Greek and Roman Mythology and Mythography

In his lost book On the descent to Trophonios (F 81 Mihrady), Dicaearchus alludes to the tomb of Harpalus' courtesan, Pythionike. The contextualisation of the fragment cited by Athenaeus allows us to explain why the sophist made this allusion, considered trivial up to now : Harpalus, as it was believed, had evoked the soul of Pythionike in the East, thanks to the intervention of the Magoi. The oracle of Trophonius at Lebadeia implied a revelation quite close to nekyomancy, and Trophonius himself was associated with Magoi and their religious personality by Strabo and Lucian. Besides, this paper also comments on Python's drama, Agên satyrikos (TGF 91 F 1 Snell), on the Greek mindset on the localities called 'aornon' , and the difficulty of distinguishing facts of representation from real facts.

Les mythes grecs et latins ont été transmis par les poètes et par les mythographes. Mais, quoique leur rôle ait été décisif, ces derniers ont été peu étudiés. Une des raisons en est que leur activité n'a jamais été constituée en genre, leurs pratiques étant aussi diverses que complexes. Ce volume, issu des travaux du groupe de recherches international Polymnia, cherche à répondre à la question : Que recouvre le terme 'mythographie' ? en étudiant un choix de textes représentatifs de la tradition mythographique en Grèce, à Rome, dans l'Europe du moyen âge et de la Renaissance. Pour mieux appréhender la diversité des méthodes et des propositions des mythographes anciens et modernes sur les significations et la fabrication des mythes, ces études sont centrées sur les formes, usages et visées de leurs écrits. Loin d' être de simples médiateurs et compilateurs, les mythographes ont été des analystes, des interprètes et des recréateurs de mythes, qui nous invitent à réfléchir à notre tour sur les constants efforts d' exégèse qui ont construit la culture occidentale.

This article discusses a passage of Eratosthenes’ Catasterisms, which has been considered absurd and incoherent so far. A reading that attempts to deconstruct its narrative linearity, and that includes bricolage and juxtaposition, is put forward in order to recover the sense of this passage.

Cornutus was a Roman philosopher who wrote this compendium on the Greek gods in Greek language in the first century A.D. He wanted to teach the basics of Stoic philosophy to an unknown Roman boy using this mythological work by etymologizing and allegorizing the gods' names and epithets.

This is the first critical edition of the compendium since 1881.

Le Fabulae di Igino costituiscono un testo composito e di tradizione in gran parte incerta. Tuttavia, tenuto conto della forma testuale e dello stile, che in massima parte si lasciano ricondurre a paradigmi di semplicità e compilazione propri di prodotti antiquari e informativi di varie età che intendono conservare e trasmettere, si ravvisa una fondamentale coesione e coerenza nell'insieme. Quest'ultima è data in particolare dall'adesione a un teorico modello mitografico, rappresentato nel mondo greco da Apollodoro, di cui si mette in luce l'analogia a certe istanze proprie della tradizione enciclopedica.

La place que tient Orphée dans la mythologie et la religion gréco-romaines est connue depuis fort longtemps. Ce qu'on savait moins jusqu'à une époque récente, c'est que le chantre thrace n'a jamais disparu de la culture occidentale. On le retrouve en effet dans la littérature pseudépigraphique de l'époque hellénistique et romaine, chez les Pères de l'Église, dans l'art paléochrétien, la philosophie médiévale et les littératures en langues latine et vernaculaires du Moyen Âge. Le livre de John Block Friedman s'interroge sur les raisons de cette survivance et étudie les métamorphoses de la figure mythique au cours quelque dix-huit siècles qui séparent le judaïsme hellénisé de la Renaissance écossaise.
Cet ouvrage ne met pas seulement à disposition des lecteurs francophones un classique des études médiévales, il présente en outre plusieurs traductions françaises inédites de textes écrits originellement en grec, en latin et dans diverses langues vernaculaires du Moyen Âge.
Une postface intitulée "De l'Orphée juif à l'Orfée écossais" propose un bilan des travaux effectués depuis la publication de l'ouvrage et fait le point sur les perspectives qui s'offrent encore aux chercheurs.

Note: The PDF does not exactly match with the printed book and the page references in the index are not right.

RESUMEN: El examen de la nomenclatura aplicada a Hecateo de Mileto en los Testimonia no sólo revela las distintas valoraciones de su obra en la Antigüedad, según el concepto de historia manejado por sus receptores, sino que también permite reflexionar sobre la emergencia de la mitografía dentro de los géneros de la prosa griega.

