her and gave her instead to the mortal Peleus, whereupon she became the mother of Achilles. 78 Later she returns to the sea (though her husband Peleus is still living - il. 18.433f.), which is where we find her at the time of the Trojan War. There is nothing in this to suggest that Thetis was anything more than a But there is a fact concerning her wormermaid with friends in high places. with respect ship that at first sight appears as though it might be significant to Alkman. Pausanias the following story regarding the shrine of Thetis tells at Sparta (3.14.4, Loeb trans.): The sanctuary of Thetis was set up, they say, for the following reason. war against the Messenians, whohad revolted, The Lacedaemonianswere making and their king Anaxander,having invaded Messenia, took prisoners certain This Cleo the wife of Anaxand amongthemCleo, priestess of Thetis. women, ander asked for fromher husband, and discovering that she had the woodenimage (Sdavov) of Thetis, she set up with her a temple for the goddess. Leandris did this because of a vision in a dream,but the woodenimage of Thetis is guarded in secret. Much is uncertain about early Spartan chronology, but the Messenian Revolt Thus this shrine is generally given as c.650, and Alkman's floruit as 630. his cosmogonical Alkman when have been set composed might up quite recently there may be those bold. enough to suggest that this very ode, in which ode; Thetis appears to play such a vital role, was written for performance at its dedication. in any case, I think it must Such a suggestion would be pure speculation; There is be fairly obvious by now that we have been following a false trail. to connect the Thetis of mythnot a jot of evidence anywhere in Greek literature ology with any kind of demiurgic activity whatever - not even, as we shall see, among those later commentators who insist on turning the Homeric poems into a Nor do we receive any guidance by examining her cult, allegory. cosmological confined to the fact that there were since our knowledge of this is virtually The truth of the matter shrines dedicated to her in various parts of Greece. We is that we have been led into a blind alley by our present commentator. Alkman's of his that 13) have already had occasion to note (e.g. reading supra p. acumen is, to say the least, and that his critical text was none too careful, It need occasion no surprise, therefore, if we find that he open to doubt. what he is precisely and this, I believe, has made yet another blunder here; When he saw the word GETIC (or CETIC) in the original has done. poem, he that Alkman was talking about the Nereid immediately jumped to the conclusion a mistake which modern editors and scholars have helped perpetuate by Thetis; The answer, as in the case of Poros 8.79 printing the word with a capital and Tekmor, lies in an examination of the etymology of the word; the fact in the nominative case with the name of a wellthat this word is identical will then be seen to be quite irrelevant. known sea-goddess 80 where he pointed out, The clue was spotted by West in his first article, of the actual name associations in connection with the possible etymological Thetis, that besides the suffix -tic; (gen. -tu6os) denoting a female agent (e.g. xaTaiBaTis, fern, of xaTaiftdxns) "there is another suffix -xis, gen. -tios, which for forming abstract nouns." generally developed to -cis. and was used extensively in the rare examples where this second Unfortunately he was more interested suffix also has an agent signification, being concerned to show that "Alkman

27.

could certainly have interpreted the name Thetis as 'she who sets1," But it is surely more natural to assume that if a form * Sens for the normal Seats then it would have the same signification existed in Alkman's dialect, that it would be the abstract noun derived fromxt'Snyt i.e. Se'ats has elsewhere; with the basic meaning of "action de poser" (Boisacq s.v. Seats). The suffix -a is j gen. -atos, employed to form abstract nouns in Greek comes from the I.-E. in Latin; thus for *-tis, which appears as -ti-h in Sanskrit and as -tio(n) the Greek otolo is we have in Sanskrit sthitih and in Latin statio, and for Greek Seats itself corresponds to the Baals* Sanskrit gatih and Latin (in-)ventio.' -dhitih (found in compounds) and the second element of the Latin Sanskrit Now it is true, as Buck points out (preek Dialects 61) f that the con-ditio?^ * -tis words shows an early change to -a- in all dialects; -t- of I.-E. intervocalic suffix there are, however, two notable examples of the survival of the original its desin the words cpdxts (the abstract noun from cpnyt,retained alongside cendant <paai"sto denote a special sort of "action de parler" - cf. L.S.J. s.v.) and units (whose parent verb is lost in Greek - corresponds to Sanskrit matih exacte"). "mesure, connaissance Furthermore, Doric tends to retain inter-" vocalic -T- in other cases, such as the verbal endings -it and -vxt, the preposition Tcoxt, /txaxt for etxoat, (xpta)- xaxtQL etc. for -xdatot, and IIoTet6dv: it also retains initial t- in xu, xe'., xet. "Le dorien conserve en g^ndral t devant t," Hence it is by no means impossible that the -its form of says Bourguet.^3 g4 abstract nouns was still current in the Laconian dialect when Alkman was writing; so that when he wrote Se'xts eye'vexo or whatever, he meant neither more nor less than "a Seats took place. "85 based not on the Consequently we may now proceed to an interpretation of Thetis the Nereid but on the instances activities of the word Seats in early Of these there are but seven, as the word is fairly rare before literature. the fourth century philosophers; and they fall, broadly speaking, into two categories. (1) Literal, "action de xtSe'vat".
(A) Et. Mag. 319.30: (a) "Creation, production". Alkaios fr. 133 Bgkv ' from ' "ESrixeanyat'vet 6i5o, xb ipoxaxe'Srixev f' eitot'naev... acp oS xat Seats f' not'nats a 'AAxattj). (Cf. Alkaios fr. 204.6 Lobel-Page: J.atSeats) nap

(b) "Order, disposition", fromxt'Snytin the sense of "dispose, ordain" (L.S.J. ' s.v. A.VIII.l). Soph. Ichn. 275 [6 yev (sc. Hermes) axa]x[ds Y* gt] eaxl xou Ttaxpbs Seaet. (2) Transferative, a result of the action of xtSe'vat. T^ itotxtAoYapuv (a) "Position, setting" of words in verse, Pi. 01. 3.8 cpopytyy^ xat Boav/aoXwv hniuv xe Seatv ... (auyyetat ). So Hippokrates Airs Waters Places 6 (b) "Place, position" of townor city. xauxas xas noXtas (sc. xas itpbsxas 6v5atasxedyevas) (11.24.13 Littre) avdtYwn Seatv xe'eaSat voaeptDxaxnv. This meaningalso occurs at Thuc.1.37.3 and 5.7.4. (c) "Deposit" to be paid in respect of a law-suit, Ar. Clouds 1191 tv' at Se'aets ylyvolvto xrj vouynvta(this usage madepossible by Snaetv xa itpuxaveta of line 1180).

