OUSEION - Memorial University's Digital Archives Initiative ...

OUSEION
JOURNAL OF THE CLASSICAL ASSOCIATION OF CANADA
REVUE DE LA SOCIETE CANADIENNE DES ETUDES CLASSIQUES
LI - Series III, Vol.7, 2007 No.3 ISSN 1496-9343

MOUSEION
Jou rn al of th e Class ical Assoc iation of Canada
Revue de la Societe canad ienne des etudes classiqu es
L1- Series III. Vol. 7.2007
A RTIC LES
N O· 3
Rory 13. Egan . The Prophecies olCalcluis in the A uJis Narra tive
olAeschy lus ' Aga me m no n /79
Jan ice Siege l. The Coens ' 0 Bro the l', Whe re Ar t Tho u? and
l-lom er's Od yssey 2 13
BOOK REVlE WS/ COM PTES REN DUS
M. Finkelberg. Greeks and Pre-Greeks. A egean Pre his tory and
Greek Her oic Tradition (Reye s Ber tolf n Cebri an) 247
Br -uce Loude n. The Iliad . Str ucture. Myth. and Mea ning (Jona tha n
Burgess) 25(}
Justina Gregory. ed .. A Comp an ion to Greek Tragedy
(C.W. Marshall) 253
Dav id Kovacs. Euripidc a Ter tia (Ma rt in Cr op p) 257
Pier re Fro hlich, Lcs CitL'S grecques et lc contro lc des m ngi strats
(l V'-r sicclc ava n t j.-c.) (Cacta n Theria ult) 26(}
Joseph Roism an. The Rhet oric olConsp iracy in A ncien t A the ns
(Vir ginia Hunter ) 264
Jaso n Koni g . Athletics and Literature in the Rom an Em p ire
(N ige l 13. Cr ow ther) 267
P.J. Heslin . The Tra nsvestite Achilles: Gender and Genre in Statius'
Ach ille id (Rebecca Na gel) 27 /
[aclyn L. Maxwell. Christinniz etioti and Com m unication in Late
A ntiquity: John Clirysostotn and his Cong reg ation in A ntioch
(David F. Buck) 274
Werner Kre nkel. Nn tura lie non tur pin. Sex and Gender in
A ncie n t Greece and Rom e. Sclirittcn 7 L11' antikc n Kultur- utid
Sex ualwisscnsc luiIt {James [ope) 277
P. Murgatroyd . Bella Schin va 283
P. Murgatroyd. More Ep itap hs 284
P. M urganoyd. A p is 286
Index to Volume 7 287

Editorial Corrcspondcnts/ Conscil consultetii: Janick Aubcrger. Universite
du Quebec a Montreal: Patrick Baker. Universit e Laval: Barbara
Weiden Boyd. Bowdoin College: Robert Fowler. University of Bristol:
John Geyssen. University of New Brunwsick: Mark Golden. University
of Winnipeg: Paola Pinotti. Universita di Bologna: Jame s Rives. University
of North Carolina: C]. Simpson . Wilfrid Laurier University
REMERCIEM ENTS/ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Pour l'aide finan ciere qu'ils ont accordee a la revue nou s tenons a
rernercier' / For their financial assistance we wish to thank:
Con seil de recherches en sciences humaines du Canada / Social Sciences
and Humanities Research Council of Canada
Dean of Arts. Memorial University of Newfoundland
Dean of Arts. University of Manitoba
Universit y of Manitoba Centre for Helleni c Civilization
Brock Universit y
Dalhousie Universit y
University of New Brunswick
University of Victoria
We acknowledge the financial suppor t of the Government of Canada.
through the Publication Assistance Program (PAP). toward OUI' mailing
costs.
Canada
No part of thi s publication ma y be reproduced. store d in a retrieval
sys tem or transmitted. in an y form or by any means. without the prior
written conse nt of the editors or a licenc e from The Canadian Copyright
Licensin g Agency (Access Copyrig ht). For an Access Copy r ight
licence. visit www.accesscop yri ght.ca or call toll fr ee to 1-800 -893-5777.

MOUSeiOll aim s to be a distin ctivel y compre he ns ive Ca nadian journal of
Class ical St udies . publishing articles and r eview s in both Fre nch and
Eng lish. One issue ann ua lly is normally devot ed to archaeological top ­
ics. including field rep orts. finds analysis. and th e hist or y of art in antiquity.
The oth er tw o issu es welcome work in all ar eas of int erest to
scholars : thi s includes both traditional and inn ovative research in phi ­
lology. histo ry . philosophy. peda go gy. and r eception stud ies. as well as
original work in and translations into C ree k and Latin .
Mo uscion se prcsent e com me un pcriodique canadien d'etudes classiq
ues polyvalent . publiant des ar ticles et comptes rendus en fr an cais et
en ang lais. Un Iascicul e par annee est normal em ent dedi e a des sujets
arch eologiques, incluant des rapport s p rcliminaires de fouill es. des
etude s de mat eriel et des etude s dhistoire de l'art antique. Les deu x
autres Iascicul es present ent des etudes dan s tou s les domaines dinterct
pour les che r che urs. ce qui inclut a la fois les re cherches traditionnelles
ou nov atri ces en philologie. en histoi r e. en philosophie et en ped agogi e
ou relativ es a Iinfluen ce des etude s classiqu es en dehors du monde uni ­
versita ire : Mo uscion publie cga leme nt des t ravaux ori ginaux rcdi ges
ou traduits en latin ou en grec ancien.

NOTES TO CONTRIl3UTORS
I. References in footnotes to books and journal articles should follow
the forms:
E.R. Dodds . The Gree ks and the Irrational (Ber ke ley 195 1) 11l2- 134 [not
I02 H. ]
F. Sandbac h. "So me p r oblems in Pr op ertius." CQ n.s. 12 (1962) 273- 274
[not 273£.1
For references which require departure s from th e above formats.
see the mo st recent edition of The Chicago Manual ofStyle.
Abbreviations of names of periodicals should in general follow
l 'Attn ec Philologique.
References to th ese standard works should follow the forms:
V. Ehre nberg. RE 3A. 2 1373-1453
lG 213 111826
ClL 4.789
TLL 2·44· 193
2 . Citations of ancient authors should tak e the following form:
PI. Sm p. 175d3-5 not Pinto . Sy mp osium 175d
Tac, A nn. 2.6-4 not Tacitus. A ntuilcs (01' A nnals) 11.6
Plu . Mol' . 553c not Plut a r ch . De sera numinis vindicta (or De sera) 7
Abbreviations of names of Greek and Latin authors and works
should in gene ra l follow LS] and th e OLD.
3. Contributors should provide translations of all Latin and Greek.
apart from single words or shor t phrases.
4. Manuscripts submitted for consideration should be double spaced
with ample margins. Once an article ha s been accepted. the author
will be expected to provide an ab st ract of approximately ro o words.
and illustrative material , such as tabl es. dia grams and maps. will
hav e to be submitted in digital or cam era-ready form .
5. The journal will bear th e cost of publishing up to six plates / illu stration
s per article: fees will be charged for plates/ illustrations beyond
thi s number. The cost of th e additional half-page plates / illu stration
s is $12 each. of the additional full-page plates / illu strations $20
each.
6. Authors of articles re ceiv e 2 0 offprints fre e of char ge: authors of
r evi ew s r eceive 10 offprints fr ee of charge . Additional offprints can
be ordered at a mod est cos t.

AVIS AUX AUTEURS
I. Les re fere nces au x oeuvres mod e rn es d oivent etre formulees co m me
Ie montrent les exe m p les suiva nts:
A .T. Tuilier. Etude com p aree du tcxt c ct de s sc ho lics d 'Euripidr. Pill'is,
1972, pp . 101-1 23 [/10/1p as 101 fLI
1'. C ri ma l. « Pr op er ce et la legen de de Tarpeia » . NEL 30 (1952). p p. 32-
33 [/10/1pas 32LI
Da ns les cas exce ption nels Iorm uler se lon les rcgles de ledi tion la
plu s r ecente de The Chicago Man ual o f Sty le.
POUI' les titres de pcriodiques. utili ser les abrcviations e m p loy ees
dan s L"Annce Pliilologiquc.
C iter co m me suit ces reuvres de ba se:
V, Ehre nber-g, NE IIIA.2. 1373-14 53
IC 2!3 10026
ClL 4.709
TLL 2. 44. 193
Les r eferen ces a ux auteu rs a ntiq ues d oi vent etre Iormulees co m me Ie
rnontr ent les exe m p les suiva nts:
Plat on . Banquet, 175d . /10/1 p as 1'1.Smp. 175d3-4
Tacite . A /1/1alcs . l!. 6. /10/1 p aS T ilc. A /1l1.2.6.4
Plutarque . De scro numinis vindictn (o u De sera) 7-0. /10/1 pa s PIll. Mo r.
553c- e
3. Pr-ic r e de traduire to utes les cita tions du lat in o u du gl'ec. sa u f les
mot s sim ples et les locuti on s co urtes.
4. Les manuscrits soum is a l'cvaluation doi vent cne en double int erlign
e a vec d 'amples marges. Une Ioi s un e co m m unica tion acce p tce ,
l'auteur doit en fournir un resume de 100 mot s envi r on. et Ie mat e riel
dillust r ation-e-ta blea ux, di ag rarnrnes, ca rres-i- d oir etre so umis
so us Io rme p r ct e a la re p rod uction.
5. La re vue s'occ upe des Ir ai s d 'edition jusq u'a six plan ches / illu strations
pal ' co m m unica tion: l'auteur doit porter les Irai s a u-de la de ce
chiffre. Le cou r de chaq ue plan che /illustration en derni -p age est de
12 $ , et Ie cout de chac une en page es t de 2 0 $ .
6. L'a ute ur dune co m m unica tion r ecoit gra tis 2 0 ti res a part: l'auteur
dune revue cr itiq ue en r ecoit 10 grn tis. O n peut co m ma nde r des ti­
I'CS a pa rt sup p lc rne nta ires a un cout mod est e.

ABSTRACTS/RESUMES
T HE P ROP HEC IES OF CALCHAS IN THE AULIS N ARRATIVE OF
AESC HYLUS ' AGAMEMNON
RORY B. EGAN
Da ns Aga me m m non 104- 263 . le chre ur relat e les eve ne me nts qui se sont
deroules a Aulis. No us proposon s un e nou velle lectu r e de ce passage et
avancons plu sieu r s nouv elles interpre tatio ns sy nta xique . semantique et
mythologiqu e. II en r esult e pou r la piece et tout e la trilo gie des implications
poetiques, dr am atu r giqu es. mo rales et th eologiqu es. Nou s etayons ici des
argume nts que nou s av ions deja invoqu es en 1979 en posant en pr ernisse que le
discou rs uttr ibue a Ca lcha s (aux vel's 123- 125) continue pend ant tout r«hymn e a
Zeus » et jusqu 'a la fin ale au vel's 183- Ce discours ne connai t qu 'un e br eve
interruption a ux ve l's 157-1 58.
T HE COENS' 0 BROTHER. W HERE A RT TH OU?
AND H OMER'S ODYSSEY
JANICE SIEGEL
Une comparaiso n entre r Ody ssee d'Hornere et Ie film O ' Broth er des Ircr es
Coe n (titre origina l : 0 Bro ther Where Art Thou ? 2 ( 0 0 ) rcvele entre Ies deu x
oeuv re s des liens nominau x. nar r atif s et episodiques eto nna rn me nt etroi ts. Ce
film non seulern ent evo que Ies int ri gu es tr ou vees chez Hom er e. son ar t du
port rait et ses motifs mythiques. rnai s au ssi il cree. en combinant ces cleme nts.
un texte cornique tout a fait uniqu e et ori ginal. Tout au long du film. les
naitem ent s de topoi cpiques ana log ues (par ex. les mena ces contre la culture . Ie
r ole des dieu x et leu rs apparences ph ysiqu es. les natu res opposee s « des bons et
des mechant s ») do nnent mati ere a ref lexio n rant sur l'adaptati on moderne qu e
sur le modele antique.

Mouseion. Se ri es III. Vo l. 7 (21)(17) 179-212
'02 11 J7 Mo uscion
THE PROPH ECI ES OF CALCHAS IN TH E A ULI S N ARRATI V E OF
A ESCHYLUS' AGAMEMNON
RORY B. EGAN
Thi s ess

180 RORYB. EGAN
straightforward alternative. requiring no textual adju stments apart
from additional modern punctuation. effects a fundamentally different
and. I maintain. a more plausible accommodation of the "hym n" to its
immediate and extended contexts. Response to it. though. in the burgeoning
scholarship on the Ore steia of the past generation has . to say
the least. been muted. New critical editions. full commentaries. numerous
translations. and do zen s of monographs. articles. notes. reviews
and critical bibliographies. often dealing directly with the same pa ssage.
express neither endorsement nor refutation. (The only apparent exception
is R.O. Dawe. whose brusque dismissal I review in the Afterword.")
In the meantime. difficulties which simply vanish when the verses are
assigned to Calchas continue to exercise interpreters. including sever al
who puzzle over references to the future (of which the chorus must be
unaware) while ignoring the available suggestion that they are spoken
by a prophet." Others regard the "hymn" that putatively interrupts the
narrative. as an interlude," a "cushion .l'or even "a major punctuation
mark.?" The present reading regards the perceived switching back and
forth between dramatic pa st and present as illu sory. a con sequence of
misreading at a cr ucial juncture. The case for seamless integration of
the "hymn" into the Aulis narrative will adjust. rather than repeat. my
arguments of 1979. while elaborating a demonstration of how the passage
"w or ks" as continuation of Calchas' prophecy. One set of critical
premises applies when the narrator-chorus. remote in time and place
from Aulis. is perceived to be the speaker : a fundamentally different set
when the prophet is perceived to be speaking at th e time and scene of
the portents and in the presence of the Atr eids to whom those portent s
directly pe rtain.
TR ANSLATION AND S YNOPSIS
The overall effects of the alternative reading are reflected in the following
provisional translation. ba sed on West' s text'" (with specified excep-
6 I now. while th e pr esent article is in proof. not e a bri ef ref er en ce by Ma r ­
tin a 200T 25.
7 So e.g, Conac her 1976: 332 discussed fu rther below: Degen er 200 1: 77-79
who eve n com pares th e "hym n " to a prophecy by Cassa nd r a: Dawe 1999a: 40:
1999b: 70.
s See e.g. Ber gson 196T 22: Smith 1980: 3- 4: Hogan 1984: 4 1: Wegbge 1991:
265. 279: Thiel 1993: 87- 110: Co ur t 1994: 196-1 97: Schenkel' 1994: Sommerst ein
1996: 170 and 20g: Ce isse r 2002: 260.
YSo. respectively. Rosenrn eyer 1982: 279-2 80 and West 1999b: 78.
"' West 1990a. sup pleme nted by th e editor's com me nts on va rious passage s in
West 1990b: 174-18 1a nd 1999a.