ABSTRACT: The review of the names applied to Hecataeus of Miletus in the Testimonia not only reveals the different assessments of his work in Antiquity, according to the concept of history used by its readers, but also allows to think about the emergence of mythography within genres of Greek prose.
"""""

(written in English): Introduction to, text & translation of and commentary on the 7 testimonia and 42 extant Greek fragments of Philostephanos (text and translation revised/elaborated on the basis of an earlier version by Alain Delattre and Dennis Pausch).
After a quite long time of elaboration and production this contribution has finally seen the light of day within the opus magnum of FGrHist IV.E.4 on Nov. 28th of 2024.

For the interpretation of mythological subjects In the Roman funerary art the author systematically applies the analysis of the Key of Dreams by Artemidorus of Daldis, Greek author of the Antonine period. The funerary art was studied before by F. Cumont and A.D. Nock, and they both discussed also some dreams chosen from the manual of Artemidorus. The comparison of the principles of the analysis of dreams (mental images) with the principles that we encounter in the iconography gives interesting results. This approach has never previously been attempted. To support his argument, the author studies not only numerous decorated sarcophagi but also a series of funerary inscriptions.

This is an afterword to the French translation of John Block Friedman's book on "Orpheus in the Middle Ages," Harvard, 1999.

The format of this PDF does not exactly mirror the printed version.

La place que tient Orphée dans la mythologie et la religion gréco-romaines est connue depuis fort longtemps. Ce qu'on savait moins jusqu'à une époque récente, c'est que le chantre thrace n'a jamais disparu de la culture occidentale. On le retrouve en effet dans la littérature pseudépigraphique de l'époque hellénistique et romaine, chez les Pères de l'Église, dans l'art paléochrétien, la philosophie médiévale et les littératures en langues latine et vernaculaires du Moyen Âge. Le livre de John Block Friedman s'interroge sur les raisons de cette survivance et étudie les métamorphoses de la figure mythique au cours quelque dix-huit siècles qui séparent le judaïsme hellénisé de la Renaissance écossaise.
Cet ouvrage ne met pas seulement à disposition des lecteurs francophones un classique des études médiévales, il présente en outre plusieurs traductions françaises inédites de textes écrits originellement en grec, en latin et dans diverses langues vernaculaires du Moyen Âge.
Une postface intitulée "De l'Orphée juif à l'Orfée écossais" propose un bilan des travaux effectués depuis la publication de l'ouvrage et fait le point sur les perspectives qui s'offrent encore aux chercheurs.

Le formatage de ce PDF n'est pas tout à fait le même que celui de la version imprimée

This paper examines the Vaticanus gr. 950 (XIV c.), a parchment codex containing epitomes of the Bibliotheca (Ps.-Apollodorus), the Lycophron commentary (John Tzetzes), and the Chiliades (John Tzetzes). In 1891 the authorship of the Bibliotheca epitome was attributed to John Tzetzes. While it has never been contested, a closer look at the relationship between the Bibliotheca, the Bibliotheca epitome, John Tzetzes, and the Tzetzes epitomes reveals that it was most likely the same epitomator who excerpted the Bibliotheca, the Lycophron commentary, and the Chiliades to create this rare specimen of mythographic compilation.
(https://poj.peeters-leuven.be/content.php?id=3288839&url=article)

The study of the writings of the mythographers of the imperial age can provide us with useful material for assessing the influence of scientific geography on Greek and Roman παιδεία. This article will focus, in particular, on the Library of Apollodorus and on the Fables of Hyginus, showing their contact points, but, above all, their differences. Some passages of the Library and, in particular, the brief doxographical overview that opens the section devoted to the journeys of Odysseus shows that Apollodorus was well aware of some aspects of the geographical debate of his time, as well as of the scientific and philological discussions on geographical issues that date back to the Hellenistic period. On the other hand, Hyginus does not seem to handle mythical geography with equal competence. His main interest consists of bringing Greek mythology closer to the world of his Latin readers, and therefore the places of myth are of interest to him above all when they can be located in Italy or in the neighbouring regions. In these cases, sometimes the Fables may preserve rare and precious details. However, mostly a quick allusion to the places visited by the heroes is enough to the author, with almost no geographical reference.

RESUMEN: Aproximación a los problemas de la mitografía griega a través de la revisión  crítica de la literatura especializada. Se señalan conceptos y perspectivas que inciden tanto el establecimiento del corpus, como en su delimitación cronológica. El examen de la terminología revela la pertinencia para la configuración del género de los debates filosóficos e historiográficos acerca de las fronteras entre verdad y ficción.

ABSTRACT : This is an approach to the problems of Greek mythography through a critical revision of the literature on the theme. The focus is on the concepts and perspectives that influence both the establishment of the corpus and the chronological limits. The analysis of the terminology reveals the pertinence for the configuration of the genre of the philosophical and historiographical debates on the border limits between truth and fiction.