28.

of the Alkaios Before proceeding further , let us examine the implications With respect to the first part of the entry in fragment quoted under (1) (a) . that "among the ancients" also assert the Etymologicon Magnum,other late grammarians to noinaai of Myrlea ap. Ath. 11.501c so Asklepiades Setvai noifjaai: signified 533 A. 18 Bekker xal yap xo'is SeTvai itpbs t&v apxawov eAeyexo and Helladios ap. Phot. One sense in which this may be said TiaXatots Xe'yetv edos to e^nxev ercl too ti 6pav. to use of Tt'Snyt with noun + other noun or adjective to be so is the apparent el 6e yiv atxvnTnv eSeoav deoi, mean "render something so-and-so": e.g. Jl. 1.290 tov yev ... eq>aoxov 'hfaeiv a^dvaTov xai ayTfpwv. However, it does not Od. 5.135f. it are reporting? seem to be this apparent synonymity**** that the grammarians to "doing somethat 's statement to do with Helladios has little eSnxe referred Rather these statements of dec is to mean lotnais. thing" nor with Alkaios 's use the fact that TiSriyi in the early poets often seems to denote the action reflect cause , or the efficient would call in peripatetic of what one versed terminology But xe'Xa6ov xal auTnv. So e.g. Jl. 9.547 to tcolouv. 87 (Artemis) ayq>* aoT<|>Sfjxe rcoXuv means anything that xrtmii in these passages to suppose in fact it is a mistake transthe correct is still "Set" or "place" from xidnvi elsewhere. different to in the scheme of thought which is unable for we are still lation, operating is and consequently and non-spatial causality activity,88 distinguish spatial of the Iliad lines Thus the in concrete terms. spatial expressed ^ opening^ ynviv aei6e, ded, ITTiXriid6eu) 'AxiXfjos/ouXoyevnv,fi yupt* 'Axaiots aXye* ednxe, which we to the Achaians", a host of trouble as "the wrath ... which caused interpret Homer's way of thinking) are literally (and in a way which correctly reproduces a host of troubles which placed rendered "the wrath ... amongst the Achaians"; have been used in Thus Alkaios ' sweats will and so with the other passages.89 who but in a context where a later de poser", sense of "action writer, the basic de it as "action could interpret a notion of abstract causality, possessed inde causer" It is in fact an "action causer", "creation", "production". volving space. then we this meaning of deais into a cosmogonical If we transpose context, It is nothing of Alkman's need look no further for an interpretation Se'xis. in terms of a spatial of the world expressed less than the creation ordering. is supplied evidence for this assertion by fr. 20, which I quote Corroboratory once again: Spas 6' or'nc xpeis, ftepos xai xetya xinwpav Tpixav xal TSTpaTOV To/np, oxa adXXei yev, ea$uiv 6* a6av oux eaxt. comes from the same poem as that this piece has already suggested Lloyd-Jones seems very and this certainly that with which our commentary is dealing,90 to that suggested Not only is the metre, as West points out, "similar likely. of the but in this fragment we have an account by some of our lemmata";91 ode* which would fit very well into a cosmogonical of the seasons, creation The striking thing about fr. 20, however, whether it comes from our^poem or not, is none other than eanxe ( = this creation is that the verb used to describe Nor is Alkman the only is action word whose the by dxis. implied e%nxe), very as context. Herodotos, citing one to have employed xidnvi in a cosmogonical a of account the us of Dodona, Pelasgian the priests his source following gives ot neXaayoi) a<peas onto too toio'5tou (sc. deous 6e upoawvdyotadv attempt at etymology: These facts combine to xal itdaas voyas elxov. 9^ otl h6o'u$ SevTes Ta ndvTa rcpnyyaTa above is of Sexes in Alkman *s cosmogony offered that the interpretation suggest one. the correct

29.

The final lemma of fr. 5, [ aydp] tc xal aeXava xai tpi'tov oxotos (ews) xas yapyapuyas, tells us some of the fruits of this cosmic Sexis, and if we append fr. 20, the seasons will become some more. "Day, moon, darkness" and prethe cosmos is yapuyasappears; sumably others are mentioned before the word yap little is a itself take to difficult; "flashings" yapyctpoyas shape.93 beginning as produced by gold is its meaning in Bacchylides (3.17 Adyitei6* uitbyapyctpoyaCs it is also used of "seeing 6 xpuads) and elsewhere (e.g. Plato, Critias 116c); the expression stars" (Hipp. Prog. 24 , Plato Rep. 518a), while in the Odyssey (8.265) It is best taken here as a no6a)v corresponds to our "flashing feet". yapyapuyou of the stars. 9^ poetic representation There remains one unsolved and possibly insoluble question raised by the The fact that a of dexis in Alkman: who performs it? above interpretation moreof a Se'xns of some sort; cosmic dexis took place implies the existence for a find to we need this if 20 to eanxe does fr. subject over, belong poem in the xaxaaxeodcujv It is possible that this figure is reflected in line 1. Ttavia who precedes Poros in the commentator's version of the cosmogony, but this Moreover, it seems unlikely, on gives us no idea as to his actual identity. that Alkman would believe the Hesiodic parallel, any god to have existed betore The concept of deity eternal with respect the separation of Heaven and Earth. to the past as well as to the future is not attested until Pherekydes of Syros, and probably only appears in this author as a result of the influence of Milesian philosophy .95 Either, therefore, the commentator has changed Alkman's order in an attempt to bring him into line with orthodox peripatetic doctrine, In any case, is a pure invention (cf. supra p. 17). TEdtvxa or else his xaxaaxeudcwv the words in which he is mentioned in the commentary are so vague that nothing can be made out of them with respect to the identity of Alkman's xoayodeins. Consequently it F.ust be stressed at the outset that the following discussion is highly speculative. for the role. candidates There seem to me to be three possible (i) the world by causing the partition Poros itself,, which may be said to "create" between heaven and earth; however, there is no evidence provided either in Greek instance to connect it with the later Seats, Alkman or in any parallel and furthermore the figure is said by the commentator to "pass on" - a stateis likely to reflect ment which, as we have already seen (supra p. 22) , The commentator does not Ouranos. Alkman's own account of the event. (ii) at the dawn of creation is implied mention this ur-sky-god, but his existence by the coming-to-be of Poros to separate Heaven and Earth (Ouranos and Ge) . The concept of a sky-god who sets the world in order and then departs from the is a universal scene leaving the running of his creation to his successors it is also the case that Ouranos fs Vedic counterpart, Varuna, is asone;96 With respect to Greece, there is a possible cribed a demiurgic role.97 parallel is described in the papyrus fragment in Pherekydes1 Zas, whose demiurgic activity in this passage Zas (DK 7 B 2) as an adjunct to his marriage with Chthonie; of Heaven, as Chthonie is of Earth. 98 is obviously a personification Also, lists Ouranos as one of the "first figures" mentioned by the "ancient Aristotle poets" - though here, as in the case of Okeanos whom he mentions in the same (cf . supra p. 25 and n. 68) , he is presumably referring to Ouranos as passage This seems to Tekmor. one of the primary pair in a cosmic genealogy. (iii) We have already seen that Alkmanfs Tekmor beme the most likely candidate. for that is, it is a force primarily responsible longs to the Moira-Aisa group; It is also the case that we know of no other Urwesen in Alkmanfs cosmic order. force that appears as Tekmor in Weltanschauung than Poros and this controlling a third entity, to postulate the cosmogony and Aisa in the Louvre Partheneion; such as Ouranos or some other god, to fill the role of demiurge is dangerous in