TH E PROP/ -IECI t.:J OF CA LCI-IA S /8 /
tion s). and sy nops is whi ch also a nticipate th e various inter -pr eti ve argume
nts on wh ich th ey rest.
( 10 4-2 0 ) Since my stage of life . being naru rall y s uited for it. still
breathes fo rt h th e pe rsu asive stre ngth of song inspired by go ds, I a m
a uthorize d to ex pound up on th e fat eful powel ' in volving th e exped ition
a nd re lati ng to th e men endow ed w ith a uthori ty : on how th e ilgg l'essive
bird disp at ched th e two-throned powel ' of th e Ac hae a ns , the likeminded
com ma nders of th e youth of Hell as, and a long with th em th e
weilpons a nd th e activa ti ng milnp ow el'. a nd how to th e kin gs of ship s
th e kin g of bird s, one dark a nd th e othe r: w hi te- tai led. ca rn e into view
in th e clea r es t region of the s ky close by the bu ild ing 's peak Irorn the
s ide on w hich the s peilr is w ield ed : a nd how the y fed up on t he bro od of
ha re s. teeming w ith fecund ity , ba rr -ed Irom th e runnings th at wo uld
hav e been .
(12 1) -So n 'o w . SOlTOW, do ex p l'ess : but good shall be victo ri ous .c­
( 122-3H) The army's ca re ful prophe t sa w the pai r. di vid ed in their
mean ings, a nd he recog nized the bell ige rent Atreids. the feasters on
the ha re s . th e ma rsh all ing lenders. He s poke as fo llow s in int erp ret ation
of th e pOl'tent s. " In th e co ur se of tim e thi s expe d ition w ill plunder
th e city of Pr-iam while Fate . perforce . w ill plunder th e herds . th e
ab unda nce of th e peopl e. in Ironr of th e tow el's. I onl y PI'ilY th at no
go d-se nt r ui no us delu sion I I will be-cloud th e Grea t Troy-Restraine r.
str icken in adva nce as he is ru shed along." e m bro iled in t he a rmy's
vent ure. FOI' chas te Artem is in her pity . resent ful of her Iathers
w inge d dog s w ho are th e im mo lato rs of the pitiable cow e r-ing cre a ture
aIOIl}; with lict : OWIl childre n bctorc tlirv wcrc born [ 01 ' th eir o wn
blood tel oti ve because of the ar my l. despi ses th e eag les ' ban qu eting."
( 139) - SOITOW. SOITOW. do ex p l'ess : but goo d sha ll be victol"iou s.­
( 140- 53) " Heka te is so w ell -mi nd ed tow ar -ds th e tender yo u ng lings ':' of
Iiery lions and so pleasant to th e thriving . eager nu rsl in gs of a ll th e
bea st s th at ha u nt th e countryside. ':' She dem an ds tha t theil ' port en ts
co me to pilSS. th e favo urable indi cators but a lso th e inau s piciou s ones.
In case . th ou gh . she should brin g a bou t Io r th e C re eks some timecons
um ing . sh ip- im ped ing per -iod s wh en there is no sililing becau se of
contl'ilry w ind s. thi s in her eilge n1t'SS fOI' a not her sacrifice. a la wless
one . devoid of feasting . a n int ernecin e ca use of contentio us ness th at
" With "r-uinous delu sion " I «v to co m bine the mean ings of the mss. aTO as
ITcogni zed by Ferrrui 199T 12- 17 w itho ut p re cluding Hermann's ayo read by
West.
I .' With "stri cke n in adva nce as he is ru sh ed a long ." I a tte m pt to ca pture two
di fferent meanings of TT pOTVTT EVas exp laine d belo w.
I J Read ing . wit h Wella uer 1H23, bp ac o ic i AETTTOIC, def end ed in Egiln 2ooH.
1.1T his Eng lish se ntence transla tes a C re ek s ubor dinate cla use w hich I consnue
wi th both th e pre ced ing a nd the follow ing se nte nce. Con ve ntions of p unctu
arion . in C re ek 01 ' Eng lish. do not accommo da te th is. so th e re see ms no alternative
to isol ating th e cla use as a se pa ra te se nte nce . O n problem s of pun ctu ation
a nd se nse here d . Dege ne r 200 I : 6H-69.

THE PROPHECIES OF CA LCH AS
edy for' the bitt er stor m . more gl 'ievous Ior th e lead e rs . so that th e
Atre ids struck the gl 'ound with th eir sta ffs and did not contain thei r
teal 's. he spoke in th e following words, the se nior ruler did ,
(206 -1 7) "It is a gri evous doom not to obey, Gri evous . too . would it be
if I should but ch er my child, the adornment of my home. befouling my
pat ernal hands beside the a lta r with th e drippings from th e sla ughte r
of th e maiden , Whi ch of th ese is Ire e Irorn evil? How could I be delinquent
to my fleet and negle ctful of the alli an ce? For she [Artemi s] vehem
ently desi re s the maid en 's blood as a wind-stopping sac ri fice.
though ri ghteou sn ess forbids it. 's May it be for' th e best. "
(2 1H- 37) Afte r he put on th e harness of co m p ulsion . a iri ng a n att itude
of mind that was impious. co r-ru pt and ilTeligious. Irorn th at point he
cha nge d to a cas t of mind that would venture anything, F OI ' g ri evous
confus ion. th e so urce of suffe ri ng. advises sha mef ul co nd uct and make s
men impetuous, He wa s em bolde ned . accordingly. as s u pportel' of th e
hostilities for th e red emption of a woman, to be th e immolator ' of his
daughter: and he und ertook preliminary rituals on behalf of th e fleet ,
The battle-ea ger decision-makers disr egarded her pleadings and IWI'
a ppea ls to her father - as well as the maidenly stage of her life, Her fath
cr directed fun ctionaries. following a pl 'ayel ', re solutely to tak e her
a nd rai se her up. as if she were a young goa t. above th e a ltar. bound up
in her r obes and pa ssive . and to chec k with a re straint. with th e fo rc e
and muting stre ng th of mu zzle s. a ny utteran ce Irorn th e mouth in her
fail ' face that might hex her family,
(23H- '17) She , letting her ye llow-tinte d clothing flow down to the
gl'Ound. shot ea ch of her sac ri ficers with a pitiable shaft Iiom her eye s.
as clear-ly as in pictures . int entl y besee chin g them. becau se she had Ir equ
ently s ung at her father 's banquet s for' th e men a nd . as on e unmat ed.
fondl y honoured with her PUI't' vo ice her Iarh ers a us picio us paean a t
its third libation.
(24H-63) Eve nts frorn th at point on I do not know 101 ' did not se d,''! nor '
am I talking about them. but th e skills of Ca lchas are not without valid ­
ity , Justic e distributes knowledge to tho se who have undel'gon e ex pc ri ­
c nce . Wh en ever th e future OCCUJ 'S you will hea r of it. Let it be anticipat
ed with a wel com e balanced by th e anticipation of p 'ief. It sh all
come clea r-ly togethel' with th e I'ays of dawn ,
The translated pa ssage begin s aft er th e chor us ha ve que stioned
Clyte mnes tr a for up -to-date information and asserted their competence
to report on events at Aulis. Afte r doing so th ey close by ob serving that
the y hav e nothing fur -ther to s

ROR YB. EGAN
rative within the doubl e brackets thus form ed incorpor ates pa ssages of
qu oted speech whi ch . as fr equ entl y in poetic nar rative. are set off by
demarcating phrases that se r ve as audible quotation marks." The fir st
spee ch is introduced with OtfTW 0' ETTTE TEpol;wv at 125 and broken off at
156-7 wh en the nar rating chorus int er vene with TOIOOE KOAXac ...
oTTEKAaYSEv. In both places the spea ker is specifically ident ified :
CTpaTOlJaVTI C ( 123); KOA Xa c (156) . The phrases follow ing Calchas'
op enin g words. th ough. actua lly mark a transiti on to a differ ent . but
r elated . sequence of words by the same speaker . So Ca lchas r eported on
th e port ent s. concentr ating in the fir st part of his r ep ort on Ar temis
with her int er ests and att r ibutes and . in a consistent and approp r iate
seq uel theret o (r otc 0' ouoqxovov. 158). balanced it with the second pa rt
in whi ch he shouted forth his th ou ght s on relevant characteristics and
pow er s of Zeu s ( 160-83) . In the fir st part Calchas doe s not name Ze us;
in th e second part he does not menti on Ar temis. Whe n th e chorus have
finish ed qu otin g him. cha nge of subject and re sumption of the nar rat ive
ar e ma rk ed by Ka! TOe' ( 184) , a com mo n brid gin g term in epic nar rative.
Now the chorus re port fir st on Aga me mno n's reaction to the
proph ecy and to subsequent eve nts (185-98). and then on a further pronouncem
ent fr om th e proph et (19 8- 202) . That lead s int o a direct qu otation
of Aga me mno n (20 6-1 7) which is introduced in a conv entional
transiti on with avas 0' 0 rrpscpvc TOO' E TTE qxovcov (205) and closed at
218 wh ere ETTE! 0' simultaneously marks the next resumption of the narrat
ive. Th e na r rat ive th en lead s to the second address to Clyte mnestra.
The Clytemnestra-to-Cly temnestra sequence can be summariz ed as
follows:
I . Qu er y addressed (c u O· ... KAVTOlIJTlCTpa) to Clyte mne stra (83- 1( 3)
2. Preliminary statement of chorus ' compe te nce ( 1°4-6)
3. Ope ning of Aulis nar rative: Calcha s and port ent s (10 4- 20)
4. Att ri b ution and direct qu otation of Calchas . bis ( 122-83)
5. Reaction of Agamemno n . i]YEIJC:.W 0 TTpEC[3VC (184-98)
6. Rep ort of spe ech by Calchas (199-202)
5. Reaction of Aga memno n . a v aS o· 0 TTpk[3vc (2°3-5)
4. Attr ibutio n and dir ect quotation of Aga mem non. (2°5 - 17)
3 . Closing of Aulis nar -r at ive: Aga me mno n and sacr ifice. (2 18-46)
2. Co ncluding statement of chorus' limit ati on s (248-57)
1. Q uery addressed (K AVT a \l.Hic Tp a .. . cu 0') to Clytemnestra (258-63)
200 n difficu lties in deter minin g bou nda ri es of ora tio recta see e.g. Athanassaki
199]: 150 and 153 : Bel'S 199T 24 and passim .

RORYB. EGAN
"stricken in advance," before the bit-piece has curbed Troy, it applies
fittingly to both Agamemnon and his army. But the intransitive
TTpOTVTTTW means "r ush forward," usually under some force or pressure.
The Aeschylean mutation of the verb. if applied to Agamemnon.
can suggest a person being "rushed along," acting impulsively. A whole
alternative range of possibilities for both TTpOTVTTEV and CTpOTW8EV
opens up if the TTpOTVTTEV and CTpOTW8EV is a military objective. The
Triclinian scholia. routinely ignored by modern commentators on this
passage. explain the CTOIlIOV Tpoioc as a point of entry into Troy. previously
battered (TTpOTVTTEV) in military action (CTpOTW8EV). Earlier
batterings of Troy were a matter of "history" by the time of Agamemnon"
who, as a military leader with Troy as his objective. might naturally
be susceptible to a military reference in the overclouding of the
CTOIlIOV Tpoicc.
The protean language is sustained in the next verses (134-7) by "an
astonishing feat of amphibological dexterity."?' There is no better demonstration
of the doubleness of the portents' significance to Calchas
than his description of the reasons for Artemis' displeasure: OVTOTOKOV
TTpO Aoxov uoyspcv TTTCxKO 8vOllEVOICIV (136-7) . This, as Lawson noted,
can be translated in the following two ways. (I) "Slaying a trembling
hare and its young before their birth." (2) "Sacrificing a trembling cowering
woman, his own child. on behalf of the army."?"By one rendering
the words address the recent actions of the eagles. by another the imminent
actions of the Atreids. The cumulative double-entendres typify
the entirety of Calchas' bi-partite prophecy. Calchas continues with an
ornate disquisition on Artemis' affections for young animals in which
the jingly terminology for the little animals. simultaneously evocative
of dew and rain." also makes a topical allusion to Artemis' responsibility
for weather, albeit here with intimations, both accurate and misleading,
of beneficence. Her tender sentiments for the new-born and the
connotations of gentle moisture are antithetical both to the fieriness of
the adult animals and to the threat of internecine violence and foul
weather of which Artemis would also be the originator. Calchas' conclusion
regarding the goddess's will. correspondingly divided. is that
the twofold signs. the positive ones and the negative ones that involve
culpability (KOTCxIlOIl

[94 RORYB. EGAN
vant to Ca lchas ' r ep r esentation of Artemi s. For one thing. en vy or re ­
sentme nt and a blind. r efle xive . irrational and w rathful ven gean ce are
pe r sistent attr ib utes of th e goddess that are some times ar ouse d by inadvertent
transgr ession of her prerogatives." She retaliates with punitive
mea su r es th at ar e onl y r eliev ed by a compen sat or y sac r ifice. sometimes
of young human victims. The cult myth of Ar te mis at Brauron is
particularly analogou s to th e case of th e eag les and th e ha r e at Aulis
(itself a site of Ar te mis cult '") . At Br au r on , when an ger ed by th e chance
killing of a bea r in her sanctuary she r etaliated with a pla gu e that was
reli eved by th e ann ual sacr ifice of an Athe nian maid en ." Such char acteri
sti c incide nts make her dem and s for a compe ns atory sacr ifice at
Auli s predictable. conforming as th ey do to th e patt ern by wh ich . pa rado
xicall y. her kindliness accompanies. ind eed motivates. cr uelty .'? Thi s
info rms th e double sense of th e adjective TEKVOlTOIVOC de scribing an anger
that has off sp ring both as sacr ificial victims (Icve re ts and Iphi geneia)
and also as ave nge rs (Clytemnestra an d Orestes )." Th e patt ern of
th e ha r e-slau ghter and its sequel is thu s also a pa radigm for th e old or ­
der of r et ributive slay ing that figu r es so prominently in the dramatic
and ethical dialectic of th e trilog y. If th e r ationa le for th e sacrifice of
lphigen eia see ms "cr ude and inad equat e."7 1 that only aligns it with a
centr al th em e of th e trilogy. th e cr ude ness and inad equacy of vendett a
justi ce."
The "lo gic" of Ar te misian re tr ibution bear s upon anothe r instan ce of
semantic and sy ntac tic flexibility in th e context. Th e po siti ve. 01 ' optimistic.
content of th e p rophet' s flu ctu ating words on Ar te mis ar e confined
in their entirety to verses I40-3. a sing le clau se introduced by th e ambiguous
TOC OV rrsp . It see ms impossibl e to det ermine wh eth er th e
ph r ase is con cessive or emphatic w ith cau sal and exp lanatory over ­
ton es": wh ether . th at is. it ind icat es that Ar te mis is partial to fulfillmen t
of th e por tent s despite her selecti vely kind disp osition. or because of it?
Knowin g both th e cause of he r an ger (sla ug hter of yo ung victims) and
its con sequen ce (sla ug hter of a yo ung victim). we mu st re cog nize both
h6 Effec tive ly dem on st r at ed by Furl ey 1986: I 18. Cf. Clinto n 1988: passim.
67 See Furley 1986: [19.
hHSee w ith referen ces to testimoni a.
!>90n thi s point d . Lloyd-J on es [983: 88.
iOC£.Gei sse r 2 0 0 2 : 2 6 r ,
7 1See Fur-ley 1986: I [ 0 . with reference s to ea rli er cr iticis m.
7 2 See Belfiore 198T 6 on ana logie s bet w een Ar te mis and th e Eri nyes in th e
trilo gy.
i3 For discussion and r eferen ces see Conacher [98T 82: Fur-ley 1986: 1[8.

SACRIFICERS
Y OUNG SACRIFICIAL
VICTIM
VICTORS
VANQUI SHED
RORYB. EGAN
Artemis-oriented perspective
PORTENT
Eagl es
Hare-brood
Zeus-oriented perspective
PORTEN T
Eagle s
Hare-brood
PORTEND ED
Atre ids
Iphigeneia
PORTEND ED
Atreids
Troy
This particular set of differences, however. represents only one register
of significance . and more elemental differences between the two god s
are brought out in the two parts of the Calchas quotation.
The threatening tone at the end of Calchas' Artemis section is miti ­
gated by his hopeful declaration that he is invoking Paean, a divinity
who might forefend or remedy the threatened adversity . The Artemis
section thus anticipates an anti-Artemis. Who is thi s Paean? The generally
assumed pos sibility that it is Apollo? might have long-term implications
for the conclusion of the Atreid myth and the trilogy, but as a partisan
of the Trojans in the shor ter term Apollo is an unlikely divinity for
any competent prophet to invoke as the counter-force to Artemis.
Paean, moreover, had sever al identities, one of which wa s Zeu s.7 H Can
Zeus, then, be the anti-Artemis of the prophet's invocation? Certainly
he is th e only other divinity to figure in the portents, and in conn ection
with eagle -portents during a military venture there is rea son to s uppose
that an Athenian audience might have reflexively thought of Paean
as Zeu s. An Athenian military leader. Xenophon (An. 3.2.9). reports an
incident. less than sixty years after the production of the Ore steia. in
which a pa ean is sung after an eagle. seen as an omen of Zeus as deliverer
(cco-rfip), has appeared to his troops." Once the po ssibility ha s been
raised of Zeus as the Paean invoked by Calchas. oth er con siderations
present themselv es in corroboration. Specifically. in the subsequent account
of preparations for the sacr ifice of Iphigeneia there is a ref er enc e
to her having sung in her father's hou sehold at the third libation of the
paean (245-7). The fact that the third libation wa s conventionally in
771n Egan 1979 : 5 I accept ed th e com mon assumption that it is Apollo.
7HCf. Gr oene boom 1944 : 148-149.
7YCf. Kappel 1992: 45.

