Aelius Aristides’ Sacred Tales: A Study of the Creation of the “Narrative about Asclepius”

This paper contributes to the discussion about the interpretation of the Aristaeus narrative in Vergil’s fourth Georgic, one of the most difficult exegetical problems in Roman poetry, by examining the images of transgression and liminality, particularly as they relate to Theocritus’ Idylls. I suggest that the Aristaeus narrative shows a distinct shift to a more “pastoral” mode and evokes Theocritean images and narrative structure, thus emphasizing liminality and transgression both thematically and meta-poetically. (cf. Ross 1990, Halperin 1990) I propose that, ultimately, Vergil’s images of transgression, when viewed against the backdrop of Theocritus, thematically demonstrate the antithesis between life and death and meta-poetically represent the way in which Vergil “crosses” into different levels of narrative. The last line of the fourth Georgics reads, “Tityre, te patulae cecini sub tegmine fagi,” a clear reference to the first line of his first Eclogue: “Tityre, tu patulae recubans sub tegmine fagi.” When Vergil points his readers back to the Eclogues, he simultaneously evokes his Hellenistic predecessor, Theocritus, whose corpus of Idylls inspired the Eclogues and whose third and seventh Idylls specifically mention a goatherd Tityrus and a singing Tityrus (7.72-85) respectively. It seems to me, then, that Vergil’s conclusion of the fourth Georgic not only describes his poetic journey from the Eclogues to the Georgics, but also provides a clue as to how to read the narrative of Aristaeus and the bugonia at the end of the fourth Georgics. Thus, I begin the paper by first showing the way in which Vergil shifts to the “pastoral” when he begins the Aristaeus narrative by examining parallel images in the Idylls and the parallel multiple “embedded narrative” structure with Idyll 7 as my primary example. With Theocritus firmly established as a background, I turn to the discussion of transgression in the Aristaeus narrative, looking at Aristaeus passing into the water where his mother lives, Aristaeus passing into the cave where Proteus lives, and Orpheus passing into the Underworld. I suggest that each of these is a “signpost” for another level of narrative. This paper is, in part, a response to the numerous scholarly discussions that identify Vergil with one or several of the figures in the narrative (cf. Kronnenberg, Thomas, etc). Theocritus’s Idylls constantly raise the question of ontological stability of a character in a fiction world (cf. Payne), and I believe that Vergil evokes a Theocritean narrative model in order to raise the question of to what extent we are able to understand Vergil’s self-identification of his own fiction creations. I hope that these observations problematize the discussions of how we are to understand the fictional representations of Vergil in this myth by demonstrating how Vergil himself problematized the issue in his complex narratives, modeled off Theocritus, the master of alternative realities. Works Cited Halperin, D. 1990. “Pastoral Violence in the Georgics: Commentary on Ross.” Arethusa 23: 77- 93. Kronnenberg, L. 2009. Allegories of Farming from Greece and Rome. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Thomas, R. 1999. Reading Virgil and His Texts. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Payne, M. 2007. Theocritus and the Invention of Fiction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Ross, D. 1990. “The Pastoral in the Georgics: Si Numquam Fallit Imago.” Arethusa 23: 59-75.

Ancient Narrative, 2017

This paper discusses a passage from the finale of Heliodorus' Aethiopica which has hitherto been interpreted as suggesting that Charicles, the heroine's foster-father, possesses information which he should not hold according to earlier parts of the novel. Offering two solutions to the Charicles puzzle, this article sheds light on important narratological characteristics of Heliodorus' novel: firstly, the Aethiopica opens itself to a 'completive mode of reading', which prompts the reader to speculate about unnarrated parts of the story; secondly, profound ambiguities can trigger chain reactions of alternative readings which reach far into parts of the plot that are connected with the ambiguous segment.