30.

the absence of any kind of concrete evidence. It is a simple enough thoughtprocess to view the force which controls the order in the universe as being also the originator of this order. We need feel no surprise if an abstract entity for such as xe'xywp is made the subject of the concrete verb xiSnyt: a parallel where the this has already been quoted , viz. the opening lines of the Iliad, subject of this same verb is a noun, y?Wis, which is nothing if not abstract. On this point it is also relevant to note that yotpa in Homer is often made the subject of concrete verbs, as in the following examples. J2. 22.5 f. "Exxopa 6* auxou yelvat oAoin yotpa Tte6naev 'IX lou Ttporcapoide icuXawv xe Ixaidoov. ou6e Seoi icp Od. 3.236ff. xal cpiXq) 6i5vavxaiaXaAxeyev,oimoxe xev 6n av6pi ' avdxoio. ybtp oXofi xavriXeyeos xafteXTjai II. 24-.209f. enevnae Aivcj) Ytyvoyevy Even more significant on Tekmor's function xtf6* (Ss noi yoTpa xpaxain

as Alkman"s views with respect to what we have postulated of Parmenides : in the universe are the following expressions

t* ev xauxijjxe yevov xad1 eauxd xe xetxat xauxo*v 8.29ff. eyite6ova3^i y^vef xpaxepnY^P 'Avdyxn Xouxtos netpaxos ev 6eayoXaiv ixei 9 xd yiv aytplstepyei, xb i6v deyts elvat. ouvexev oux axeXe'5xnxov 8.36ff. ou6ev yhp^ri > eaxtv n eaxat aXXondpe^ xov edvxos, itiei xo ye MbZp enednaev oSXov axtvrixdv t' eyevai. 10.5ff. 6e xal oupavov aycplsexovxa ei6rfo*Ls evdev e<puxe xai s ytv ayoua' eue6naev 'Avdyxn nei pax1 exeiv aaxpwv. Here we see the operation of Ananke and Moira in Parmenides1 world, the first two passages being from the wayof Truth and the third one from the Wayof Seeming. that forms the most precise paraIt is the second of these three quotations lell to Alkman; for it is here stated that the present state of the world is "for there is not, nor shall be, anything else due to a past act of Moira: besides what is, since Moira fettered it to be entire and immovable."" So, a cosmos, prewith Alkman: the present world is an orderly place, I believe, cisely because it was "set in order" by Tekmor/Aisa at the beginning of time or, to use Alkman's own word, at the Se'xis of the universe. 10^ John L. Penwill Notes:
The papyrus with which we are here concerned is 1. Oxyrhynchus.Papyri XXIV, ed. E. Lobel. no. 2390 fr. 2, which appears on pp. 52-53; Lobel fs commentary(cited hereafter as "Lobel11) occupies pp. 54-55. Editions. (a) The following works form the relevant literature on the subject. Besides the editio princeps of Lobel the fragment has been edited twice by D.L. Page,

Monash University

31.

first in Poetae Melici Graeci (Oxford, 1962) pp. 22-24, and secondly in the O.C.T. (In the case of each (b) Lyrica Graeca Selecta Exegesis. (Oxford, 1968) pp. 12-14. review of work I give in brackets the method of citing it hereafter.) D.L. Page's (i) Ox. Pap. XXIV in C.R. n.s. 9 (1959) - the cosmogony is dealt with on pp. 20-21 ("Page"), review of the same in Gnomon 33 (1961) - on the cosmogony see p. W.S. Barrett's (ii) CM. Bowra, Greek Lyric Poetry, 2nd ed. (Oxford, 1961), pp. 689 ("Barrett"). (iii) des fruhen Griechentvms 9 25-26 ("Bowra GLP") . H. Frankel, (iv) Dichtung und Philosophie review of W. Burkert's 2nd ed., (v) (Munich, 1962), pp. 184 and 290-291 ( "Frankel11 ). Frankel 's book in Gnomon 35 (1963) pp. 827-828 ("Burkert") . (vi) M.L. West, "Three M.L, West, 13 (1963) pp. 154ff. ("West (1)"). Presocratic C.Q. n.s. (vii) cosmologies", 17 (1967) pp. Iff. ("West (2)"). "Alcman and Pythagoras", H. Schwabl, C.Q. n.s. (viii) Altertumswissenschaft der classischen in P.-W. Realencyclopadie art. "Weltschopfung", (ix) M. Treu, "Licht und Leuchtendes 1962), p. 1467 ("Schwabl"). Suppl. IX (Stuttgart, Studium Generale in der archaischen 18.2 (1965) pp. 83ff. ("Treu"). griechischen Poesie", A. Garzya, "Idee cosmogoniche e morali in Alcmane", P. & I. 4 (1962) pp. 247ff. (x) Coll. (xi) J.-P. Vernant, "Thetis et le poeme cosmogonique d'Alcman", ("Garzya"). Latomus no. 114 (1970), M.L. West, Early Greek Philosophy (xii) pp. 38ff. ("Vernant"). and the Orient (Oxford, 1971), pp. 206-208. 2. 3. 4. See F.D. Harvey, pp. 62ff. Col. i. 25f. "Oxyrhynchus Papyrus 2390 and early Spartan history", J.H.S. 87 (1967)