The edition of the Library published by James George Frazer in the 1921 is still a reference edition in the English-speaking countries and played an important role in the reception of Apollodorus’s work, that has not been completely recognised. At the same time, scholars consider the introduction to this edition an important document to reconstruct the thought of the Scottish anthropologist since it contains the last reflection on the nature of the myths written by him. In the first part of the article, by taking in account the entire work (e.g. notes and appendices) I’ll revise the previous opinion that considers this work a reversion to an intellectualistic approach to the myth and a withdrawal from the euhemeristic and ritualist theories and a renouncement to a unitary vision of the myth. I’ll show that the euhemerism adopted by Frazer derived from the influence of Schliemann’s archaeological discoveries and from the current debate on the nature of the Greek heroes and that it doesn’t contrast with an intellectual approach. Also, the attention paid to the role played by the bards, underlined by the category of folk tales, can be inserted in a global reflection of the myth. However, I’ll show that this reflection, with its criticism to the ritualistic theories, doesn’t imply a real reconsideration of the theoretical frame of the Golden Bough, as shown by the notes to the text. In the second part, I’ll argue that Frazer’s decision to enrich the edition with long notes with loci paralleli and his presentation of the mythographer as an ingenuous and faithful compilator of previous good sources, contributed significantly to the success of the Library in the XX century, but, at the same time, determined an oversimplified use of this text as a reference work not different from modern encyclopaedic mythological dictionary

This paper seeks to offer a fresh interpretation of the literary production of Hecataeus of Miletus, usually regarded as a starting point for historiography or mythography. Firstly, to assess his real contribution to the complex of Greek literature, it is paramount to carefully analyse the proem of the Genealogies (fr. 1 Fowler) and its value as a programmatic statement. It will be shown that the proem is shaped so as to resemble an authoritative heroic speech and that Hecataeus shares his concerns about the reliability of myth-telling with poets like Pindar. Secondly, it will be argued that his work was primarily conceived as a means to rewrite those stories already told in the epics (not only Homer and Hesiod but also the Epic Cycle and local sagas). Hecataeus’ contribution to archaic Greek literature fits into an open network of epic texts, as a cross-cultural comparison with the Hebrew Bible shows, and perhaps it can be best described as a form of “rhapsody in prose”, which entails a good degree of reworking of contents and the strong affirmation of an authorial persona free of the Muses’ patronage

P.Oxy. II 218 transmits a curious mixture of ethnographic and mythographic material, one of the few testimonies to the circulation of paradoxographic literature in Antiquity. In the central column it offers two ethnographic descriptions: a severe punishment for male infidelity and a strange ritual to be held on the death of a priest of Ares. Other sections preserve the remnants of a story of a flood sent by a god and a very unusual version of the myth of Zeus and Metis. This article presents a re-edition of and a new commentary on the papyrus.

What are myths? Are there ‘correct’ and ‘incorrect’ versions? And where do they come from? These and many other related questions are addressed in Writing Down the Myths, a collection of critical studies of the contents of some of the most famous mythographic works from ancient, classical, medieval, and modern times, and of the methods, motivations, and ideological implications underlying these literary records of myth.

While there are many works on myth and mythology, and on the study of this genre of traditional narrative, there is little scholarship to date on the venerable activity of actually writing down the myths (mythography), attested throughout history, from the cultures of the ancient Middle East and the Mediterranean to those of the modern world. By assembling studies of the major literary traditions and texts through a variety of critical approaches, this collection poses - and seeks to answer - key questions such as these: how do the composers of mythographic texts choose their material and present them; what are the diverse reasons for preserving stories of mythological import and creating these mythographic vessels; how do the agenda and criteria of pre-modern writers still affect our popular and scholarly understanding of myth; and do mythographic texts (in which myths are, so to speak, captured by being written down) signal the rebirth, or the death, of mythology?

Le discordanze e differenze tra i Fragmenta Vaticana e l’Epitome non si possono spiegare come semplici prodotti di una tradizione accidentata. Esse corrispondono piuttosto a un intento e a una scelta consapevoli, in momenti precisi della storia testuale dei Catasterismi, che possono essere messi in relazione con i punti di vista ideologici di Eratostene in quanto autore dell’opera originale. Non mi sembra verosimile, dunque, che si sia prodotta una sola rielaborazione del testo dei Catasterismi quando si è intrapresa la redazione dell’edizione Φ dei Fenomeni di Arato. I Fragmenta Vaticana e l’Epitome devono essere considerati e indagati come testi differenti e autonomi – non come risultati discordanti della casualità della tradizione testuale. Il manoscritto Vat. gr. 1087 deve essere preso in seria considerazione da qualunque studioso dei Catasterismi, perché costituisce un testimone di grandissimo valore, che non è stato sottoposto al processo consapevole di banalizzazione e regolazione che ha reso facilior il testo dell’Epitome.