2 06 RORYB. EGA N
petuously and in a mental mode that is ovccE13ii. avoyvov. cvlspov.
Here the terminology of the "mind " (rppsvoc. opovstv) echoes the Zeu s
pa ssage. but there is no success ful attainment for the mind (such as had
been expressed by TEVSETOI cppEVWV TOnov. 175). and no soundness of
mind (c corppovs iv ). just confirmation that coxppovsrv pa sses by those
who are not inclined to it. In turning abruptly from acquiescence with
the prophet's words on the all-powerful victor who is Zeu s. Agamemnon
succumbs to th e overclouding delu sion of Ar temis. "? of which Calcha
s had warned earl ier .
Sinc e a connection between Iphigeneia's singing of paeans to Zeu s
and Calchas' appeal to Zeu s Paian ha s alread y been noted. and since
there is nothing further in th e remainder of th e narrative on th e preparations
for the sacr ifice that affects. or is aff ect ed by, the attribution of
160-83 to Calchas . I proceed to the closing verses of th e Auli s narrative.
Here again the attribution of the "hymn" is of con siderable con sequence.The
na8EI lla80c axiom is invoked again. and again it is in association
with Calchas . Thi s time. although th e phrase is sp oken by th e
chorus in their own voi ce. it seems that th ey attribute it specifically to
Calchas, thu s r eflecting th e prior occurrenc e of the axiom within a
speech by Calchas him self. What happens here is that the chorus declin e
to give details about th e fate of lphigen eia and then observe that th e
crafts of Calchas do have validity. Thi s can of cour se be a euphemi sti c
way of say ing. with past refere nce now. that Calchas ' pronouncem ent s
determined the still un sp ecifi ed fate of lphigen eia about which the choru
s might be ignorant. It is hardly implausibl e in th e context. though. to
discern a referen ce to Calchas espousal of th e na8EI lla80c do ctrine.
Th e chorus will not talk about the particulars of lphigeneia's fat e but in
du e course people will find out about it. and about other things. In any
case it is in th e ver se (250) immediately following the mention of Calcha
s' name that th e no8El llo8oc axiom recurs. along with a glo ss that
extends into the following verse . Is it only an accid ent that th e proverb
is adjac ent to Calchas' name and th e referen ce to the validity of his
skills . or is the proverb actually being attributed to him here as it wa s.
according to my int erpretation. by the sa me chorus earlier on in th e
same ode ? In the latt er case thi s second ref erenc e to th e no8EI llo8oc
principl e is also a retrosp ective gloss on th e fir st on e. making it clear to
th e audience that Ca lcha s was warning Aga me mnon against impetuous
initiatives.
Thi s closin g reminder of th e dictates of Calchas delivered by th e eld ­
ers to th eir auditors at Arg os, and to th e aud ience in Athens . serves also
I"?e £. Edwar ds 197T 26- 28 on "folly " or "infatuation " in Aga me m non's decision.

2 12 RORYB. EGA N
_ _ . ed. 1989. Aeschylus. Eume nides. Ca mbri dge .
__. 1995. "Aesch. Ag. 104-1 59: Th e om en of Aulis or th e om en of Argos."
M useum Cri ticum 30- 31: 104-159 .
__. 1996. Aeschylean Trage dy . Bar i.
Sta nfor d. W.B. 1939. A m big uity in Gree k Literature: Studies in TheOIY and
Practice. Oxford .
Sulliva n. S.D. 1997. A eschy lus ' Use of Psychological Terminology. Montre
al/Kings ton/ London /B uffa lo.
Thi el. R. 1993. Chor und tr egische Handlung in .Agem cm non' des A ischylo s.
Stuttga r t.
Thomson . G.. ed. 1966. The Oresteia ofAeschylus. 2 vols. Ams te r dam / Prague .
Tyr ell. W.B. 1976. "Zeus and Agamemnon at Aulis. " Cl71: 328- 334.
Vidal-Naquet . P. 1973. "C hasse et sacr ifice dan s r Oresti e:' in P. Vernant and P.
Vidal -Naquet, eds . My the et tragcdie en Grece ancienne. Pari s: 133-1 58.
Weglage. M. 1991. "Leid und Er kenntnis: Zum Ze us-hy mnos in aischyleische n
Agamemnon: ' Hermes I 19: 265- 28 I.
Wellau er. A.. ed. 1823. Aeschyli Treg ocdiae. 3 vol s. Leip zig.
West . M.L.. ed . 1990a. Ac schy li Trag ocdiec cum incetti poctee Prometh eo. Stuttgart.
__. 1990 b. Studies in Aeschylus. Stuttgart.
__. 1999a . "Aeschylus. Aga me m no n 104- 59: ' Lexis IT 4 1-6 1.
__. I 999b. Comment on Dawe 1999b. in Lcxis IT 78.
Wilk en s. K. 1974. Die ln tcrdcpcndcnz z wischen Trago dienstr uk tur und Theo logie
bei A ischylos. Munich.
Willink. C. 2004. "Aeschylus. Aga me mnon 173-1 85 and 205- 217." QUCC n.s. 7T
43-54·

2[6 JANICE SIEGEL
The Coens' purported ignorance of Homer's text-together with
their well-known fondness for movies of pa st era s-has led some critics
to conclude that the brothers actually got their knowledge of the Odyssey
from Kirk Douglas' Ig54 film Ulys ses (G. Perry 20 0 0 and Danek
200 1: go) or even from the Clas sics comic version of the tale (Hunter
200 0, Taylor 20 0 0 , and Danek 20 0 I: go) . 13 In fact , in interview re sponses
ostensibly designed to prove the limited influence of Homer's Ody ssey
on the film . the Coens reveal a much more-than-passing acquaintance
with the text:
Ethan: We avail ou r selv es of [th e Odyssey ]very selectively. The re's the
sire ns: and the Cyclops . John Goodman, a on e-eyed Bible sales ma n .. .
Joel: Wh en ever it' s conv eni ent we trot out the Ody ssey.
Ethan: But I don 't want any of the se Ody ssey fan s to go to the movi e
expecting, yknow .
Joel: "Wh er es Laertes?" (laughter )
Ethan: "Wheres his do g? " (more laughter}'!
In fact. although its details are of course very different, 0 Broth er doe s
indeed follow the gen eral narrative template provided by the Odyssey.
Yet the Coens mock tho se who look only for supe rf icial plot parallels
with the Odyssey
"Scy lla and Cha ry bdis? Where were they? " pu zzle s Ethan. Th e whirlpool
at th e end , sure ly? "Oh." the brother s cho r us , "the whirlpool."
Ethan gr ins pen sively. "Oh , yeah, sure. Scylla and Cha r ybdis" (Romn ey
2 ( 0 0 ).
No, in 0 Brother Scylla is not a man-eating monster, nor is Char ybdis
a whirlpool. They represent in the adaptation exactly what they repre
sent in the original: a difficult choice between two equally undesirable
options. 15 Just as Ody sseus had to navigate between Scylla and Charybdis
twice before he could reach safety (Od.12.28g-338. 544-70). Everett.
Pete, and Delmar twice avoid a similarl y dista steful choice-death or
I31n an interview in th e "Pr oduction Fea ture tte " of th e DVD , Joel Coen explains.
"We sor t of combined th e Three Stoo ges with Hom er 's Odyssey" (d . an
int ervi ew with George Clooney in Bergan 2 0 0 0 : 2 I 2 ). By critics, 0 Broth er ha s
been dubbed ''' Bonnie & Clyd e' as told by Monty Python " (Tura n 2 ()() 0 ) and
"Mad Maga zin e's version of ' Let Us Now Praise Famous M en " (Taylor 2 ( 0 0 ) .
q Interview with Ridley 2 0 0 0 as reprinted in Wood s 2004: 183. Cf. an int erview
with Joel Coen in Romn ey 200 0 as reprinted in Wood s 2 0 0 4 : 176.
15 Pace Weinli ch 2 ()()5: lO T "The Coen brothers r ead Ody sseu s' fant astic adventures
of Books 9- 12 pr agm atic ally , not symbolically." Although Weinli ch' s
ess ay (r ead aft er I submitte d thi s ess ay for review) offe rs a worthy approach
and rai ses important qu estions. we disagree on a number of important way s in
which text and film int er sect.

o BROTHER. WI-JERE ART THOU? AND TJ-IEODYSSEY :!. /7
pr -ison-s-a s provided by th e s he r-iff in two se pa rate meetings: "p r iso n
farm 01' the pearly g

2/8 JANICE SIEGEL
place is two weeks from everywhere" (OB 18). Like Odysseus. Everett
leads his crew westwardly (10 .27 = OB 9) but doubles back on his own
path (10 .59-6 I = OB 63) before eventually reaching home.
In a comic rendering of the epic style. the heroes of 0 Brother­
Everett. Delmar and Pete-also represent the best qualities their culture
ha s to offer. Although more than usually flawed and from the lowe st
societal str atum . Everett and his buddies are noble in spir it. Like Ody sseu
s. they show fierce loyalty to their own families and to each other
(response to betrayal is a topos common to both text s). Everett's uncharacteristic
prayer at the end of the film. when death seems ine scapable
. even mirrors one made by Odysseus:
"Roug h yeal's I'v e had : now ma y I see on ce more my halls. my land s.
my peopl e before I die!" (Od. 7.240- 4 1)
" I just want to see my dau ght er s again . Oh Lord. I've been separ ated
from my famil y for so lon g ..; " (DB !(4)
Petty crooks all (a comic downsizing of Ody sseus' piratical way s).
Everett, Pete , and Delmar often find themselve s victims of their own
appetites and knowingly do wrong. But they always find themselve s on
the side of Good wh en they have to choose. They stand up against Evil
even when it is unpopular and un safe to do so (e.g. bringing down th e
local chapter of the Ku Klux Klan) and they ri sk their own live s to protect
tho se who can't help themselve s (e.g. saving Tommy from being
lynched. or fr eeing Pete from jail)." The Coens' comic vision also transforms
every violent confr ontation in Homer's mod el text into a comic
enterprise in 0 Brother.
Thi s comic tendency is apparent in 0 Brothcrs transformation of
Homer's epic hero. too . Odysseu s is the mod el of leadership Everett
would like to be but con sistently falls shor t of. According to Fitzge rald's
translation. Homer's Ody sseu s is "royal" (13.79), "mas ter of many
crafts" (18 .452), and full of "sap." "prudence ." "foresight ." "wit." and
"steadiness" (4.289-95). He is versatile (5.21 2). "canniest of men " (8. 160),
and "sly and guileful" (14 .457) . 0 Brother's Ulysses Ever ett McGill fan ­
cies him self a trickster and a wordsmith (OB 54) in the style of Ody sseus.
But far from having achieved the success of an Ody sseu s. Ever ett
is just a run-of-the-mill con man. and not a very good on e at that.
In Fitzgerald's translation of th e Ody ssey. the most frequently used
epithet for Ody sseu s is "the gr eat tactician." IH Earl y in the film, Evere tt
I?Cf. Joel Coens comments in intervie w with Romn ey 2000 as reprinted in
Wood s 20° 4: 179.
IHE.g. 7.257.8-440,1 1.4 13, 11.438. 15-464. 17.18.17-455, 19.52. 19.579 , 23. 147 . and
24.39 1.

o BROTHER. WH ERE ART THOU? AND TI-IEODYSSEY 2 19
tacitl y compares himself to Odysseu s when he assures his compadres
that "the '01 tactician's already got a plan" (OB (9) , Luter he acknowledges
that he r eally "did n' t have no plan" (OB 33 ), But wh en th e tim e
comes to convince the boy s that he is a worthy leader. Everett admits: "I
know I've made some tacti cal mistakes .... And I've got a plan ... " (Of)
89). But unlike Odysseu s. Everett suffers both Irorn a distinct lack of
imagination and

JANICE SIEGEL
is the undisputed Truth that the god s exist and that for good or for ill
the y involve themselves in men 's live s." In 0 Brother, however, the
characters spend a good deal of their time arguing whether God, the
Devil , and other beings with super natural talents (w izar ds and seers ,
for example) exist at all.
It is generally part of the human condition to want to explain the inexplicable
and to seek knowledge beyond our ken . In the Ody ssey , it is
the god s who provide the an swers men seek. They communicate them
to man through a variety of ways including dreams (e.g. 4.852ff., 19.620­
42), prophecy (e.g. Proteus in 4.501-3, Teiresias in II.I 12-5 2, and Theoklymenos
in 17.20 I), bird auguries (e.g . 2.155- 63, 15.198-99, 15.636-4 6)
and meteorological signs (e.g. 20.110-17 and 21.471-72).
Man 's quest for knowledge drives the action in 0 Brother. too . The
phrase "looking for an swers" haunts the film . Everett conjectures that
"Looking for an swers" (OB 12) is the rea son Cora Hogwallop left her
hu sband. He also note s that " Looking for an sw er s" is the rea son that
Christianity is so popular (OB 23). Big Dan Teague, the larcenous Bible
sales man, sees thi s as a weakness he is happy to exploit: "Folks'r e
lookin' for an swers and Big Dan Teague sells the only book that's got
'em!" (OB 54). Penn y take s a more practical approach. She plans to
marry a man with "p r ospects " (OB7 2) becau se her children "look to me
for an swers" (OB 72). Ever ett un succe ssfull y present s him self as the
true an swer to Penny's prayers when he plaintively crie s to his estranged
wife, " I' ve got the answers!"(OB 90).
Pete and Delmar believe that God an sw er s prayers (e.g. OB 62 and
OB 1(4). Everett, on the other hand, is a rationalizer, the only memb er
of the group to remain spir itually "unaffiliated" (OB 27). He dismi sses
belief in divinity as "r idiculous supers tition " (OB 25) and scoffs at supernatural
explanations for natural phenomena (e.g. OB 9). For th eir
faith, he dismisses his friends as "ignorant fools, " "hayseeds" and
"durnbern a bag of hammers" (OB 25-6) . When Delmar delights that
baptism has cleansed him of his sins and brought him salvation ("Neither
God nor man 's got nothin' on me now," OB 24), Everett reminds
him of the power of earthly law: "Even if it did put you squa re with the
'lJOdysseus cr edit s "some god , invi sible " (10 .157) with stee r ing his ship to
safety . He is gr atef ul th at du rin g a hunt "some go d's compass ion set a big buck
in moti on to cr oss my path " (10 .173-74). Athe na se nds a w ind to tak e Telern achu
s hom e ( 15.36 2). and as fath er and son pr epare to sla ug hter the suitor s.
Telerna chu s not es th at "O ne of th e gods of heav en is in thi s plac e" ( 19.51) . In th e
end , Athe na herself comma nds th e men of Ithaka to mak e peace (24 ,59 2-94), and
her wo rd s are pun ctu at ed by Ze us "dr oplping ] a thunderbolt smoking at his
dau ght er 's feet " (24.602 -3),