[ev 6]e

xauxri xrj <j>6[ij *AX]xyav cpua[ioXo(yeT )] .

accounts of cosmogony fall broadly speaking into two Mythical and protophilosophical Primitive man knew only two methods of categories, depending on the .analogy employed. one was by biological the other by plastic art. creation; reproduction, Consequently when an account was sought for the origin of the world, an analogy was drawn with either one or the other of these creative The commonest analogy used by the early methods. so that an Greek speculators reproduction, was, as is well known, that of biological instance of the "craftsman" interesting. analogy in this early period would be especially -Mai xpi'xos axoxos* ii.21ff. 6ia to yn6ena) yn'xe nXiov yn'xe ae[X]nvnv yeYovevou <*XX* ex i a6i,axpiT [o] v etvai xhv uXnv, while the next lemma reads (25f.) [Syap] xe xal aeXava comment in the apparatus xou Tpi'xov choxos. to fr. 5 in Poetae Melici Graeci Page's mihi visus hie commentator: scilicet xotL xptxos axdxos, quod poeta p. 24, "hariolari hie a contextu evolsit, ad Porum (25 seq.) prope 5yap et aeXdvav tertio loco posuit, of this muddle. Cf. Harvey Tecmorque quasi socium transtulit", gives the best explanation "Whether or not he (sc. the commentator) was an intelligent man is (above n. 2) p. 62: a question on which it is better not to dogmatise." On the fact that one lemma has xpi'xos and the other xpi'xov, Barrett comments "Presumably xpi'xos is right and xpi'xov the common modernisation of axdxos into a neuter noun." (609 n.5). West (2) p. 4.

5.

6. 7.

B ad II. Cf. Theagenes of Rhegium ap. Schol. 20.67 (= DK 8 2) ; Herakleitos Horn. All . 43. For the whole question of cosmogonies and cosmologies from Homer by later extrapolated writers see F. Buffiere, Les mythes d'Homere et la pensie grecque 1956) 9 pp. (Paris, 155-186. H.A. 557a 1. Cf . however the following fragment of another commentary on Alkman which that Aristotle said somewhere that the poet came from Lydia: Fr. 13.8 (Page) suggests ' dXX* eoixe Au6bv au[xov voyi,']Cei<v 6 xe ApiaxoxeXns hcu, [ . . . . a'5] pc^ncpo l ontaxnSevxeg But this gives no indication that Aristotle had [ ] "avhp aypetos xxX" (fir. 16). read Alkman, actually

8.

32.

9.

Cf. Alkman frr. 148 (Exicko6es ), 149 (AiyiaXi's), 150 (' Avvi'xwpov) , and the following frr. downto 157, It mayor maynot be relevant to note that Hesiod was another poet fond of introducing such remotepeoples into his poetry - v. frr. 150-153 MerkelbachWest. Frr. 26, 39, 82. icavxajv. Cf. fr. 40, where he says, /^oi6a 6* opvt'xwv vo'yws

10. 11.

The last two were Viz. the Enetic, the Ibenian and the Kolaxaian (lines 51 and 59). of such obscurity that they defied certain interpretation even in Hellenistic times, See G. Devereux, "The as is well attested by the confusion in the scholiasts. Kolaxaian horse of Alkman'sPartheneion", C.Q. n.s. 15 (1965) pp. 176ff., and "The Enetian horse of Alkman'sPartheneion", Hermes94 (1966) pp. 129ff. GLP 39. Cf. also G. Devereux's article on the Kolaxaian horse (above n. 11) p. 176: fs Partheneion contains so many obscure details that even the elucidation of a "Alkman single point seems worthwhile." So Lloyd-Jonesap. West (1) p. 156. Cf. infra 28.

12.

13. 14.

1 amnot happywith Page suggests as an alternative for 14-15 [6atydvwv]yepaixdxoi. would have considered since it does not seem to me that Alkman either atwv or 6cuydvu)v, I would therefore leave itavxwv as absolute and either of these beings as divine. aXxdwould becomethe subinsert a verb at the beginning of line 15 of which onc]e'6iXos Xudn6' would fit very nicely. ject. Following the translation of Fage p. 20. In addition, the following authors are mentioned by the scholiasts on the Louvre Partheneion: Aristophanes, Aristarchos, Pamphilos, Sosiphanes, and Stasikles. aXXa auv nXiq>. Syap is restored fromthe exegesis 5yap ou ((aXuJs Cf. Barrett's comment quoted above n. 5. mustbe a word that appeared in Alkman'spoem: (a) yctpyapuyots <eo>S> suppl. Page. it is muchtoo obscure to be a gloss; (b) it is difficult to imagine what it could possibly be intended to "explain"; and (c) it does occur elsewhere in early Greek Cf. infra 29. poetry (Od. 8.265, H. Ap. 203, Bacchylides 3.17). Whichshows that this poem, like the Partheneion , was written for public performance, at some religious festival. presumably Frr. 27 (Mu>a* Aids), 28 (M&aa Aibs duyaxepXiy' otei'aoyaiwpaviacpl.) $i5yaxep aye KaXXtdita Cf. also fr. 3.1 (['OX] uyTua6es icepi ye cppevas.) 6 yev 'Apiarapxos Oupavouduyaxepa xnv 3. 16b: Aristarchos? Cf. Schol. Pi, Nem. xat 'AXxyavCaxopoOaLV. Mouaav6e6exTai xadditepMoOaav6e6exxaL xaSaitep Muyvepyos here makes the Muses daughters This is also the view of Frankel, who says that Alkman liber die of Heaven and Earth "sodass sie demDichter eine mehrauthentische Auskunft On the idea that there ersten Begebnisse der Weltwerdunggeben konnten" (291 n. 4). 6e eXeyeua es rhv were in fact two generations of Muses, cf. Paus. 9.29.4: Muyvepyos xe xal Au6o'5s. (pnaivev x$ Tipootyu^ Suyaxe*pas rcpbsF'5ynv ydxnvnounaas xnv Eyupvauwv Alkman eCvat Atbs uau6as. 6e aXXas veu)xe*pas xas apxatoxepas Mo'5aas, xov5xwv Oupavov) probably held a similar view to that of Mimnermos. axdXoudov Page (P.M.G. p.24j/ ex 6e xw it[dpajxb xxya>pxb 6e xe] xywpeyevexo x [$ udptp

15. 16. 17. 18. 19.

20. 21. 22. 23.

24.

33.

ex 6e to) Tt[peayus Tldpos Texyoop xe 25. 26. Bowra GLP p. 26, Lobel p.

xe]xyoop p. 3.