Aitia 13, 2023

The purpose of this paper is to examine the transition of Aeetes from an epic to a tragic figure in the Argonautica of Apollonius Rhodius. The Argonautica is a generic mixture of both epic and tragic elements. On the one hand, it is an epic poem based on Homeric aesthetics. On the other hand, Apollonius differentiates himself from Homer by promoting different values through his epic. Within the Argonautica, we can distinguish a transition from an epic to a tragic poetic mode. In other words, Apollonius composes an epic that consists of many minor tragedies. Aeetes can be used as an example of this generic transition. He is supposed to be a representative of archaic epic within the Argonautica. However, although Aeetes is represented as an epic figure in the beginning of the poem, he ends up being a tragic figure, in accordance with the definition given by Aristotle in his Poetics.

Asclepiades of Tragilos is a fourth-century mythographer whose work, Tragodumena, has been transmitted through indirect tradition. The fragmentary state of the text poses some methodological issues which affect both the edition and the commentary of the text. This paper focuses on three main aspects, the quotation's literal accuracy, the delimitation of fragments and the current context, in order to examine their implications on the commentary. The discussion is based on three fragments of Asclepiades-FHG 12 F3 (=Sch. Pi. P. II 40b Drachmann) on Ixion, F13 (=Sch. (yqa) Il. VI 155 van Thiel) on Bellerophon and F4 (= Harp. s. Γπζαύιεο Keaney) on Dysaules-which exemplify the above mentioned questions. One comes to the conclusion that it is necessary to study Asclepiades' fragments from a comprehensive perspective which takes into account both the context of the quoting source and a linguistic and mythographical analysis of the text itself.

2016

Greek and Latin texts of Later Antiquity (1st-4th centuries AD) have for a long time been overshadowed by those dating back to so-called 'classical' times. The first four centuries of our era have, however, produced a cornucopia of works in Greek and Latin dealing with questions of philosophy, ethics, and religion that continue to be relevant even today. The series SAPERE (Scripta Antiquitatis Posterioris ad Ethicam REligionemque pertinentia, 'Writings of Later Antiquity with Ethical and Religious Themes'), now funded by the German Union of Academies, undertakes the task of making these texts accessible through an innovative combination of edition, translation, and commentary in the form of interpretative essays. The acronym 'SAPERE' deliberately evokes the various connotations of sapere, the Latin verb. In addition to the intellectual dimension-which Kant made the motto of the Enlightenment by translating 'sapere aude' with 'dare to use thy reason'-the notion of 'tasting' should come into play as well. On the one hand, SAPERE makes important source texts available for discussion within various disciplines such as theology and religious studies, philology, philosophy, history, archaeology, and so on; on the other, it also seeks to whet the readers' appetite to 'taste' these texts. Consequently, a thorough scholarly analysis of the texts, which are investigated from the vantage points of different disciplines, complements the presentation of the sources both in the original and in translation. In this way, the importance of these ancient authors for the history of ideas and their relevance to modern debates come clearly into focus, thereby fostering an active engagement with the classical past. 16 ST 4.14. 17 ST 2.2. 18 ST 4.14-29. 19 ST 4.16-18. 20 As suggested by Jones 2013. The case for placing Or. 24 here is that it refers to the earthquake of ca. 140 AD as a past event (24.3) and that at the time of writing, Aristides himself is too ill to travel (24.1). Or. 32 refers back to the visit to Rome as a past event (32.39) and also makes reference to Aristides's own physical weakness (32.41). But these are clearly not decisive indications; Behr 1968, 76 places Or. 32 in ca. 150 AD. 21 According to its subscription, Or. 30, the Birthday Speech to Apellas, was "read" during the kathedra, in 146 ("when he was twenty-nine"); it is an open question whether this means that Aristides performed the speech in person, or simply sent it for someone else to read at the festivities. 22 ST 5.26-46. 27 Compare the analysis of sequence of Aristides's orations offered by M. Korenjak, "Conversing with posterity: Hermogenes, Aristides and Sophistic φιλοτιµία", in: Roskam / De Pourcq / Van Der Stockt 2012, [253-266] 262-265. 28 See Or. 1.25, 26 and 30, which contrast Athenian autochthony with the status of the Romans as migrants from abroad, and invite speculation on what this says about the value of Roman citizenship.