o BROTH ER. WH ERE A RT THOU ? AND T!-IE O DYSSEY 22 1
Lord. th e State of Mississippi is more hardnosed " (D B 25). -''' And yet.
Eve re tt and his fri end s enjoy th e benefits of success for' whi ch th er e is
no a ppa re nt ea r thly explana tion.
The most superna tura l of so urces for ans wers in 0 Brothe l' is. of
co urse. th e blind railr oad man (OB 7-lJ). with whom th e film both ope ns
and closes. With his oddly insightful prophecy. thi s character cha llenges
Eve re tt's view of th e world ri ght Irorn th e stan of th e film :
You see k a g l'eat fortune . yo u th ree wh o are now in chai ns ... And yo u
w ill find a fortune-s-tho ug h it w ill not be th e fortune yo u see k . . But
firs t. firs t yo u m ust tl 'avel- a lon g a nd diffic ult mad-a wad fra ug ht
wi th per-il, un huh. a nd pregna nt w ith adventure . You s ha ll see things
wonde rfu l to tell. Yo u sha ll see a cow on th e ro of of a cott o nho use . uh ­
huh . and oh . so man y sta rtlem ent s .... I ca nnot say how lon g thi s mad
s ha ll be. But fear not th e obsta cles in yow ' path. for Fate has vo uchsa
fed yo uI ' rewrud. And th ou gh th e r oad may wi nd, a nd yea . yo ul'
hearts gl'ow weal 'Y. still s ha ll ye Ioller th e way . eve n unt o ylll ll' sa lva ­
tio n ... . lzzat clear?' (OB8-tj)
Thi s speec h is design ed to fulfill th e sa me purpose as th e on e Teiresias
(the Odyssey's blind see r) gives Odysseus in th e Und erworld." Both
detail a parti cularly odd p rophecy th at will come to pass (cow on th e
r oof of a cotto nho use :::: people mistaking an oar for a winn owing fan ).
And both sha re detail s of the her o's future th at turn o ut to be t ru e.
Del ma r and Pete are aw ed th at th e see r seems to know th at th ey see k
th e sec re t treasure Eve re tt told th em he buried befo re bein g incarcer ­
at ed. but dism ayed to hea l' that th ey are not destin ed to find it. Everett
is mom entaril y spo oked th at th e seer would eve n kn ow abo ut thi s
tr ea su r e. since it was a lie fa b r-ica te d to convi nce Pete a nd Delma r to
cooperate in th e jailbreak.
Never the less. Eve re tt is able to rej ect belief in superstition for' his
ve rs ion of science/ rationalit y. He cava lierly di smi sses th e un canny
abilities of thi s "ignor ant old man " (D B (0 ) as th e kind of "para-nor mal
psych ic pow ers" acquire d by th e blind in compe nsa tion for' th eir loss of
sig ht (DB lJ). His immed iate goa l. of co ur se. is to disp el Pete and Del-
.'' In th e so undtrac k liner not es to th e DVD version of 0 Bro th er, th e "blissf ul
Baptis t congregation engaged in riv erside imm ersion " is eq ua ted with "the Lotu
s-Eater s Itj.tj8- 102] w ho lull Ulysses' cohorts." Equa ting th e cons um ptio n of a
na rc oti c-lik e plant w ith baptism to fulfill hop e of sa lva tio n is indee d . as Da ne k
200 I : 87 suggests. a new tw ist on the idea of "I'eligion as th e opi um of the peo ­
pie." Flensted-jense n 2()()2: 18 concurs : " Delma r and Pete are dl·ugge d . not by a
fr uit. but by reli gion ."
.' 1 For a co m parison of the two pro ph ecies . see Flensted-je nse n. 2002: 18 a nd
Heckel 2oo5 b: 58. See Werne r 2003: 175 fOf' th e sim ilar ity of th eir archa ic a nd
poeti c speec h pa tte rn s.

JANICE SIEGEL
mar's doubts. But the scene has programmatic importance as well. Thi s
is just the fir st of many conflicts between Pete and Delmar, who believ e
in the super natur al and divine. and Everett, who trusts in the ability of
man-and particularly in him self-to make his own wa y in the world.
Over and over in the film. Everett's vision of the world will be forc efully
challenged by the characters he meet s and the difficulties he faces
(beginning with the Sirens, the fir st of th e Od yssean adventures). Although
it might see m to us that Everett. like Odysseu s, enjoy s some sor t
of divine guardianship that also extends to his companions. Everett will
to the end see success as his reward for keeping faith in himself.
THE SIR ENS
In Fitzgerald's translation of the Odyssey. the Sirens lure their victims
with their seductive song, "crying beauty to bewitch men coasting by "
(12.48-49). Odysseu s de scribes their song as "ha unting " (12.19 I) . The
singing of the Sir en s in 0 Brother is de scribed as "barely humon" (set
directions. OB 47) and" unearthly " (set directions, OB 48) . In the "Po stscri
pt" to his translation. the one acknowledged as a sour ce by the
Coen s, Fitzgerald describes the "conjur ing kind of echolalia " of th e sirens'
song in Greek. and how "the crooning vowels are for low sed uctiv
e voice s ... " (Fitzg erald 1962 [1998J : 493). The haunting song of the
film 's sirens is true to the se very qualities.
In the Ody ssey. Od ysseu s him self explains how much he wanted to
hear th e sirens ' song ( 12.246- 47). But Cir ce encouraged him to have his
crew lash him to th e mast so that he could listen in safety. "Shout as you
will " (12.65). she warned. the crew mu st "kee p their str oke up . till th e
singers fade " (12.67). In 0 Brother. Pete is th e fir st to hear the song of
the sire ns, and he scre a ms "PULL OYER!" (OB 48). Bereft of any overt
divine guidance. Everett scratches his head and wonders aloud. "I gue ss
or Pete 's got the itch " (OB 48) as he pulls the car over and Pete rac es
through the wood s ahead of his friends.
The sour ce of th e singing in 0 Brother is a trio of women described
as "beautiful but marked by an otherworldly lsngot" (OB 48). The y
stand upon a tongue of ro ck that jut s into the river as they wa sh clothes
in the water. Seductively drenched. th ese three river sir en s. as if
anonymous forc es of nature. ignore th e boy s' attempts to engage th em
in conver sation and intoxicate them with their presence. thei r song. and
their corn liquor. And wh en Everett and Delmar awaken from their
debauch. they find Pete missing. A ser ies of set directions explains how
Delmar come s to the dramatic conclusion that Pete has been transformed
into a toad:
Pete 's cloth es ar e laid out on th e g round. not ill a heap . but mimickin g

224 JANICE SIEGEL
THE CY CLOP S
At this restaurant (decorated with a bust of Homer), Everett and Delmar
meet the film 's Cyclops character, the one-eyed Big Dan Teague.
Homer's Polyphemus is a monster who is also a shepherd. Big Dan is a
shepherd of sor ts (a Bible sales man intent on fleecing his flock) who is
really a monster. Like Polyphemus. Big Dan is physically imposing: set
de scriptions call him "br oad-shoulder ed" (OB 53) and "a big man" (OB
54). Like the isolated Cyclops, who live s alone in his cave (9.202), Big
Dan sit s alone at his table (OB 53). In each tale. initial contact between
the Cyclops figure and his victims establishe s the monster's home field
advantage: Big Dan 's "Don' t believe I've seen you boy s around here before
.. ." (OB 54) is equivalent to the Cyclops' "' Str a ngers .. . who are
you? And where from?" (9.274). In both texts. the greed of each hero
lead s to his downfall. Odysseu s wants the Cyclops ' fat sheep. lambs and
kid s. and stor es of chee se (9.233-36) plu s whatever else he might have to
offer (9.249). Evere tt and Delmar are interested in Big Dan's promise of
"the vast amounts of money [to] be made in the ser vice of God Amighty
Isid " (OB 55)·
At Big Dan 's sug gestion. the group relocates to "more private environs"
(OB 55) out in the country. The Cyclop s. too. prefers to graze his
flock "r emote from all companions" (9.2° 3). A trick camera angle cau ses
the hulking figure of Big Dan. now sitting alone in the foreground. to
appear so large that he dwarfs the mas sive tree behind him . Thi s shot
evokes the Cyclops as de scribed by Odysseu s. "a brute so huge. he
seemed no man at all of those who eat good wheaten bread; but he
seemed rather a shaggy mountain reared in solitude " (9.2° 3-7).
In each Cyclops scene. the monster enjoys a meal of meat provided
by his victims. Homer's Cyclops "dismember ed [th e men] and made his
meal. gaping and cr unching like a mountain lion-everything: innards.
flesh. and marrow bones" (9.313-18). Similarly. Big Dan. a selfproclaimed
"man of large appetites" (OB 57), attacks his meal of chicken
frica ssee. a recipe that specifically includes skin. flesh . and bones (a meal
for which Everett paid). Eve n his disgu sting eating habits re sonate with
those of the Cy clops:
Dru nk. hiccupping. [th e Cyclops ] dribbled streams of liquor and bit s of
men (9-404 -5)
Big Dan is just sucking the last pi ece of chicke n offa bone . He tosses the
bon e over his shoulder . belch es. and sighs (set direction s. OB 57). (In
th e film . an op en bottle of beer indicates that he ha s been drinking.
too.)
Even before Odysseu s meet s the Cy clops . he senses trouble: "for in my
bones I knew some towering brute would be upon us soon- all outward

o BROTH ER. WH ER E ART THOU? AND TJ-IE ODYSS EY 2 25
powel',

226 JANICE SIEGEL
cess of the frog. weeping" (OB 60) .
REUNION
Eve ntually. both her oes ret urn hom e safe ly to th eir Ithak a, having escape
d fro m so me kind of im p r isonment. In the Ody ssey th is occurs
th r ough divine fiat (Zeu s orders Ca lyp so to release Ody sseu s. 5 .118­
12 1), while in 0 Brothel' the def ining factor is the will of Everett (w ho
"just hadda bust out" of Parchma n' s Far m. OB 8 1). Each hero is driven
to prevent his wife 's imp ending mar ri age to anot her man . Od ysse us
learn s of his wif e's p redicam ent fro m Teiresias in the un der worl d
(11.1 3 1). Everett receives a letter fro m Pen ny in th e mail (OB 81).
Upo n th eir lon g-aw ait ed hom ecom ing . both her oes meet th eir
childtren) befor e meetin g their spouse. Ody sseus. disgu ised as a beggar.
at first present s him self as a stranger to his ow n son Telernac hus. w ho m
he meets at Eurnaios ' hu t." The n Athe na allow s Telernachu s to see the
tru e Od ysseu s. who embraces his child wit h fatherly affec tio n ( 16.223­
24). But star tled by this beggar's mira culous cha nge of appearance.
Telema chu s rejects him : "You cannot be my father Od ysseus!" ( 16.228 ­
29). Od ysseu s r espo nd s:
"This is not pri ncely. to be swept
Away by wonder tit yo ur fat her 's pI'esence.
No ot her Odyss eus wi ll eve r com e,
For he and I tire one. the sa me: his bitt er
For tune and his wanderings tire mi ne.
Tw ent y yetll's gone, and I tim back agai n
On my ow n island . (16.238- 44)
Only after Od ysseus exp lain s At hena 's divi ne intervent ion do fat her
and son have their long-awaited . and ver y emotiona l. reunio n ( 16.253­
6n), Telernachus is de lig hted to welco me the her oic Odysseu s. the honored
fathe r the son was taught would one day ret ur n to his everfaithful
Penelope. Everet t is just as happy as Ody sseu s to see his chil-
260 dysseus' r eun ion with his swine-herd Eurn a ios re tlp petlrs in inver se allusions
wh en th e bo ys visit Pete's cous in Wash Hogw allop. Whe n fir st tlppreached
. Wash is dest ru ctively whittling a piece of wood down to a nub with
his kni fe: Eumaios is ca re fully cutt ing sa ndals from oxhid e (14.26- 27). Both
farmers provide Friendly accom modation to th e tra velers : Wash Hogwallop 's
eve ntua l betrayal contras rs wit h Eu maios' s steadfast loya lty . Delmar saves a
piglet Iro m th e bur ning bam and returns it to the boy who r escu es them wh ile
Ody sseu s ear s "the young porker s " (14.91) sla ughte re d for' his dinner. For' fUI'th
er com par ison of Eumaios and Hogwa llop . see Dan ek 200 1: 86: Wer -ner 2003:
176: Heckel 2()()5t1: 582: and Heckel 2Oo5b: 58. For' this peacef ul int erl ude as corres
ponding to Ody sse us' respit e in Scheri a . see Weinli ch 2()()5: 92 a nd Heckel
2()()5t1: 582.

o BROTH ER. WH ERE A RT THOU ? AND Tf-IE O DYSSEY 2 27
d ren , and he comes by his beggars look s hon estl y, Despite th e sig ht before
th eir eyes . th ou gh . his girl s too ha ve ca use to distrust th at th e man
standing in front of th em is th eir lather retu rn ed home afte r a lon g abse
nce:
YOUNC EST
Dad dy!
MID DLE
/-Ie ai n 't O UI' daddy!
EVERETf
Hell l ain 't ! Wha tsis ' Whnrvey' ga ls? - Your nam e's McC ill!
YOUNC EST
No sir! N ot since yo u got hit by a train!
EVEREH
Wh atre you talking a bo ut - I wasn 't hit by a t rain !
M IDDL E
Ma ma sa id you wa s hit by a train!
YOUNCEST
Blooey !
OLDEST
No thinJefrl
MI!)DLE
Ju st a g rease spot on th e L&N!
EVERETT
Da rnnit . I neve r bee n hit by a ny tra in! (aU ( 7)
In The Odyssey . Telernach us has been prep ared for his Iarhers retur
n. In 0 Bro the r . Eve re tts dau ght ers ha ve been told that he wi ll not
be r etu rning . hen ce rheir conf usio n, The di fferen ce is du e not only to
th e shift in th e characte r of th e epic hero . bu t also to th at of th e epic
hero's spouse, In 0 Brother . Penn y "tur ns out not to be th e embodime nt
of wifely constancy Homer rhapsodi zed " (Scott 2 ( 0 0 ) , She not onl y divo
rced her hu sband "Ir orn sha me " (OfJ 7 1) while he was incar ce rat ed.
but she th en lied to her child re n about his untimely death , In thi s way.
Evere tt . just like Odysseus. ca n be sa id to ha ve retu rn ed fr om th e dead ,
Evere tts dau ghter s th en tell him abo ut their mo th ers new beau .
wh o is set to repl ace him , And just like Od ysse us. Eve r ett sets his children
straig ht about how he is th eir only t ru e fath er:
M II)J) LE
He's a suitor!
EVERET I'
I-Im, What's his nam e?
M IDD LE
Vernon T, Wa ldrip.
YO NCEST

22 8 JANICE SIEGEL
Uncle Vernon.
O LDEST
Till tom or row.
YO UNGEST
The n he's gonna be Daddy!
EVERETT
I' m th e only daddy you go t! I' m th e da mn paterfamilias! (OB 68- 9)
Similarly. Telem achu s inform s his own father about the rece nt eve nts
conce r ning his moth er and her suitors (16.285-3°4). Odysseus ass ures
him of the di vine assista nce th ey will receive ( 16.3°9) wh en it comes
time to put his plan in motion . But Everett lacks both Od ysseu s' patien
ce and his confidence in di vin e int er venti on . An gr y and w ith out a
plan . he fooli shl y decid es to confront his wife, Penny. and her fian ce.
Ver no n T. Wald rip.
Horner 's Pen elop e is "tall in her beaut y as Ar temis or pale-gold
Aphrodite" (17.45) . She is wise (e.g. 17.45 . 17.739 , 19.682) and tend er
(17.512). We see her weep (e.g. 4.756.4.77°. 21.59-60. 23.34) and we hea r
her lau gh (17 .710) . She lives in a palace with a staff of servants and
herd s of livest ock to live off in th e extende d absence of her hu sban d
C'no t twent y heroes in th e wh ole world wer e as r ich as he," 14.119-120).
Whe n Penelope fina lly comes to und er stand th at Ody sse us has retu rn ed
to her . she welcom es him with joy (23.23° -34).
Penny McGill . wh en we fin ally meet her in Woo lworth's . is described
as "a woman in her thirties with a haggard. careworn face" (OB
70) . She is clearl y exha usted by th e dem and s of par enting seve n children.
She is smart in a ha rd-as-nails kind of way. with out th e luxu r y of
feelin g sorry for her self . (She won 't eve n smile until she is back on
Everett's ar m at the end of th e film . and eve n th en her joy will easily
turn to "indigna tion," OB 109 .) Penny need s a hu sband to p rovide for
her family in hard eco no mic tim es. But wh en Everett r eturns. she disavo
ws him : "He 's not my hu sband. Just a drifter . I g uess ... Just some
no-account drifter ... " (OB 72). Ver no n T. Waldrip see ms the bett er
catch by far : "Verno n her e's got a job. Ver no n's got prosp ects. He's
bona fide ! Wh at' re you?" (OB7 2).
Early in th e Ody ssey. the mature Telemac h us. no lon ger th e bab e
Odysseus left "still cradled at [Pen elop e's] breast" ( 11.524) . qu esti ons his
ow n paternity out of self-pity (I .260), not fro m any rea l concern th at he
is not Odysseus' son (p hysica l resemblance mark s him as suc h th r ough ­
out th e poem )." But the paterni ty of th e bab y Penny hold s to her breast
is very ques tio na ble ind eed. Like his other child re n now divor ced fro m
27 Weinlich (200 5: 1( 1) ast utely observes th at in contrast. th e girls' adoption
of the ir moth er 's lan guage and voice shows their ide ntifica tio n wit h her.