West (1)

p.

154.

55, West (2)

state of the world was that the original West's idea, propounded in his second article, "a rude mass that is anopov xai axexyapxov" (p. 2) - which in any case sounds more like Treu sees in the sheds no light on the subject. Anaxagoras than Alkman - consequently doctrine of the Eleatic to f' uXn udvxoov an early expression commentator's reference "Schon um 650 v. Chr. hat sich that "what is cannot come-to-be from what is not": aus etwas e:>tEntstandene dass alles demnach der Standpunkt der cpuaixoi durchgesetzt, zu denken i.t" im Urzustand prakonzipiert bereits standen s*ein muss und demnach 'alles1 to Alkaios xai x' ou6ev ex fr. 320 L.-P. This he supports by reference (p. 86). There is no evidence, 6evbs ye'voixo. however, to suggest that Alkaios was here law of physics any more than Shakespeare was when Lear tells a universal enunciating Cordelia "Nothing will come of nothing" (King Lear 1.1.90). So Lobel p. 55, Page p. 20, Bowra GLP p. 26, West (2) p. 2, Treu p. 86.

27. 28.

"Dans l'obscurite So also Vernant p. 49: (axo'xos) du ciel et des eaux originellement sur la des voies dif fe'rencie'es , rendant visibles confondus, il [sc. Poros] introduit une e*tendue orientant de l'espace, diverses voute ce'leste et sur la mer les directions d'abord de'pourvue de tout trace' et point de repere, arcopov xai axe'xyapxov." Elsewhere, and more interestingly, he gives "eine Brucke liber den Abgrund" (p. 184).

29. 30.

of Poros in Plato's As West rightly points out ((1) Symposium p. 155), the appearance irrelevant as regards any attempt to interpret (203b) as the father of Eros is entirely had become common, and it is of time the meaning "device" Poros in Alkman. By Plato's Poros lurking One can see the ghost of Plato's this that his Poros is a hypos tasis. it is even more manifest in of Alkman' s as "Device"; behind the common interpretation world-mass was aitopov that Alkman 's original when he declares West's second article, xai axexyapxov and therefore needed Poros and Tekmor to "bring it into shape" ((2) p. 2), for Plato says that the result of Poros being the father of Eros is that oux anopel seeks to demonstrate that Plato is Vernant (pp. 44ff.) "Epoos Ttoxe (Symp. 203e) . a connecting link between Poros, the Eros had older which from an forming myth drawing The evidence and Penia, uXn. symbolic of undifferentiated symbol of differentiation, in such a theory; he adduces is very late and cannot really be used to substantiate Poros in Alkman. it is not the key to interpreting any case, as will become apparent, So also Vernant, who speaks West (2) pp. 3-6. la Nuit des eaux primordiales" (pp. 50f .) West (2) p. 3, Burkert p. 828. Cf. infra p. 25. of "l'obscurite' totale qui regne dans

31. 32. 33.

the separation of "(This describing important as explicitly fragment) is particularly as a popular and traditional i.e. sky and earth as being passed on from mother to child, The Presocratic account." G.S. Kirk in Kirk-Raven, 1957), p. 33, (Cambridge, Philosophers doubt that Chaos in Hesiod means the gap between earth There can surely now be little and heaven. See Cornford, From Religion to Philosophy (New York, 1957) pp. 66f., (New York, 1965) pp. 194f . , and the most convincing argument of Principium Sapientiae offered Kirk in Kirk-Raven op.cit. As regards Alkman, the interpretation pp. 27ff . here fits fairly well with what the commentator says at ii.7f. d)s yap npotxo n v'r' xaxaaxeua [a$fjvai] and if Alkman himself used words such eyevexo ndpos xts oiovel apxn: as yopcpn yja oupavou xa' yns to commence his account of cosmogony (though it should be felt no need to do so) , then it is presumably this that noted that Hesiod certainly the commentator terms uXn.

34.

34.

35.

That is, the world Myth and analysed

make their appearance, binary oppositions polarities being a major feature of as myth" in J. Middleton (ed.) Cf . in this regard E.R. Leach, "Genesis state. Cosmos (New York, 1967) pp. 1-13, where the creation account in Genesis is in terms of the coming-to-be of successive polarities (pp. 5f.)

With respect to the separation of sky and earth in Greek thought, something of the lies behind the garbled account that remains of Anaximander fs cossort very likely mogony, where the sphere of flame surrounding the air round the earth "like bark round circles" a tree" is "broken off" and "shut off in certain (DK 12 A 10) . 36. 37. 38. West (2) Reading p. 8. ya]p in line 13.

[xpaxnae

restoration for the papyrus reading ]e6eiXos. cnt]e6"rXqs seems to be the only possible The various interpretations that have been put upon it are discussed by West ((2) pp.7f.); firm of these, I prefer that of Lloyd-Jones (ap. Bowra GLP p. 42) that it means "lacking - it is of weakness some notion it to must for the context carry require foundation", the aXxa of defeated heroes that is being spoken of, after all. X'5$n 6' Inserting in n. 14 would bring this out clearly; at the beginning of the line as I suggested is something which does not appear to bother as already observed, though clarity, Alkman in this poem. Cf. Pi. Pyth. 10.27 and Aesch. Prom. 894-6 cited by Garzya p. 249, nn. 10, 11.

39. 40.

Fr. 102 (XeTuxot6' axapitos avnXeihs 6* avayxa) may well be another expression by Alkman of the gap between In terms of myth, the appearance of a similar pair of conceits*. it is, the formation of the gulf between men and gods; earth and heaven also signals That the gap is considered in fact, another facet of the concept of man's "fall". $' ayvov ndpov also by Aesch. Prom. 280 (oaepa "out of bounds" to man is suggested and Ibykos fr. 28 (itOTaxai olojvwv - aither is the Syvos Ttdpos which man cannot pass) ev aAXoipuj) xaei - chaos is "another's province"). ii.l2ff. too [6e- 7td]pou icapeXdovtog eTtaxoXoo^n [acu] texyiop.

41. 42.

It is as well to note in passing that Poros and Tekmor do not form any type of pair. in nor are they the primary polarity; They are neither the primary cosmic parents, one with to do another. have will become as nothing practically they fact, apparent, West (1) West (2) Frankel p. 251. pp. p. p. 155, 2. 184 and p. 827. 291 n. 2. This second remark is quoted with approval by Garzya 156.

43. 44. 45. 46. 47.