En 1993 Robert Fowler publicó un artículo en el que defendía que las narraciones del mitógrafo Ferecides de Atenas, en su caso el mito de Céfalo y Procris, escondían un background ritual, y concretamente interpretaba este mito como el aition de una ceremonia de rain-magic. Retomando la senda marcada por Fowler, proponemos un paralelo con el mito de Alcmena y Zeus, que incluiría, igualmente, un hieros gamos como forma de la magia de fertilidad. Nuestro objetivo es explorar las implicaciones, mágicas y mistéricas, del dossier de textos que componen el fragmento 13 de Ferecides a partir del análisis textual de dos términos (karchésion y pastós) que sugieren un uso ritual (mistérico).

Resumen -De acuerdo con el resumen de Focio, las Narraciones de Conón estaban dedicadas a Arquelao de Capadocia, un importante rey-cliente de Augusto. Varios διηγήματα tratan sobre asuntos romanos o itálicos, pero destaca especialmente narr. 46 sobre Eneas. En este sentido, la propaganda augústea estaba presente en la obra del mitógrafo más de lo que deja entrever el amañado resumen de Focio: la comparación del epítome con el POxy 3648 saca a la luz aspectos no tenidos en cuenta sobre el modus epitomandi del Patriarca.

RESUMEN.- Las concomitancias entre los pasajes de las Metamorfosis de Ovidio donde se cuestiona una transformación, y las interpretaciones de Paléfato sobre esos mitos increíbles apuntarían a tópicos de la retórica y, en última instancia, a los debates ontológicos de la primera filosofía griega.
ABSTRACT.-  The connection between those passages in Ovid’s Metamorphoses which
question a particular transformation, and Palaephatus’ interpretations of these incredible myths would therefore be related to topics found in rhetoric and, eventually, to the ontological debates of the first period of Greek philosophy.

Two astral myths are studied in order to show that a catasterismic tradition ran parallel to the Eratosthenic one in Antiquity. Eratosthenes absorbed these interpretations into his mythographical handbook by cancelling those elements that contained a religious or a philosophical significance.

The article proposes a conjecture for Pherecydes fr. 141, replacing the name of Antenor's son Kynon with Kimon, and, based on this conjecture, tries to make a case for Kimon drawing on the Antenoridai as heroic prototypes. This demonstrates that Pherekydes was critical of Homer who regarded Kyon as Antenor's son.

...lorsque Ératosthène prolonge le récit traditionnel au moyen d’un épisode indépendant (le dénouement astral), et par surcroît laisse des traces linguistiques de l’hétérogénéité qui sépare le temps mythique du présent phénoménal, il envisage le mythe patrimonial comme un corpus fermé, objectif, détaché de lui-même – bref, un corpus textuel sur lequel il peut projeter un regard historico-littéraire. Somme toute, au coeur de ce “world of libraries, official texts, and institutionalized research” telle que la Bibliothèque d’Alexandrie, l’héritage de la mythologie grecque a été transformé par Ératosthène, de façon plus ou moins consciente, en tradition.

The abbreviation "ΜΥΘ" is found six times in the marginal annotations of ps-Antigonos' text, a collection of extraordinary stories, alongside the more frequent seen "ΣΗ". The purpose of this paper is to examine the nature of the abbreviation. Firstly, what does it stand for: is this mythos or its derivatives? Then, on what grounds is a passage qualified as mythos. This study intends to shed more light on the perception of mythos, especially in Antigonos' text.

Parallels between ἱστορίαι in the Homeric D-Scholia and the mythographic handbook attributed to a certain ‘Apollodorus’ have troubled the scholarship on the MH from its very beginnings. Even before Panzer coined the term ‘Mythographus Homericus’ (1892), these parallels have influenced investigations into the authenticity and reliability of the subscriptions as Julius Schwartz (1878) and Eduard Schwartz (1881) pointed to discrepancies between ἱστορίαι linked to ‘Apollodorus’s’ Bibliotheca and their subscriptions.

While the twin matters of authenticity and reliability have now been settled for the MH corpus in general, they remain a contentious issue for the ‘Apollodorus’ ἱστορίαι. It is still open to debate whether the subscriptions to ‘Apollodorus’ are authentic (and for that matter, whether the ἱστορίαι were part of the original MH collection) and whether they are reliable witnesses to the relationship between the MH and ‘Apollodorus’.

Taken into consideration these and other ms. ἱστορίαι that to a varying extent correspond to Bibliotheca passages, this paper discusses four scholarly positions on this matter and offers some notes on the ramifications for the edition of the MH corpus.