o BROTH ER, WI-IERE ART THOU? AND Tf-IEODYSSEY 229
him. the baby (a str anger to Everett) doe sn't even ca r r y his name ( 013
70). Thi s insult of eras ed pat ernity is more than Evere tt can bear.
FIST FICH T
A sce ne of confrontation between riv als then OCCUI ' S in both text s. again
with comic defusement in 0 Brothel'. When Eve re tt calls Penny a " Iyiu'
. un con stant succubus," Waldrip call s him out on his manner s:
WALDRII' : You ca n' t swea r' at my fian cee!
EVE RETT : O h yea h? Well you ca n't mal'I 'y my wife! (08 72).
Vernon T. Waldrip's tr espasses-using Ever ett's hair treatment and
planning to become head of his hou sehold-are the comic eq uivalent of
th e cr imes committed by the suitors . as described by Teiresia s (11.130­
3 I) : "insolent men eating your livesto ck as th ey cour t YOUI' lady."
Werner (200]: 184) notes that in his arrogance, Waldrip even reminds
us specifically of Antinoos. Inevitably, a violent clash between hu sband
and suitorts) occurs in both text s. But th e details of thi s fight between
Eve re tt and Waldrip are tak en from a scene that precedes Odysseu s'
slaug hte r of his wif e' s suitors. the fistfight between rival beggars Od ysse
us and lros (d. Dan ek 200 I : 86 and Heckel 2ooSb: 60). In both texts, a
crowd gathers to watch the fight. In 0 Brother. Ever et t fail s to land a
single blow. And de spite being used as a punching bag. he sheds not on e
drop of blood:
[Everett] tak es a wild s wing whi ch Waldrip easily dudes. Waldrip
adop ts a Marquess of Oue cnsbur y stance and prances about. deli vering
sting ing punches to th e nose of a stunned and outclassed Evere tt (0 8
72 ) .
In th e Odyssey. Od ysseu s mangles lros with just on e punch. Afte r his
def eat. lro s is unc er emoniously ejected Irorn th e premi ses:
Now both conte nde rs
put th eir hands up .
Th e two
were at close qu arters now. a nd lro s lun ged
hitt ing th e sho ulde r. Th en Odysseus ho ok ed him
und er th e ea r and shatte re d his jaw bon e.
so bri ght r ed blood ca me bubbling fr-om his mouth.
as down he pit ched into th e du st . bleating.
kickin g aga ins t the g ro und. his teeth stove d in . ( II' . J()1'- 9: 115-1 21)
The n. by th e a nkle bon e.
Odysseus hauled th e fallen on e out sid e.
crossing th e cour tya rd to th e ga te . a nd piled him
against th e wall. In his ri ght had he st uck
his beggin g sta ff and said: "Hcrc tak e your' post.
Sit here to keep th e do gs a nd pigs away .. . ( 11'. 123- 30 )

23°
JANICE SIEGEL
In 0 Brother. it is Everett-clearly a lover. not a fighter-who suffers
the indignity of defeat and expulsion:
EXT. WOOLWORTH's
Its glass doors swing op en and Everett is hurled out and beJJyflops into the
dust of the street.
BRAWNY MANAGER:
... And stay out of Woolworth's! (OB72- 3)
CINEMA SCEN E AS KATAB ASIS
Everett and Delmar then retreat to the local cinema and perform a kind
of styli zed kataba sis from which they emerge with crucial information
that will affect their future." The theater and the underworld are alike
in that they both lie beyond the reach of the sun." In both text s. the he ro
positions himself fir st. and then a throng appears. When the prisoners
from Parchman's Farm are ushered into the theater. the leaking daylight
that illuminates their pas sage gives them a fluttery. less than substantial.
appearance similar to that of the shades in Hades (d. Content
200 1: 45). The shade of Ody sseu s' dead mother. for example, Odysseu s
describes as "impalpable as shadows are, and wavering like a dream"
(11.231- 32).
Both Ody sseu s and Ever ett are sur p rised to meet a lost comrade.
Everett stares at Pete "As if at a ghost " (OB 75). Ody sseu s de scribes the
shade of Elpenor as a "faint image of the lad " (11.93): he is a "ghost "
(11.97). Rather than a pool of blood, it is a few rows of empty seats in
the movie theater that separ ate Everett and Delmar from their recently
departed fri end and his new associates. Pete's harshly whi spered warning-"Do
not see k the treasure! It' s a bushwhack" (OB 74)-corresponds
to Elpenors similarl y dire warning to Ody sseu s: "Do not abandon
me unwept. unburied. to tempt the god s' wrath" (11.81- 2). The
authority feared in 0 Brother. though, is human. not divine.
And only in 0 Broth er do we find the add ed dimension of humor.
wh en Delmar tri es to explain their sur prise and delight at being r eunit
ed with Pete: "We thought you wa s a toad!" (OB 75). Despite Delmar's
lack of discr etion-his repeated stage whi spering and bod y language
are anything but subtle- the other prisoners act as if the y simply
don 't hear anything. Neither do th e shades in Hades interact in any way
with Od ysseu s unl ess they are invited (11.164- 67). Ody sseu s cuts his
oRFOI' th e pattern of kataba sis in a ncient literatur- e and its ada pta tion in mod ­
er n film, see Holt smark 200 I : 23-5 0 , esp. 25- 27. Heckel (zonga : 585 ) also equates
thi s scene with Odysseus ' nekyio .
2

o BROTHER. WH ERE ART THOU? AND T!-IEODYSS EY 23 /
time in Hades sho r t for fear of "the gods below" (1 1-49). Delmar and
Eve r ett fear the prison guards. a mortal set of overseers who can heal'
them and are sim ila r ly re sponsibl e for imprisonment and punishment.
And thi s is con sistent with the re st of the film. where the powerful figures
that aff ect our heroes are not gods but god-lik e mortals: Horner
Stokes. Menelaus " Pa ppy " O'Daniel, and She r-iff Cooley . all of whom
manipulate and exploit human beings in th eir own battle for power."'
Another link between thi s movie-theater scene and Book 1 I of th e
Ody ssey is that each features a hero's expression of distrust toward
women in general because of his wife's personal betrayal. Th e diatrib e
against women delivered by Agamemnon is adapted and rei ssu ed here
by the wounded Everett . :1' Agamemnon exp la ins how he was murdered
by his own wif e Clytemnestra upon hi s homecoming: "But that woman.
plotting a thing so low. defiled herself and all her se x. all women ye t to
co me . ev en those few who may be virtuous " (11. 501 - 4). Agamemnon
hopes that hi s words of advice will sav e Odysseu s. "L et it be a warning
ev en to you" (11. 5 14-15): "The day of faithful wives is gone Iorever"
(11. 534).
An angry Eve re tt feel s sim ila r ly betrayed by his wife Penny: "Dece
itful! Tw o-faced ! She- w o ma n! Never trust a female. Delmar! Rem ember
that on e simple precept and your tim e with me will not have been ill
spent! ... Hit by a train! Truth means nothin' to Woman. Delmar" (OB
73).:12 We have se en how Penny is no Penelope. But neither is she a
vengeful Clyte m nes tra . de spite the metaphori cal killing off of her hu sband
(in both cas es per -petrated for th e ost en sibl e good of th e family at
large) . And Eve rett will eve ntually win the pea ceful r eunion with his
wif e that wa s deni ed to Aga me m no n.
K u K LUX KL A N RA LLY AS D EFEA T O F TIIE C YCLO PS
It should come

o BROTH ER. WH ERE ART THOU? A N D Tf-IE ODY SSEY 233
But although dela yed due to the vagaries of th e plot. thi s scene in th e
film depicts the vanquishing of the Cyclops (with whom the y are reunit
ed at last )." Both sets of heroes find a wa y to rem ain invi sible in th e
presen ce of the en em y, Ody sse us and his men lash th em selve s und er th e
bellies of the blind ogre's sheep . and Evere tt. Delm ar and Pete co mmandeer
the costumes of th e color g ua l'd . Jh Once he has become aw are
of th e deception. each Cyclops seeks help from his brethren against th e
int erl op ers . But in eac h tale. the hero's trick prev ent s their int ercession .
When Polyphemus calls. " Nohbdy , Nohbdys tricked me . Nohbdys I 'U ­
ined me!" (9.443). his fellow Cyclopes decide not to int erfere. Big Dan.
who "senses" (DB 83) the boys' presence. dramatically unhoods th em ."
But th e di sgui se the boy s had used ea r-lie r Ior Pete's pr -ison break (faces
smea re d black with shoe poli sh. DB 78 and 79) se re ndipito usly distracts
their would-be attackers: "The color guard is colored! " (85). the Grand
Wizard yelps. as the oth er s sta nd stock-stili and sta re." In th e moment
of confus ion that follows in each text. the lead er urges escape: Everett' s
" Run . bo ys!" (DB 86) is equivalent to Od ysseu s' " Row . row. 01' perish "
(9.532 ) ,
The film 's Cy clops cha rac te r is abl e to thwart his ene my's att empt to
poke out his sole eye (w it h th e Confederate Flag pole ). But thi s atta ck
turns out to be onl y a ta ctical distraction that r end ers him blind (a nd
deaf) to Eve r ett 's sabotage in th e shadows . In eac h text. it is th e sight
and so und of forc e and fir e (significant vocabulary und erlined ) that best
dramati zes how eac h Cyclops is va nq uished by a flaming weapon of
wood:
3'iSee also Heckel (:w()Sb: 6() Ior thi s scene as cor-responding to th e blinding
of th e Cyclo ps .
3 h This detail of 0 Brother'« Ku Klux Klan rally. in additio n to th e familial'
r-hythmic cade nce of th e march er -s. seems clea rl y borr-owed Irom th e rally of the
Wicked Wit ch 's al'll1y in th e post De pression-e ra film. The Wizard o{ Os: (as
not ed by O live r. Tay lor. Hoffman 2()() 1: 37 . a nd Ruppersburg 2()()3 : 18).
37Big Da n sniffs out th e true identity of th e color g ua n l w he n he recogni zes
th e distinctive odor of Evererts hail' jelly, Altho ug h th e Cyclo ps of neither
Horn er no r Vir gil has a sim ilar-ly fre aki sh " Fee-Fi-Fo- Fum sense of s mel l" (q uotation
[rom Dav idso n 2 ( )( )( ): I:l L over time the mon st er has acq uire d such a bilities
as his stor y has becom e confla te d w ith other ca nniba listic g iants of folkl o re
(es pec ia lly with th e giant Irorn Jack a nd th e Bean st alk ). Sec. for exa m ple, th is
excel'pt Irorn a dialo gu e w r itt en for Vil'gil"s Cyclo ps in a po pul a r e le men ta r-y
Latin book : "phi. ph ae. pho , phum sa ng uinem olf acio Tro ianoru m v i r-u rn "
(Ma urice Balme a nd Jam es MOI"Wood, Ox ford Latin Course. Part O ne [O xfor-d
1:1:16 1 ( 3 ),
3HTha nks to Kirst en Day for her obser vation th at s uch a sce ne wa s typi cal
Buster Keaton Ia re .

o BROTHER. WHER E ART THOU? AND TH E ODYSSEY 235
associate's chall enge. but he is not willing to give up on his dream. or on
his fri end s:
EVERETT : "So you' re against me now , too! ... Is th at how it is boys?"
Silence . No one wants to m eet Eve rett 's eye. He is saddened.
"The whole world and Cod Almighty ... and now you . Well. ma yb e I
deserve thi s. Boys, I ... I know I'v e mad e some tactical m ist ak es. But if
you'll just stick with me: I need youl ' help. And I've g ot a plan . Believe
me, boys, we ca n fix thi s thing! I ca n get my wi fe back! We ca n ge t outta
11eI'e!" (OB89) .
Despite their' initial reluctance. Eve rett's Iri end s agree to his cockamamie
plan to sneak into the hall. Th ese three-c-Delrnar. Pet e. and
Tommy-are thus th e comic eq uivalent of the three who help Od ysseu s
fight the suitors: Telern ach us . th e swine he r d Eurn aios . and th e cow he rd
Philoitios (22. 29 2- 96). In order to gain access to th e site of their imminent
confrontation with their rivals. both Odysseu s and Eve ret t mu st
hide th eir identities. By turning him into a beggar. Athena ha s magicall y
change d not only Od ysseu s' clothes but also his physical features
( 13.538-47). The boy s in 0 Brother com ically content themsel ves with
donning fal se beards (" Reall y false beards, " not es Rogel' Ebe rt). They
sneak into th e building and present th emselv es as th e band.
Wh en Odysseu s is ready to tak e back his wif e. he dramatically r eveal
s his true identity: "s hr ugging off his ra gs th e wilie st fighter of th e
islands leapt and stood on the broad door sill. his own bow in his hand "
(22.1 - 2) . He th en addresse s th e suitors directly . informing th em of th eir
imminent death:
You yellow dog s, you thought I'd never mak e it hom e Irorn th e land of
Troy. You took my hou se to plunder . twi sted my maid s to ser ve you l'
bed s. You da red bid (01' my wi fe whil e I was still a live . Conte m pt was
a ll you had (01 ' th e gods who rule wid e heav en , conte m pt (01' what men
say of you hereafter. YOUI ' last hour has come . You die in blood. (22·37 ­
43)
In contrast. th e less-than-heroic Everett sneaks up behind his less-th anfaithful
wif e, pull s down his beard to r ev eal his face. a nd whines a complaint
that carries rather less of a punch than Od ysse us ' spe ech:
"Thcvre my daughters. Penny! 1'111 th e king of thi s goddam castle !" (013
92). But Penny remains unmoved .
In each text . th e hero ente rs a contes t Ior his wif e th at he is uniquely
suited to win . In th e Ody ssey. th e contes t of th e bow is Penelope's idea
(J 9.663), arr-ived at through a dream, and thus und erstood to be th e
co unse l of th e god s. She explains that she will marry the man who ca n
mat ch her hu sband's g r eat feat of str ing ing th e bow and shooting an
arrow through twelve axe head s (I 9.669-7()). Eve re tt is st umpe d about