Burkert p.

In view of the fact that the Homeric xexyiop and the later xexyap normally have quite distinct meanings, it could perhaps be maintained that they are in fact two distinct in Pindar where xexyap words. However, this theory is ruled out by the two passages is required by the and in the case of Pyth. 2.49 at least is used in the Homeric sense, In later poets, such as Apollonios, metre. xexywp and xexyap are used indiscriminately considerations. as dictated (Cf. Frankel 's note on Ap. Rh. 1.499 [Noten by metrical hatte ich angezweifelt, zu den Argonautika des Apollonios , Munich, 196 8] : xexyap exouao und weil es in dem sondern 'ist', ein weil in 3.1002 das Sternbild xe'xywp nicht 'hat' horn. Hymnos 32.13 vom Vollmond heisst xexywp 6e $poxois xoa afjya xe'xuxxai. [spaten]

35. der Jedoch scheint in der neuen Alkmanfragment 5...Texyu>p in einem Sinn vorzukommen hier zu dem(iberlieferten Text passen konnte." Texyaphere does in fact comeclose to meaningyotpa, which is the sense I shall suggest it has in Alkman; it maywell be significant that it occurs in Apollonios, too, in a cosmogonical context [the passage is quoted above, p. 18] - one, moreover,which embodies the motif of the separation of sky and earth.) 48. i.e. "possession of knowledgeregarding divine dispensation is a markof nobility", taking to as a demonstrativepronounreferring to the whole clause 5aa ... addvaToi, as meaning"worthless xou eaSXftv Texyapas being in apposition to nu$ea$ai, and 6etXwv and noble persons." Texyaphere comes close to the meaningof "dividing line", and it mayhave been this passage that Aristotle had in mindwhenhe wrote (Rhet. 1357b 7) to yap Texyap xal rcepastcxutov zcti xaTa ttiv apxatav yXuvrTav. The passages where Texaipoyai occurs are II. and H. Apoll. 285. 7.70, 6.349; Od. 5.317, 11.112, 12.139;

49. 50.

Alkman was in fact familiar with the Ionian epic tradition; cf. fr. 81 Ze') idTep, at which recalls Nausikaa's ai yap eyoi T0t,da6endais xexXnye'vos yap i'ibs itoais ein eiT) (Od. 6.244), and fr. 77 Av5aiapis, aivdrcapts, xaxov 'EXXd6i Burriaveipathe beginning of which looks very muchlike ari imitation of Homerfe Ai5anapi,el6os aptaTe (J2. 3.39, See BowraGLPpp. 20ff. 13.769). FromReligion to Philosophy, ch. 1 (pp. 1-39). Cf. the Sarpedon episode in .the Iliad (16.431ff.), where Zeus is unable to rescue his son froma fate TtdXai Tteupcoyevov (441); see also Od. 3.236ff. quoted below, p. 30. xaTa to xpe^v: the whole fr. is quoted below, n. 56.

51. 52. 53. 54. 55.

DK 22 B 94 aHXios yap o^X uiiepBriaeTai yeTpa? el 6e yn, 'EptviJesytv Atxns enixoupoL eeoprfaouat,v. oSaav ttiv auTnv xal Dam 123 bis auvelvcu 6e a'JT(p (sc.Xpdvy) Tnv 'Avdyxnv,cp'5aiv 6iwpyut auTou e(paitToyevnv: evnv ev iravTi xcpx6o'u$9twv icepaTwv wy 'A6pdaTeLav,daaiyaTwv Ath. 18 p. 20 SchwartzOupavos 6e Ft}yix^els yevvqt driXetasyev KXwda) "Axponov. AdxTiciv (DK 1 B 13) For Chronosin Orphic belief see W.K.C. Guthrie, Orpheusand Greek Religion (NewYork, 1966), pp. 85ff. With respect to Pherekydes, cf. DK 7 B 1 Zas yev xal Xpdvos fiaav ae' xal XSovi'n, on which Probus (ad Verg. Eel. 6.31 - DK 7 A 9) comments "Znva inquit xai X^c5va xau Kpdvov,ignemac terramet tempussignificans, et esse aethera qui regat, terramquae regatur, tempusin quo universa pars moderetur." Cf. also Herm.irr. 12, For Anaximander cf. DK 12 B 1 *Ava^uyav6pos ... apxnv ... eJpnxe quoted below n. 98. t&v ovtojvto aiceupov... eB,Sv 6e n yeveaus eaTU tous o5au, xa', ttiv (pdopaveus Ta'3Ta ttIs a6uxuas xaTa yuveadat xaTa to xP^v* 6u6dvau yap auTa 6txnv xa't tlolv aXXr^XoLS Tnv toO xpdvouTa^tv. So in the Sumerianaccount of the creation of man (S.N. Kramer,SumerianMythology, Philadelphia, 1944, pp. 59-62), after the clay has been fashioned into human shape, Enki instructs Nammu "0 mymother,decree its fate"; while later on in the same myth Enki and Ninmah human creatures and engage in competition, Ninmah fashioning deformed In defying Enki to nominatea "fate" for them,which, however, Enki manages to do. later Babylonian theology, the gods (Anunnaki) are referred to as "the great Anunnaki, who decree the fate" (J.B. Pritchard (ed.)# Ancient Near Eastern Texts,Princeton, 1950, elish the accession of Mardukto the supremeposition in the p. 114), while in Enuma pantheonis signified by his taking fromKingu "the tablets of Fate, not rightfully his (sc. Kingu's)" (4.121). later stage in Epimenides1theogony: cf. DK 3 B 19 They also seem to comeat a somewhat ex tou (sc. Kpdvou) xaXXixoyosye'veTO t* addvaTou xal *Epuvues XPua^ *Aq>po6iTn/Mopat
aLoXd6ujpOL.

56.

57.

58.

36.
59. According to Damaskios1 report (DK 9 B 1), Eros is the child of Erebos and Night, who are the first two beings to appear after Chaos. (Cf. also Plato Symp. 178b DK 9 B 2.) One may also note the cosmogony given in Ar. Birds 693ff., where Eros is the first being to come from the wind-egg produced by Night. est to find nothing surprising "l'e'tonnant about it: Vernant, however, professes He associates de Ne*ree?"(p. 41). du role devolu a la fille qu'on ai pu s'etonner Thetis with Metis, another sea-nymph who shows a great similarity to Thetis - see Zeus The name Metis appears in Orphic cosmogonies as one of III.l Cook, p. 745. the many names given to Phanes (Guthrie, from this Vernant deduces above n. 56, p. 97); Such reasoning that a sea-nymph could easily play an important role in cosmogony. it relies on a number of tenuous associations, does not appear to me very convincing; association of the word (= "Wisdom, and surely in the case of Metis it is the etymological with Phanes, not the fact that that is important with respect to identification Counsel") she was a sea-nymph. Burkert p. West (2) i.e. p. 828. 3. xai 5-6. axexyapxov.