236 JANICE SIEGEL
how to convince his wife that he too has prospects. Only when the
Soggy Bottom boys sing the first measures of "Man of Constant Sorrow"
and the crowd goes wild do they understand the far-ranging consequences
of their earlier money-making venture of "singling] into a
can " (OB 27).3YTheir celebrity gives them the leverage Everett needs
both to win over Penny and to defeat his rival (just as Odysseu s' great
strength and adroitness at the bow singled him out of the crowd).
Even the scene of the disgraced Horner Stoke s being run out of the
hall on a rail (a peculiarly American ritual) has a correspondence to the
Odys sey, in Odysseus' orders concerning the dispatching of the traitor
Melanthios. Both Melanthios and Stokes represent the rotten subculture
the hero mu st eradicate for his community to be strong and
proud once again. The details of their indignation are different but they
both suffer humiliation before they are permanently put out of action
(Melanthios will lose all his points, and Horner Stokes his political future):
You two go throw [Melanthios] into th e store r oom, wrench his arms
and legs behind him , lash his hands and feet to a plank, and hoist him
up to the roof beams. (Ody sseu s to Eumaios and Philoitios, 22.192-94).
Two m en advance through the clapping audi ence holding high either
end of an eigh t-foot rail. When they reach Stokes, oth er audi ence m em ­
ber s help load him onto the rail .. . Stokes is being run through the
crowd on the rail, jeer ed at and pelted with comestibles until he bangs
out the exit (OB 96).
A successful politician, Pappy O'Daniel knows when "Oppitunity
knocks!" (OB 96). And his curious choice of exclamation here-"Holy
moly. The se boys're a hit! " (OB 92)-seems designed to evoke the name
of the magic plant-the molii (IO.343)-that protects Odysseu s from
harm." It is at this moment that the governor-in his capacity as the
highest ranking law enforcement officer in the state - pardons the escaped
convicts. So wondrous is the nature of Ever ett's victory in his
great hall. But the motive of thi s self-proclaimed "fgive and f get Chr istian
" (OB 97)-to win over an electorate clearly soured on Stokes-is no
purer than anyone else's. When Pappy invites the crowd to sing with
3') It ha s also been not ed th at th e title of Evere tt's signature song , "Ma n of
Constant Sor r ow ," is even a loose tr an slation of Ody sseu s' nam e in Gr ee k. Cf.
Rupper sbu rg 2003: 12. In Fitzgerald's Odyssey , both Penelope (4.885) and Teiresias
(I I.I(4) call him a "ma n of wo e," and Tele machus not es that "th e man was
born for trouble" (4.350 ). Odysseus him self sta tes , "My life is pain" (7.164).
4°Wor th noting since eve r y oth er exclamation in th e film is explicitly Chr istian:
"Holy Saint Chr istophe r !" (Delmar 1013 50 I and a polic eman 1013 161.
"Swee t Jesu s" (Delma r 1013 51, 83 ]), "Weeping Jesu s on th e cr oss !" (Pappy [013
56]) , and "Jesus!" (Eve re tt's favorite exclama tion [013 6,10, 63 etc.),

o BROTH ER. WI-JERE A RT THOU ? AND Tf-IEODYSSEY :!4 /
also brin gs th e philosophical a rg urne nt conce r ning th e ex iste nce of God
front lind cente r. Was th e flood II " miracle " as Delmar thinks (013(06). II
Chr istian deu s ex nui cliitui l (so Da ne k 20 0 1: 94), Pet e thinks so: " We
prayed to God lind he piti ed us!" (013 l(6). Ever ett di sagrees. a nd llr ­
gues th at his own momentary lap se into pl 'llyer is fOI'givllble. Ior "a ny
human bein g will cas t a bout in II moment of stress" (OB 1( 6), His "perfectl
y scientific ex pla nation fOI' wh at just happen ed " (013 l(6) cred its
th eir tim ely rescue to II plan of Ma n (i.e.. th e sche d uled flooding of th e
ri ver). not to lin action of Go d. Eve n th e incon gruous sight of "a co w on
th e r oof of II cotton ho use .' fulfillment of th e blind see r 's odd prophecy
(0139). ca n be ex plaine d by thi s eq ua lly unu sual se t of circ ums ta nces .
Afte r th e Ody ssey e nds. we know that th e humbled Odysse us will
follow Teiresia s' instructions ( I 1,133-48) lind ClllTY th at oar inland until
some one ask s him about the winnowing Ian on his shoulde r. lind th ere
he will build II shrine to Poseidon lind mak e his sacrifices. Odysseus w ill
for ever qu ell Poseidon's wrath by spread ing enlig hte nme nt abo ut his
cult to II people former-ly in th e dar-k about him . Ulys ses Eve re tt McG ill
delights in the knowled ge th at th e flooding of th e r ive r (the film' s version
of bringing th e sell inland) will bring e lec t r-icity to th e Sout h. lit er ­
ally bringin g illumination to II backward people:
No, th e fact is, th eyre flooding thi s valle y so th ey ca n hydroelectric up
th e whole durned sta te ..
Everett waxes sm ug:
Yessir . th e So uth is go nna cha nge. Every rhings go n na be put o n d ectri
city a nd run on a pa yin basis. O ut w ith th e old s pir itua l murnbojum
bo. th e s upe rs titions a nd th e backwa rd way s. We ' l'e go nna see a
br a ve new wor-ld w here they run evel'yone a wire a nd ho ok us a ll up
to a g l·id. Yessir. a ve r-ita ble age of rea son- like th e on e they had in
Fra nce-and not a mom ent to o soo n. (013 Ill6)·IH
An irr -ep re ssibl e optimist. Everett peers into II future filled with hope.
In llny oth e r sit ua tion . th e ignorllnce of th e hU!l111n condi tion (lind his-
1HTh is speech is s u re ly a co mic inversion of the sca thing in dictment of "prog
l'ess " in th e 1972 film Deliverance (bas ed on Ja me s Dickey 's novel a nd directe d
by John Boo r ma n) , w hose plot s imi la rl y conce rn s a Dee p South ad vent ure un ­
dertaken by [our fr -iend s befo re th e Te n nessee Va lley Authori ty cre ates a la ke
wh ere one had not ex iste d befo re . (The s pee ch is mad e by th e characte r nam ed
Lewi s Medlock , played by Burt Reynolds , a nd is not found in th e nov el.) O t he r
evide nce of th e influen ce of thi s film is sca tte re d throughout 0 Brother . Not
coinc ide nta lly , 0 Brother:« mu sical dire ct or T Bone Burnett (in a n interview
cite d in Willma n zno r: HI) s uggests Deliverance as one of the few orh er main ­
stre a m e nter ta in me nt sources of ea rl y twentieth -century Southe rn Ame ri ca n
m usi c.

o BROTH ER. WH ERE A RT TH OU ? AND Tf-IE ODY SSEY 243
se us ' happy end (as announced in the proem of th e poem. 1.28) is alwa ys
a for egon e conclusion. Evere tt's un exp ected success is both more SUI'pi
-ising and swe eter . We can 't know wh y comic hero Eve re tt and his
pal s succeed despite their many shortc omings (d. Flensted-Jen sen 2 0 m :
23 ). Cer tainly. such an end wa s most unlikely. Is their success du e to
happy coin cidenc e and pla in old good luck? 0 1' do coincide nces reall y
exist at all? Could these unlikely heroes rea lly be For tune's favor-ites ?
Or is the Chr istian God th ey pl'ay to res ponsi ble for th eir good fortune?
All we can know for sure is that in 0 Broth er . Where Art Thou ? th e
Coens offer a vision of th e world both heartwa rm ing and mystif yin g . in
a wa y that mak es us smile despit e ou r selv es. Unlike Horners Odyssey.
our world is full of inexpli cable events, Why can' t we just accept that
some of th em bring happiness and joy?
D EPARTM ENT OF CLASSICS
H A MP DEN-SYDN EY COLLEGE
H A M PDEN-SYDN EY. VA 2394 3
REFERENCES
o Brothel' Where A rt Thou ? 20 ()(). DVD . Direc te d by Joel Coen. Written by
Etha n Coen. Produced by Etha n Coen a nd Joel Coe n. Mu sic by T Bon e
Burnett. Touchs tone Pictu res.
Soun dtrack : 0 Broth el' Whe re A rt Tho u ? 20 0 (). CD. Pr oduced by T Bon e
Burnett. Me rc ury Record s.
Ber gan . R. 20 0 0 . The Coen Broth ers. New YOlk
Blake , R. A.. S.J. 20 0 I . " Wily brothe rs. " A merica 11'4·3 : 30-33.
C had w el l. S. 2()()4 . " Inventing th at 'old-timey ' style : So uthern a uthe nticity in 0
Broth el'. Whe re A rt Thou ? " .Il'h v T 32: 2- 9.
Coen. E. and J. Coe n. 2 ( )( ) O . 0 Brother. Whe re A rt Tho u? London.
Collum . D. D. 20 0 I. "Souther n bells." Sojourn er» 3 (),4 (Jul y / Aug) : 52.
Conte nt. Roo T. Kreider a nd B. White. 2 ( )( ) I . 0 Brothel'. Where Art Thou? Film
Quarte rly 55 :1.4 1-41' .
Da ne k. C . 20 0 I. " Die Ody sscc del' Coe n-Br-u de-r. Zi ta te be ne n in 0 Brothcr.
Whe rt' A rt Tho u? " in M. Korenjak a nd K. To ch te rle . eds. Pontes 11: A n tike
im Film . lnn sbruck. 1'4-94.
Dav idso n. J. 20 0 0. "Tra vels a mo ng OUI' dumb fri en ds .' TLS 501'6 . 19.
Filene. B. 20 04. "0 Hro thcr. wh at next ?: Ma king se nse of th e folk fa d ." Southern
Cultures 10 .2: 50-69.
Fishe l'. B. 20 0 0 . "Esca p ing Irorn cha ins-Conv icts bu st loose in 0 Brothcr.
Wh er e Art Thou ? " A m cricn n Cincmnrogrn phr r I' 1.10 : 3 6- 50.
Fitzgerald . R. t ran s. 1991' 11962J. Hom crs C oveec» , Ne w YOI'k.
. 1991' 119621. " Pos tscr ipt." in J-lomt'I' ·s Od yssey. New Yor-k. 46 7- 509.
Flens red-lense n. P. 20 02 . "So me th ing old. someth ing new . so met h ing borr -ow ed:

244 JANICE SIEGEL
The Ody ssey and 0 Bro the r . Whe re Art Tho u?" C&:M 53: 13- 30.
Fre nch. P. 200 1. "Hi hon ey. I'm Ho mer." in Woods 2004: 184-185.
Harries. M. 200 1. " In the Coen Brot hers' new film. the dark. ut op ian mu sic of
th e American South." CHE (Feb. 2): BI4-15 .
Hec kel. H . zooga. "Z ur uck in die Zukunft via Ith aca. Mississippi.
Technik und Funk tio n del' Homer-Rezeption in 0 Bro ther. Where Art
Tho u?" Intern ational Jou rn al ofthe Classical Tradition I I: 57 I -589 .
_ _ . zoogb. "Odysseu s am Mississi ppi. " Des altsprechlichc Unterricht 48: 58­
62.
Hoff ma n. A. 200 I . "Cockeyed caravan. " A merican Prospect 12.1:36-37 .
Ho ltsmark, E.B. 200 I . "The Katabesis th em e in modern cine ma ." in M. Winkler.
ed. Classical My th and Culture in th e Cine ma . Oxford. 23- 50.
Jackson . K. 2000. " 0 Bro ther. Where A r t Thou ? " Sigh t &:So und 10: 38-39 . 54.
Jon es. K. 2000. "Airtight. " Film Com me n t 36: 44-49 .
Kellm an. S.C. 200 1. "Wher e art? " South ern Quar terlY 39: 189-1 90.
Prin s. M. 200 I. "Br other s' odyssey," The Christian Century I 18.10: 3 1.
Ridley. J. 2000. Bro thers in A rm s. As re pr inted in Woo ds: 2004: 181-1 83.
Romney. J. 2000. "Double Visio n." As re printed in Woo ds 2004: 176- 180.
Rupp er sbu r g, H. 2003. ·" Oh. so man y star tlern ents .. .': History. race. and myth
in 0 Bro ther. Where Art Tho u? " Southern Cultures 9-4: 5- 26.
Wa ll. Jam es M. 2003. "Sulliva n tr avels aga in," The Christian Cen tury 118.10: 53.
Wein lich. B. 2005. "Odyssey . Where Ar t Tho u?" Myth an d mythmaking in th e
twen ty-fir st century." CM L 25: 89- 108.
Werner. Florian. 2003. "Die Mu se singt den Blues: Joel un d Ethan Coens
Sud staa te n-Ody ssee '0 . Brot her Where Ar t Thou ?'." in W. Er har t and S.
Nieberle. eds. Ody sccn zoo t . Munic h. 173- 188.
Willma n. C. ''' AI't' for art's sa ke ," En ter tainm ent Week ly 57?: 8 I .
Wood s. Paul. ed . 2004. Joel and Ethan Coen: Blood Siblings. Londo n.
FILM REVIEWS (ON-LINE)
Block. T. www.cultu r evultul.e.net /Movi es2/ 0 Br oth el..htm
Ebert. R. www.suntim es.com / ebert/ eb ert _r eviews h ooo /1 2/1 222901.html
Howe. D. www .wash ingt onpost .com / wp -sl.v / entertai nme nt/movies/reviews /
obl'o thel'whel'ea lttho uhowe.htm
Hunter. S. www.wa shingtonpost.com/wp-srv/entel' tai nment/movies/ I'ev iew s
/ obr oth el'wh eI'eal,tth ouhunter .htm
Molvar. K. 2000. Q&A : Tim Blake Nelson. Brown A lum ni Maga zine (Mar ch,'
April) www.browna lumnima gaz ine .com/storyd etai I.cfm?ld=61
New man . K. 2000. htt p:/ / w w w. em pil.eonl ine.com / reviews / r eviewcom
plete.asp ?FID=6 145
Oliver. G. filmforce.ign .com/al,ticles/035/035708p l .html
PeITY. C. htt p :/ / w w w. bbc.co.uk / films h ooo / I0/ IS/sullivans_o_bI'Othe l'_
article.shtrnl
Porter. P. (17-21-99. Clario n-Ledg er . Jackso n. Mississippi. as displayed at www.
coenbrothers .ne t/ ocloo ney.htm l

BOOKREVIEWS/COMPTES RENDUS
M . FINK ELBERG. Greeks and Pre-Greeks. Aegean Prehi story
and Greek Heroic Tradition. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 2005. Pp. xv + 203. US $85.00. ISBN 0-5 21­
85216- 1.
Thi s book is an attempt to solve the pu zzle of Gree k prehi story from an
int erdisciplinary point of view . Th e author applies mainly linguisti c
evid en ce and myth to re cr eat e society in the tim es previous to th e Homeri
c epics. Finkelberg excels in her use of lingui sti c evidence. and it is
precisely thi s use that stre ngthe ns her th esis. Althoug h lingui sti c facts
and th e distribution of th e C ree k dialects Iorrn th e basis of th e argu ­
ment. th e author is conscious that her r ead ership may not hav e th e necessa
ry ba ckground. Her ex planations are th erefore simple and always
introduced with historical a pprec iation and co ntex t for th e development
in qu estion. without dwelling on minutiae.
Most books that deal with Aege an prehi story ha ve an arc hae olog ical
slant . but archaeology without th e analysis of lingui sti c data can onl y
giv e a partial ima ge . As Finkelberg herself remarks (146): "it is appropriate
to ask whether th e archa eological evide nce is th e onl y kind of
evide nce that should be taken into account" in cases suc h as th e "coming
of th e Dorians." Finkelberg adduces the parallels of oth er inva sions in
historical times for which th er e is no archa eological evide nce. The
fr eshness of the book r esid es in the author's ability to reinterpret
known evidence in a new . cohe re nt light with th e int ention of solving
old problem s.
Let us now exa mine in some detail th e eight chapte rs of which th e
book is compr-ised . In the introduction. Fin kelbe r g di scusses th e four
main points whi ch th e book will develop. Fir st. she defend s th e role of
lingui sti cs in study ing th e pa st and advocates th e study of myth as a cultural
artefa ct that re flec ts th e present and th e pa st compleme ntar ily and
sim ultane ously. Within th e " rn ytho-histor ical continuum" ( IS) th at th e
legend s of th e Heroic Age represent. Fink elb erg ab stracts th e patt ern of
ro yal marriage and succession in order to "restor e at least so me of
th em to their historical contex t " ( IS ). Th e fourth objectiv e of the book is
to shed light on th e problem s of identity and et hnicity of th e " Hellen es."
247

BOOK REVIE WS/ COMP TES REN DUS 249
Cha pte r six goes back to lin gui sti c a rg ume nts and discusses th e
spread of th e Gree k lan gua ge. In thi s cha pter. Finke lbcrg fir st recon ­
structs a dialectal co ntin uum (w hich implies a geographical on e) of th e
Greek dialects. The fact th at th e hist ori cal locati on of Creek dialects
does not correspo nd to th e lingui stic ev ide nce is expla ined as a r esult of
th e "co ming of th e Do ri a ns. " wh ich. eve n if it did not leave any arc hae ological
evide nce. sha pe d th e historical di st ribution of dial ects through
th e d ispl acem ent of th e populations th at spo ke th em .
Cha pter seven focuses on th e end of th e Bron ze Age a nd th e collapse
of Myce nae an civiliza tio n. It deals wit h lingui st ic evi de nce Io r th e fall of
Mycena ean Greece. th e "co ming of th e Do ria ns ." and th e d isappearan ce
of Mycena ean migrant gr oups int o th e cultures of th e East. O ne of th e
g m ups that were unable to maintain their identity a nd ende d by bein g
ass imilated to th e env ir onme nt was th e Philistines. The arg ume nt is not
new and was already put for ward in th e 1930 S and 1940S ( 154), ye t on ce
aga in Finkelberg man ages to present it Io rcef ully and to bring to our
consci ous so me t hing that mo st Hellen ist s prefer to ign or e. It is th e fea rless
sta te me nt of th e logi cal conclusion of her al 'guments that I enjoye d
mo st abo ut th e book.
Cha pte r eight summarizes th e continuity and d iscontinuity between
th e Bronze Age and hist o ri cal Greece. Finke lbe rg concl udes th at th e
Gree ks p r efer-red to r esh ap e their not abl y disconn ected past in ord er to
cre ate an im agin ed unity a mo ng th e " Hellenes" and cre ate a co ntinuity
between th e Bronze Age and historical G reece. Th e myth of th e Tr-oja n
War and th e end of th e Age of Heroes th at it sy mb olizes becam e instr
ume nta l in th e conso lida tion of heterogen eou s populati on gro ups.
Altho ug h Finkelbergs book is not the last word on Aegean pre history.
certa inly it is a ve ry attrac tive and th ou gh t-provoking pr op osal
whi ch moves th e read er to further enq uiry . Th e book is written in a
mann er ap pealing fOI' both th e lay and th e profession al . and eve ry body
ca n learn new things Irorn it. Th e cha pte rs some times see m not well
connec ted w ith one ano the r . a nd it re q uires a ste p back to rea lize th eir
connec tion. There does not see m to be a goo d integr ati on of the ve ry
int er estin g issu e of exoga mo us a nd endogamo us r oyal marriage w ith
previous discussion of a p re-Creek subst ra tum and th e lat er on e on dialectal
di str -ibution. I miss more cohe re nce in th e book. whi ch see ms at
tim es to be written as a se ries of ind ep endent essays lackin g a clea r
th em e th r ou gh ou t. Neverthe less . th e book is successful in offering a
quite co mpre he nsive assess me nt of pre-H om eric Greece Irorn the lin-

25°
guistic and ethnic point of view.
BOOK REVIEWs/COMPTEs RENDUS
REYESBERTOLIN C E13RIAN
DEPARTMENTOFGREEK ANDROMAN STUDIES
UNIVERSITY OFCALGARY
CALGARY. AB T2N IN4
BRUCE LOUDEN. The Iliad. Structure. Myth. and Meaning.
Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. 2006 . Pp . viii +
337. US $55.00 (cloth). ISBN 97S-0-SorS-S2So-7.
Many have tried to expose the structural pat terns of the Ilied. claiming
to discern such phenomena as doublets. ring composition. repeated
movements. and motif sequences. Some have been Unitarians eager to
counter disintegration of the poem by Analysts: others have been oralists
in sear ch of the building block s of composition-in-performance.
These efforts have led to some key insights. but are often met with skepticism
(and I write as one who has often peddled doublets. motif sequences.
etc .). One problem is consistency of scale: this type of argument
often mixe s units of different size. from formulae to themes. in the
creation of matching patterns. Another is that of cherry-picking: it can
appear that schola rs are emphasizing elements that ser ve their argument
and ignore much else. The credibility gap widens when readers
sus pect that motifs and patterns have their origins more in the mind of
the critics than in the poem.
Louden ha s produced a major study of large-scal e patterning in the
Iliad. following his similar st udy of the Ody ssey. I That is the fir st four
chapters at lea st: an additional three chapters examine parallels between
the Homeric poem and Near Easter n (mo stly Ugaritic and Old
Testament) literature. The fir st part of the book proposes three movements
of an extended motif pattern in the Iliad (covering Books 4- 7/8.
I1-17!2o-24). and in addition an introductory pattern that is also threefold
(Books 1-2/g-[()/!8-lg): Book 3 is treated separ ately as an "overture."
The main (or "pr incipal") pattern cons ists of tw ent y motifs. while
the "introd uctory " pattern is composed of another thirteen.
The study is a generous. even heroic. presentation of parallels. internal
and external. There is much repetition in the Iliad. and Louden
points out a number of correspondences in need of greater examination
. For example. many scenes featuring Hector and his family occur at
1999)·
I Bru ce Loude n. The Od yssey: Str ucture . Narration. and Meaning (Baltimore

BOOK REVIEWS/ COMPTES RENDUS
th e city wall s. not just th e famous meeting of Hector and And r omac he,
and Louden interestingly brings Helen 's appearance at th e walls into
th e di scu ssion. Many of the a rguments will not persuade. however.
Some motifs are mer ely typologi cal (e.g. heroic eri stcie or vaunting):
others are tortuously described in orde r to fit the perceived patte rning .
Since th e motifs are required to appear in onl y two of th e three r elat ed
movem ents. the th re e-fold structure do es not see m es pec ially firm. Nor
is th e se q ue nce of motifs. Th e r eader will have alread y noti ced th at
Book 3 (the "overture ") has been exc use d from th e r est of th e patter-ning
. and th at th e "intr od uctory" seq uence in Book s g- IO int errupts th e
"principal" seq ue nce of book s 8-17. It is claimed that in Book 3 th e piincipal
motifs OCCUI ' in th e following order: I I . loa. [2. g. ga . [9. 2.14. [6.
5f. 15. 9· A further layer of cate gor ization (I-V) is supe ri m pose d to thi s
in order to p rovide some se mblance of ord er. Th e enth us ias m for s ubdivi
sion C'p r incipa l" motif 5 ha s six sub- motifs) ca n make th e a r g ume nt
as hard to follow as it is to accept. In Cha pte r 5. in th e Neal ' Eas te r n second
half of th e book. th e sixth motif confusin gly unf url s a stri ng of s ubmotif
s identified as 6a . 6b. 6c. A. A r , B. C. D. E. F. Fl . G. H . H I. witho ut
ex p lanation of th e principles of differentiation (p res uma bly H I is a subset
of H. which is a subset of 6e. th e s ubse t of 6). Mu ch of th e middle sequ
enc e of th e "p ri nc ipa l" pattern is unrecogni zabl e as such: on e find s
Greeks playin g roles assign ed in th e motifs to Trojans. 01 ' vice versa . in
what is de scribed as inversion or parody . It look s like Horn er will need
to st udy thi s book a nd revise hea vily before th e patt erning th esis works
well as a whole.
More di scu ssion of methodology would hav e been welcome. es pe ­
ciall y in th e contex t of past stud ies of th e po em 's str uct ure . Loud en
tends to see th e structure as a n as pec t of com pos ition. not reception.
The correspo nd ing patterns are not meant to be r ecogni zed by th e audience
. and thi s explains how th ey hav e esc a pe d th e attention of sc holrus
(a nd perhaps thi s should lessen alarm at th eir com plex ity) . The a uthor
is ca utio us a bout th e origin s of th e Hom er-ic po em . 01 ' how it ca me to
con ta in Nea r Eas te rn motifs. but it is clea r that he has a basicall y Unitarian
a p p r oac h. Some w hat oralist -seeming is th e fr equ ent s uggestion
th at co mpos itiona l patterning ex pla ins a nd exc uses as pec ts of th e po em
th a t hav e been identified as problem ati c. For exa mp le. a solution to th e
notorious duals in Book 9 is proposed by thi s method (the th eo ry is not
infer-ior to th e majority of previou s s uggestions. but probabl y insufficient
to se tt le th e matter just ye t). In ex plana tion o f wh y Pr-iam brings
a nimals sac r ificed in th e plain back to T I'OY in Book 3. we a re r eferr -ed
to th e kings later t ranspottation back to T r-oy of th e "sacrificed " Hector.
who als o suffe rs a letha l neck wound (the neck wound is portr-ayed
as a n im po rt a nt motif. man ifestat ion s of which includ e th e cho king of

252
BOOK REVIEWs/COMPTEs RENDUS
Paris by his chinstrap. the decapitation of Goliath by David. and the
possible etymological meaning of Goliath). The Unitarian impulse in
the se arguments is well -intentioned. but patterning as a solution to narrative
problems is not always satisfying . since it implies that the compo
ser is beholden to forces beyond his control (though it is sometimes
suggested that th e patterns help to convey important themes).
The second part of the book should be of value as an addition to the
growing recognition of Near Eastern influence on Greek literature (it is
revealing that Louden has done comparative Indo -European work before.
but now feel s Near Eastern influences are more important for
Homer). The two halves of the book are described as providing two
"contexts" as hermeneutic tool s. one narrative and one Neal' Easter n.
These are really quite different things. Whil e the exploration of motif
patterning is an intratextual exercise. the second part of the book involves
the influence of external and precedin g material. The broader
motifs of the Near Eastern comparanda are rather generic (e.g. siege
myth. the extraordinary hero. inherited guilt). A few are better represented
in the Homeric poem (e.g. str ife between hero and leader. divine
councils). but mo st are not. and the exercise of comparison aim s to explain
what is relatively understated in the Iliad (e.g. plague from the
god s. theomachy. human sacr ifice: Louden's use of the term "s ubge n re"
in thi s section see ms to mean that the themes and motifs exist in th e
background of th e Homeric poem).
There do es not seem to be a str ong historical case fo r the Homeric
poems being influenced by the Old Testament. which attracts mo st of
Louden's int erest . Louden sugges ts that Homerists have negl ected the
correspondences. but putting Old Testament pas sages side-by-side Homeric
pa ssag es used to be commonplace in previous generations. I wa s
compelled by thi s book to pull my old cop y of Pharr's Homeric Greek
off the shelf. where many of the se same issue s are elucidated by some of
the same Old Testament quotations. The provision of context for things
that ma y pu zzle read er s is instructive as far as it goes. But it sho uld
probably not go too far. Loud en 's attempts at more specific comparisons
(e.g . Achilles in Book 9 as Job) do not stri ke me as particularly cogent.
or a matter of influence. More success ful is the last chapter. whi ch
explores Homeric divinities from an Ugaritic perspective. with an extended
comparison of Anat and Athena. Thi s seems to be a thorough
and thoughtful examination of th e characteristic s of th e divinities.
Thi s book energ etically provides an exploration of not one but two
important topics for the Iliad. narrative str uct ure and Neal' Eas ter n
influence. If thi s revi ew has been rather skeptical. perhaps such is the
fat e awaiting the bold explorers of motif patterns. as I sugges ted at the
beginning. There is no qu estion that it is a cr eative book. and th e ambi-

BOOK REVIEWs / COMPTEs RENDUS 253
tion of th e author is to be applauded. Readers will co me away with
some new in sights. e ve n if th e more ca utio us will choose to cher-ry-pi ck
the on es they find acceptable. So me of th e all eged correspondences are
valid. but it is hard to agree that they nil cohere in th e large-scale str ucture
that is at the heart of th e book's argument. And to th e extent that
th ey do . th e question remains wh ether th e ob served patterns are ()l'gnn ­
izing th e nar -rative 01 ' a sy m ptom of other forces. Typology can ex plain
much of th e iteration: other cor responde nces a rise or ganicall y Irom th e
plot. Thus th e " inve rs ion" of th e middle seq ue nce of th e middle patter-n
is best ex plained by reference to th e planning of Zeu s: th e Tr oja ns win
for a tim e. so ne ed for Achilles will be felt , but then th e C re eks will become
ascendant again. At its mo st ba sic form th e patterning argument
is compatible with th e three-fold division of th e Iliad th at ha s been convin
cin gly argued from var -ious persp ectiv es, and it might be useful
when con sulted in conjunction with oth er st udies. Th e ex plora tion of
Near Eas te r n analogu es contri b utes to our se ns e of th e exte r nal context
s of th e Iliad. and schola rs int erest ed in th at topic will want to tak e
cons ide ra tion of thi s sec tion of th e book.
JONA TH A N BURGESS
D EPARTM ENT OF CLASSICS
U NIV ERSITY OF T ORONTO
T ORONTO. ON MSS 2E8
J USTINA GR EGORY. ed . A Com panion to Gr eek Trag edy.
Blackwell Companions to the Ancient World. Maldon, MA:
Blackwell Publishing. 2005. Pp. xviii + 552. $ I 86.99. ISBN
978- I -405 I -0770-9 (cloth).
Th e thirty-on e papers in thi s collec tion Iorrn th e ri ch est single-volume
introduction to an asp ect of th e an cient world that I hav e rend. The
I'an ge of contri b utions is immen se . and eac h paper could be used as a
sta rt ing- point for fur-ther st udy of Athe nia n traged y (eac h cha pte r po ssesses
a bibliogr-aph y of "fu rt he r reading "). The book is divided into
four parts-i-t'Context s. " "Ele me nts ." "A p p r oac hes ." and " Reception"and
it is helpful to cons ide r th e pnpel"s within th ese gr o ups . Th e wid ernnging
nature of the volume-s-and th e limitations of th e acade mic I'eview
-s-m eans that onl y s uperf icial com ment is po ssible Ior mo st co ntributions.
Th e fir st part. "C ontex ts. " cons ists of se ve n cha pters. Three I'epresent
generali st su m maries of th e a uthors previously publish ed view s.
Scott Scullion (23-37) provid es a well-ar -gu ed account that is honest

254
BOOK REVIEWS/COMPTES RENDUS
about the marginality of the perspective expressed but rigorous in its
clear articulation of key aspects of the origin of tragedy. Jocelyn Penny
Small (103-118) offers a skeptical view on the relationship between vase
illustrations and tragic performance. arguing against the views of Taplin
and Green . While additional context from the so-called phlyax
vase s would. I think. offer helpful counter-evidence. thi s is a very useful
summary. I remain unconvinced. however. by Neil Cr oally's defense of
tragedy's didacticism (55-70): he shifts between two senses of "teaching"
(as a function of the genre. and as a choice by the pla ywright). so
that the point becomes trivial: everything teaches in thi s sense . Much
stronger is William Allen (71-82) on the philosophical tradition. which
(with Halliwell: see below) covers much of the same ground as Cr oally.
Christopher Pellings discu ssion of the role of rhetoric (83-102) demonstrates
how performance culture blurs tragedy into the lawcourts. and
vice-versa. The se two papers are both excellent sum mar ies. Other papers
are less compelling. Paula Debnar (3- 22) opens the volume with a
historical overview of fifth- century Athens. placing selected tragedies
in thi s context. though general readers will be misled by sever al claims.
including the certainty with which th e opening paragraph affirms
Euphorions production of Prometheus in (sp ecifically) 43 [ (a play
treated as Aeschylean at Ill5. 2 [6. and 326. and inauthentic at 3. 199. and
254). Bernd Seid en sticker (38-54) give s a general account of satyr
drama. but the description of dithyramb. important for understanding
tragic choruses, is minimal.
The core of th e second part. "Eleme nts." con sists of four discu ssion s
on str uctural asp ects of Gr eek tragedy. Deborah H. Roberts on beginnings
and endings ( 136-1 48) discu sses how the content of tragedy is
bounded. For her. the play is the unit of int erpretation. and one misses a
sen se of how the satyr pla y provides its own kind of ending to th e dramatic
exper ience. Michael R. Halleran's paper on epi sode s (167-182)
describes specific types of scenes and is attuned to th e implications for
performance. Peter Wilson's solid. shor t . provocative discussion of music
( 183-193 ) ri ghtly emphas izes the performative implications and th e
for eignness of Greek mu sic. Aft er carefully defining his vocabulary and
terms. Luigi Battezzato (149 -166) su mmariz es th e function of lyri c and
challenges conventional (Aristotelian) view s. All four papers are excellent
. and togeth er provide a kind of Bauformen del' griechischcn
Tregodi c "lite" that will be incredibly useful to English-speaking undergraduates.
Less success ful is Michael J. Anderson on myth ( 121-[35).
which is a bit flat since it do es not enga ge with larger and often misun ­
derstood issu es of what myth is. Th e final paper in thi s section. John
David son on performance (19 4- 2 1r), is in the awkward po sition of hav ­
ing to cover too mu ch gr ound within a sing le chap te r : as a result. the