60.

61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68.

auopov pp.

West (2) Ibid. Ibid.

p. 6. p. 3. xai ynxe'pa Tr^uv and 246 pe'edpa/' ftxeavoO, os nep

' ftxeavdv xe Sefov yeveaiv II. 14.201 yeveois itdvxeaai. xexuxxai. Okeanos is mentioned by Aristotle (Met. N4 1091b 4 ot 6e TtounTau ou upcoxous otov Nuxxa xau Oupavbv f' on the passages cited supposition

as one of the "first beings" of the "ancient poets" apxotCou xauxrj oyouws, 5 BaauXeueLV xai apxeuv (paatv ou xous Xdos n 'ftxeavdv, aXXa xbv Aua), probably basing this in the previous note.

69.

= DK 11 A 23 Cf. Aetius 1.7.11 8aXfjs vouv xoO x day ou xov $edv, xo 6Ne nav eyc|>uxov apa xai 6aiydvu)V TtXnpes* 6tnxeLV 6e xa'i 6ta xou axoixc1'^00^ uypoO 6uvayiv deiav xtvnxixViv auxou. West (2) p. 6.

70. 71.

in "Sofern die kosmogonische Deutung zutrifft, liegt das legitime Vergleichsmaterial Anaximandros und den altorientalischen Kosmogonien vor, die von Hesiod bis Thales, beeinflusst dariiber hinaus griechische haben, deren auftreten bei Alkman Spekulation von Sardes gar nicht so liberraschen kann." (Burkert pp. 82 7f.) no judgement can I agree with Page "that, on the available On this question evidence, Such evidence as there The Partheneion, be passed" (Alcman: Oxford, 1951, p. 167). and see also P. Janni, "II is is reviewed in Appendix II of this work (pp. 167-170); I (Rome, 1965) pp. di Alcmane" in La Cultura di Sparta Arcaica problema dell'origine 96-120. on early Greek myth and philfor Near Eastern influence It is true that the evidence and the Orient, Oxford, osophy is strong (see e.g. M.L. West, Early Greek Philosophy The two such as this. for a wholesale importation 1971), but there is no parallel that might be cited as such are the mutilation/succession instances myth of Hesiod fs Kumarbi epic (Pritchard, to the Hittite op. Theogony which bears a marked similarity

72.

73.

37.
cit.f pp. 120-121), and Thales1 choice of water as his first principle, which may be But with respect to the first, it is quite based on Egyptian cosmological beliefs. as Kirk wrong to say that Hesiod's account is derived directly from the Hittite; account, points out (Kirk-Raven, op.cit., p. 37), "there was a widely diffused common with many local variants, of which the Hittite tablet gives one version and Hesiod another.11 Both, in fact, display the Indo-European penchant for dividing things into threes (cf . C. Scott Littleton, The New Comparative Mythology, California, 1966, pp. 151 and 208-209), which accounts for the appearance in each of three sets of gods, while the son's mutiliation/murder/dethronement/castration of the father is a mythoHence the question here is one of common logical motif found all over the world. With respect to Thales, it may indeed be asheritage rather than direct influence. serted that water owes its place in his cosmology to Egyptian influence (though the Okeanos passages of Homer cited above n. 67 could well have a more direct bearing in this case), but his final scheme, so far as we can piece it together, is far different from any he may have come across in the temples of Heliopolis. 74. Pi. Nem. 4.62ff.; Soph. frr. 150, 618 Jebb; Eur. fr. 1093 Nauck; PI. Rep, 318d; and in art Paus. 5.18.5 (chest of Kypselos); Baumeister, Denkmaler, 1797, 1799. "Une des raisons Vernant finds this power of self-metamorphosis somehowsignificant: ces divinites marines etaient aptes a jouer, a l'origine du monde, ce pour lesquelles role cosmogonique , c'est leur pouvoir de metamorphose. Elles contenaient en quelque sorte par avance a l'interieur d'elles-memes, les dissimulant puis les reVeUant tour a tour a la lumiere, toutes les formes susceptibles d'apparaltre dans le cours du devenir." This seems somewhat far-fetched to me; furthermore, the evidence he (Vernant p. 42.) adduces is late and refers to the Orphic Metis (cf. above n. 60), not Thetis. Cf . if. Apoll. 319ff . The coupling of Thetis with Eurynomemight appear significant to those who consider Alkman is talking about the Nereid (so e.g. Vernant pp. 41f.); for in the cosmogony sung by Orpheus in Book 1 of Apollonios1 Argonautica (495ff. = DK 1 B 16 - cf. above p. 21 ) , Ophion and Eurynomeare stated to be "the first to exercise power over snow-clad Olympos" (503f.), being subsequently overthrown by Kronos. Thus Thetis may have a tenuous link with the Urgotter - but certainly not sufficient to elevate her to the status of cosmic demiurge. II. II. 6.132ff.; 1.393ff.; Stesichoros fr. 67 Page.

75.

76. 77. 78. 79.

Ion fr. 2 Page. fr. 9 Page; Pi. Isthm. 8.28ff.; etc.

Melanippides

I am not sure, in fact, whether it is really correct to give Poros and Tekmor capital letters, either, since there is no proof that Alkman actually thought of them as Homer's yoipa is just as powerful as Alkman's T^xywp, 6ouyoves (cf. above n. 14), but one does not usually spell it with a capital y. However, I have followed the normal fs case. procedure in Alkman So also Frankel p. 290 n. 2: "Vielleicht West (1) p. 155. darf man vermuten, dass Alkman selbst nicht von Oexts , Gen. 6eTi6os, gesprochen hat, sondern von lakon. Sex is (oder aexis), mit dem Genitiv (der aber in Original text nicht vorgekommen ware) ctios = attisch deais, im Sinne von 'Setzung, Ordnung1 (vgl, das haufige ednxe, lautlich = fecit, !machte!).fl Taken from Boisacq CD. s. w. (Chicago, laconien 1955) p. 223. (Paris, 1927) p. 146.

80.

81. 82. 83.

Buck, Greek Dialects

E. Bourguet, Le dialecte

38. 84. It is true that we find tiois at fr. 1.36 and yadn'aios at fr. 125; but this does not invalidate the argument , as rare laconisms would tend to be "corrected" by copyists unfamiliar with the dialect into moreusual forms, especially if it were only necessary Lobel to change one letter. Cf. Page, Paaetheneion,p. 103, and the citation from at fr. 38 oooou 6e itat6es ay&ov/evxj,', thereon. x before i is preserved in Alkman xbv xidapiaxav/ouveovxi and fr, 136 (nxi for net)Page's conclusion about Alkman's dialect (Partheneion p. 163) is that it is "basically and preponderantlythe Laconian vernacular" with, however, some features of Epic dialect occurring in places. It is interesting, although possibly not relevant to the argument,to note that later writers who turn Homer into a cosmological allegory never makeThetis into a female Sexns, but always an allegorical reference to a cosmic Sais T^ie following passage of Eustathius is especially noteworthy (122.45, on II. 1.397ff.): n 6e aXXnyopia "Hpav yev xal evxaO%axbv ae*pavoeT ... 8xtv6e xhv xoo itotvxbs Se'aiv, xauxbv 3y<pa> xnv xe Se*xivxou xnv eaiv, waitepxal (pdxivxoU cpdaiv. Cf. 1150.2 (on II. fiyouyevoi 18.394); cf. also Schol. B ad II. 1.399, cited by Lobel p. 55 n. 1. That it is only an apparent synonymity see n. 89 below. Aristotle Phys, 194b 29 exi odev n apxh tfis yexafloXns olov ... n itpwxn n ttIs npeyn'aews, to TtotoOv xou noiouye'vou: and later in the peripatetic tradition cf. Aetius1 strictures on Anaximenes xoi yovoei6ous aepos (1.3.4. - DK 13 B 2) ayapxdvei 6e xou o5xos it ontXoo xai nve'5yaxos 6oxwvauveaxdvai xa c$oi' a6uvaxov yap apxnv yiav xnv uXnvx25v ovxojv UTtoaxfivat , aXXa xa' xb tioloOvafxiov XP^Iuicoxid^vat* olov apyupos oox apxei icpbgxb exicwya yevea$oti , eav yn xb itoiouv ^, icouxeaxtv6 apyupoxdnos. Cf. Cornford,FromReligion to Philosophy (above n. 34) p. 140. Cf. also Od. 9.235, 24.546, II. 3.321, 4.83, 21.524, etc. This applies even to those passages where xi'$nyi appears to mean"render"; again, it is spatial causality that is being expressed, and the proper translation will be somethinglike "set x (in the world) as y". Aboven., 13. West (1) p. 156. The metre of fr. 20 is iambic dimeter xaxa axi'xov. "If this conjecture is right, 5ydp xe xal aeXdva is a catalectic line. The occurrence of the word or -Ss is a difficulty, but we mightassume that Alcmanscanned it yctpyap'3yas yapyapuyds (cf. dyapOyn)... In the initial words of the poem, col. i.22f. [ae Ma3]aaXuaaoyat ic[..]u)v ydXtaxa^Lobel's suggested supplementnavx&vwould have to be discarded in favour of an iambic word; for example, Barrett's Xuaqoyott x[e mightbe continued with aifov (monosyllabic, cf. fr. 56. 2. "(West loc. cit.) West's suggestions have been adopted by Page in his second edition of the papyrus (Lyrica Graeca Selecta p. 13), which is the reading I have followed whenquoting the first lemma. Hdt. 2.52. Cf. also Empedoklesfr. 111.6ff: drfaeis 6fe oy$poio xeXouvoO xcu'piov Enacts 6'e xou e auxyoio depeiou/pe'5yaxa auxyov/avdpwitois, 6ev6peddpeitxa. One assumes that earth and heaven are already in position as a result of the icoposwhich began the cosmogony; cf. the Orphic cosmogony given by Athenagorasabove p. 21. Vernant xa' axdx[os] to (p. 39) cites col. ii. 24-25 eyevovxooSv utco.[.]... itdposxai xe'xyajp and Darkness formsome sort of primeval triad. But try and show that Poros, Tekmor as this final lemma makesquite clear, axdxos is third not after Poros and Tekmor but after Day and Moon. Exdxos refers not to the darkness of pre-creation primordial Night but to the darkness of phenomenal night, which follows the day as the moonfollows the sun (cf. ii.27f. Xyotp ou (|aXS)saXXa auv nXup). It is obviously better to use Alkman's

85.

86. 87.

88. 89.

90. 91.

92. 93.

39.

ownwords as evidence for the content of his verse than the oratio recta "exegesis11 of the commentator. 94. is most likely to be an epithet attached to Poros Of the other two lemmata,Tcpeayfus takes a phrase fromthe (so West (1) p. 154 etc.), while the first xca xpixos awd-ros final lemma and treats it out of context (cf. above n. 5). "His (Pherekydes*) triad of primal forces presupposes the philosophical conception of the apxn, which he has merely fused with the genealogical principle." W. Jaeger, The Theology of the Early Greek Philosophers, tr. E.S. Robinson (Oxford, 1967) p. 68. African religions. As e.g. in many "Thus, for instance, the Yorubas of West Africa believe in a sky god called Olorun (which means literally 'Ownerof the Sky1), who having started to create the world handed over the finishing and the governingof it to a lower god, Obatalla." M. Eliade, Patterns in ComparativeReligion, tr. R. Sheed (London, 1958) p. 47. held asunder spacious Earth and "Wise truly and great is his (Varuna's) ownnature,/Who Heaven./He pressed the sky, the broad and lofty, upward, /Ay, spread the stars and spread the earth out broadly." Rig-Veda 7.86, as given in Cornford,FromReligion to Philosophy (above n. 34) p. 67. hou,Kpdvov Cf. Herm.irr. 12 (DK 7 A 9) $epewu6ns yev apxotseTvai 'eyuv Zfjvaxai XSovunv Zfiva]iev tov audepa, X^ovltiv6e tVivynv, Kpdvov6e xov xpovov, 6 yev au^hp to tiouoOv, ^v V Y^vo*yeva 6 6k XP*VS n 6e yfiT0 rccxcxov, Tr. J.E. Raven in Kirk-Ravenop.cit. p. 277.

95.

96.

97.

98.

99. 100.

I would like to thank Dr. G.E.R. Lloyd of King's College, Cambridge,for advice and received during the preparation of this paper. encouragement