BOOK REVIEWs / COMPTEs RENDUS 255
discussion is com pressed at key points. and alternative po ssibilities r emain
und er-explored . Whil e many of th e paper s more th an tou ch on
issu es of performance. th ere is too mu ch here to provid e a consolida ted
view . and issu es such as th e th eatre space itse lf are not sufficiently di scusse
d . Th ere is a lmos t no discussion of dance (see 205-206 . not in th e
ind ex). and th e rel at ion ship between ac tor and character (and mask )
need s to be clarified (though see 349 and 374) .
The ten papers in part th r ee. "A pproac hes." fall into clu st er s. Th e
fir st four of th e pap er s consi de r tra gedy by author. Suzanne Said pr esents
a wid e-r an gin g survey of Aesc hy lus (215- 232) th at is perhaps too
confide nt in its di smi ssal of problem s but full y engages with a th eatrical
pla yw ri ght. Ruth Scode l's cha pter on Sopho cles (233-250) is filled with
precise. succinct insights. taking d eal ' stands on controversial issues,
Justin a Gregory on Euri pides (25 ]-270) ex plicitly r efl ects "the r evi sion ­
ist point of view " on Euri p ides. whi ch could be stre ng the ned with r eference
to stage practice (connec ting age categ or ies of cha rac te rs with
mask s. for exa mple) . Martin Cr opp provid es a ri ch survey of lost
tr agedi es (27 1- 292). with a useful discussion of development s in th e
fou r th century. including Rhesu s (a play tr eat ed as Eur ip idea n at 75.
]0 4 . and 130 . and as inauthentic at 269 . 288. and 387 ). Very di fferent attitud
es and a pp r oac hes to the pla ywrights are placed alon gsid e on e a noth
er in th ese gre at. short surveys. A seco nd clu ster describ es th e cha racte
rs of traged y. Dona ld Mastronarde off er s a sens ible sum mary on
gods (321-332), accepting an occasion al a ppe ara nce of Ze us on stage. in
contrast to Mark C ri ffiths wid e-rangin g discussion of (ma le) authority
figures (333- 35 d . whi ch deni es any th eatrical appearances of Ze us. Jud
ith Mossm an provides a ca ref ul and precise discussion of women (35 2­
365). whi ch limits wh at can be sa id. but still teaches a lot (tho ug h th e
concl usions drawn from sta tistics should be tr eat ed w ith ca ution. given
th e lim ited size of th e sa m ple), " Marginal figlll' es" (bas ta rds. barb ari ­
ans . a nd slaves ) are di scussed by Mary Ebbott (366- 376). Between th ese
two clus ters fall two further important cha pters. C hr istiane So urv inou­
Inwood summa rizes he r ow n a nt h r-opological approach (293-3ll4),
whi ch r ightly emphas izes th e meanings create d by an cient audien ces.
though I w ould say too mu ch is subs ume d und er th e lab el of "sacr ed
drama. " Fina lly . Doug las Cair nss di scussion of valu es (305-320) . e mbr
acin g both ethics a nd th eol ogy. of fers a r ich and subtle present at ion
of thi s cr ucial subject. Both of th ese papel's might eas ily hav e been
placed in th e fir st pan of th e collection.
Par t four . " Reception ," offers eig ht pap el's th at present a selec tion of
appr oac hes respond ing to th e ways fifth -century tr aged y has been r ead .
It is ri chl y va lua ble to po sition reception in terms of David Kovacs'
cha pte r . whi ch presents a n ove rview of th e textu al history of traged y to

BOOKREWEWS/COMPTESR ENDUS
the present day (379-393). Stephen Halliwell ha s written an equally useful
overview of how tragedy wa s read from the fifth century until the
second century AD (394-4 12), in another paper that more helpfully articulates
th e educative function of the genre. Vassiliki Panoussi sum mari
zes her own work on the reception of Greek tragedy in Latin literature
(413-427). I felt th er e were significant problem s with each of th e
three examples provided here (e.g. Ovid 's Pr ocne is discu ssed in terms
of Becchec . with no mention of Sophocles' Tereusi; thi s represents a real
missed opportunity. Salvatore Di Maria present s an interesting discu ssion
of the sixte enth-century Italian reception of tragedy (428-443),
though thi s too is based on his own previous work and will be marginal
to the experience of theatre for mo st readers. Albert Henrichs presents
a conci se account of The Birth of Tragedy in Nietzsche 's academic career
(444-458). which, though also narrowly focu sed, complements the
insights of Halliwell 's chapter. Ismene Lada-Richards clearly po sitions
her discussion of mod ern acting theorists in terms of reception (459­
471): with thi s focu s. her examination of how Brecht. Boal. Crotowski .
and Artaud might read moments of Gr eek tra ged y provides a useful
primer for classicists unfamiliar with thi s mat erial. Herman Altena discusses
stage performances of tragedy in recent decades (472-489 ).
ri ghtly em phasizing that much of the revival is manifested in smaller
productions. Specific exa mples in his discu ssion focu s on Dutch production
s. In the final chapter (490-504). Paul Woodruff discus ses his own
translation practice and rai ses important issue s for the reception and
re-interpretation of the genre today. though one might exp ect some
mention of those few translations-such as Tony Harrison 's Oresteiathat
clearly stand as lite rature in their own right. None of the se last six
papers makes claims to be comprehensive . but the result is that there is
a sense of arbitrariness to the examples given. when the section is examined
as a unit: English renaissance theatre and the ma sked performance
traditions of Japan remain almost unmentioned. though their importance
to the contemporary reception of traged y is without doubt.
The variety of approaches to Gr eek tragedy repre sented here will
offer something for eve ry one. That is th e volume' s strength. but it ha s
disadvantages. Opposin g views are juxtaposed. oft en without explanation
or acknowledgm ent. and different contributors address quite differ
ent audiences (unde rg raduates . graduate stude nts , classicists. th eatre
historians. tra ged y scho lars int erested in oth er th eatrical tradition s
etc.). At a few point s. one might have wished for str onger editorial
guidance. Cross-ref er encing between paper s is minimal and. at tim es.
unhelpful. An y of half a do zen papers could have begun th e volume.
which suggests a flexibilit y to the editor's con ception of the colle ction:
some of my observation s her e might sug ges t a different (complem en-

BOOK REVIEWS/ COMPTES RENDUS 257
tary) way of classifying th e contr ibutions. There are a few misstep s. It is
not helpful to think of Med ea as a two-actor pla y (181), give n that Euripides'
Philoctetcs produced in th e same tetralogy almost ce r tainly
employe d three. Simila rly . descriptions of th e "five-act r ule" (169), th e
chorus as a deut eragonist (219), th e implied date of Trecliininc (234), th e
genre of A lces tis (258). viewing Cap tive Melnnippe as a seq uel (285). and
th e comfort ing eff ects of Pliiloctctcs (395)- to give a handful of examples-are
probabl y misleading. With rare exceptions. tran slations ar e
clear. Occasionally. a term is used that will be ob scure (e.g. "bracket" on
391) or opaque CColemanball" on 355 and 3( 4) for so me r ead ers. Act ua l
cr ro rs are minimal (e.g . the date of th e Ores teia on 199).
As will be clear. Blackwell 's Comp anion to Creek Tra,gedy is an ambitious
and impressive volume . It r epresent s a wid e range of a pproaches
to th e gem'e. Mo st cha pte rs are ver y str ong . written by leading
scholars. and th e book sho uld ser ve as th e start ing point for man y
r ead ers at all level s for deep er und erstanding of C ree k tra gedy .
C.W. M A RSHALL
DEI'A RTMENT OF CLASS ICA L. N EA R- EASTE RN .
AND RELIGIOUS STU DIES
U NI V ERSITY OF BRITI SH COLU M BIA
V A NCOUVER. BC V6T I ZI
D AVID K OVACS. Euripides Tertia . Leid en/Boston: Brill. 2003 .
Mn cmosyne Supplement 240 . Pp. x + 191. €80.oo. ISBN 90­
04 12977-4.
Thi s is th e third and final volume of Eurip ides prepared by David
Kova cs whil e working on his Loeb edition of th e exta nt pla ys of EUI'ipides.
Th e fir st (1994) included a large se lection of so urces with English
tr an slations for th e life a nd work of Eur ipides (thi s will now se r ve as
helpful compa nion to th e more co mple te collection in R. Kanni cht,
Tta gi corutn Grnccor um Fregmen tu 5. 1 IC otting en 2004139-145), as well
as textual di scussions on passag es in th e pla ys of Loeb Volume I (Cy ­
clop s. A lcestis. Med ea). Eurip ides A ltern (1996) continued with th e pla ys
in Volumes 2- 3 and th e beginning of Volume 4 (Irorn Hcra cleidn c to
Troe desi, We now have t he com pletion of th e series. with cha pte rs on
th e pla ys from lpliigenia Tauricu to lpliigenio A ulide nsis. plu s th e non ­
Eur ip ide an Rhesus. and brief Add enda on mo st of th e ea r-lie r pla ys
(none as it happen s on Hippolytus. A n dr om ache or Elec tra: a larger
number on Tro adcs), The Loeb volumes and Euri pides togeth er are by
now well established as a valua ble resou rce fo r bo th scholars and ge n-

BOOK REVIE WS/ COMPTE'S REN D US 259
of 1347b- 52 assign ed to Electra: Willink had del eted both lines but now
reta ins 1347. CQ 54 b)04 ] 35). Be. 199-203 (dd . Digg le: Kovacs assign s
199- 200 to Cad mus lind suggests 1Iline ha s been lost lit th e start of Tiresills
' re ply) , Rh. 16-18 (del. Diggle: Kovacs with Dindod delet es onl y th e
Chor us's two words). But I doubt th e need to defend Tro . 918 (dd .
Paley: Kovacs would prefe r to eme nd). Plio . 26- 7 (del. Paley. apparently
abse nt from th e scholiasts text-but Kovacs might ha ve mentioned th at
Mastronarde devotes foul ' pllges of his co m me ntary to defending th em ).
Plio . 548 (dd . Schoe ne) . Pho. 757-60 (w hich Kova cs r et ain s despite deleting
th e sur r ounding lines. lind references to Polynic es' burial and Haimons
marr-iage lit 774-8 lind 944- 6. lind eve ry thing aft er 1581).
As for interpolations, Kovacs reinforces th e case against IT 572-5
(SLISP. Dig gle. del. Cr opp). lind agu inst IA 1381- 2 (dd. Wecklein). He 1I1s0
raises se ri o us doubts about H cl. 20- 1 (a mythographic int er -polation).
0 1'.564-7 1 (lin inappropriate rh etorical amplification), lind Or. 704-5.
whi ch he del et es 1I10ng with 702-3 (but not 706-7) as incoh erent in se nse
lind incon sistent with wh at Tyndareu s sllys a bo ut his int entions in th e
r est of his spee ch. In other cases Kovacs see ms too ellge r to "sol ve "
problem s by eliminatin g th e lines that rai se th em . In H cl. 48 1- 2 (dd.
Kovacs) OUXoco v mllY be COiTUpt. but th ere is hardly enoug h r eason to
delete th e lines. Hcl . 497-9 (d d . Bad ha rn . Kovacs) 1I1'e not incompa tible
with wh at preced es, for 490-6 do not den)' th e possibility of alte r native
gods lind pla ces with th e slime nam es: th ey merely sta te 1I pu zzle to
whi ch 497- 9 offer 1I possibl e solution (Kovacs should hav e cons ide re d
Kanni chts com me ntary on 496-5 00 here). Kovacs's r en ew ed a rg ume nt
for del eting 1I11 of Ph 0 , 549-67 see ms to me to a p p ly rather high sta ndard
s of coge ncy lind orthodoxy to [o castas rh etoric (altho ugh on e ca n
lIgree on re moving 563-5 lind 567). Th e del etion of IA 1148- 84 entire ly
(mentioned her-e in 1I discussion of 1185-6: cf. jJ-lS 123 120031 95- 96) gives
lin unsati sfa ctory r esult. Ior in 1I11 other Eur ipidea n cases ElEV C'well .
th en ") is eithe r 1I speakers fir st word or mak es 1I transition from on e
large segme nt of 1I speec h to th e next . as in th e transmitted text here (d.
A le. 299, Mc d. 386. Hipp. 297, Hcc. 3 13, Supp. 1093. I-IF 1358. Tr o·945 ,
998 . Pho . 1(1 5): it can hardly follow th e int roductory couplet 1146-7 .
Kovacs's mo st distin cti ve edito ri al feature is his willingn ess to suppose
th at on e 01 ' more lines hav e been lost from th e tran sm itt ed text lind
to propose s uppleme nts exem p li g ra tia. Man y such suppleme nts lIppellr
in th e text of th e Loe b edition, wh ere (as othe rs hav e not ed ) lin unwllI'y
r ead er mllY overlook Kovacs 's warning in his intr od uction to th e se r ies
(Vol. 1, 38) that th ey 1I1'e " pure ly illu strative." Kovacs is ri ghtl y 1I1eIt to
th e possibility of thi s kind of textu al disruption. lind he mllY be ri ght to
dia gno se it. fOI' exa m ple. within I T 734. before lind lifter J-lel. 1229
(Willinks sugges tion). within rather th an a fte r Bn. 1371. lifter Rh. 467,

260 BOOK REVIEWS/COMPTES RENDUS
and within rather than before Tro. 435. But some of his supplements
ser ve only. I think. to undo the poetic brevity of the original. for example
within Held. 1015, within Tro . 638 (following Seidler and Diggle).
and before HeJ. 714 (following Holzner), Ba. 314 (following Wilamowitz)
, Med. I I, HF 191. Tro. 379. and Tro . 1044. (For the ellip se of the fir st
subject in Tro. 380 see Denniston. GP 166. and for the seque nce TE . .. OE
... ibid. 513.) At Or. 423ff. Kovac s's two-line supplement and adoption of
Willink's awkward adju stment of 424 give unlikely sense: Orestes wa s
not notably quick to obey Apollo's command (423a): Men elau s' comment
that "The god is wi se in keeping clear of blame" (423b) seems gratuitou
s; and a charge of kakia against Apollo (424 as adju sted) is sur p r ising
when Oreste s ha s just explained that Apollo's slow ness in protecting
him is what you mu st exp ect of god s (420).
Textual criticism is often a matter of ten ste ps forward and nin e
steps back, and the value of Kova cs's book will become clear from the
impact it ha s on future editions of the plays of Eur ipides. Many of his
discu ssions are valuable in drawing att ention to que stions of language
and interpretation, even where his conclusion s may not be sound; so I
expect that the impact will be substantial.
The volume is handsomely produced, though regrettably expensive
at some $115.00 Cdn. I noticed only a scatter ing of minor typographical
errors, but the page-header s have become confused in pages 159-1 64
and 174-18 8.
MARTI N CROPP
DEPARTMENTOFGREEKANDROMANSTUDIES
UNIVERSITY OFCALGARY
CALGARY. AS T2N 1N4
PIERR E FROHLICH . Les cites grecques et le controle des lnagistrats
(lv-r r siecle avant ].-C.). Hautes Etudes du monde
greco-romain. 33. Ceneve : Librairie Droz S.A.. 2004. Pp.
634.3 annexes. addenda. 7 cartes.
Le controle de s magistrats dans les cites grecques hellen istiques n'a pa s
fait l'objet d'une histo riographie developpee. La reddition des comptes
et, partant. la r esponsabilite des magistrats occupaient pour-rant un r ole
de premier plan dans les cites et prennent une valeur certaine dans
l'etude des institutions. C est done a I'exarnen syste matique de cett e
que stion a l'epoque hell eni stique que s' est attaque Pierre Frohlich. dans
un e th ese soutenue a Pari s en 1997 et un mernoire depose en 2000 a la
lye section de l' Ecole pratique de s Hautes Etudes. L'auteur p ropose une

BOOK NEVIEWS/ COMP TES NEN D US
a na lyse fine et pa rf aitem en t docurn entce de linsti tut ion et tente (f e n
d istingu er levolurion a u COUI'S des qu at r e siecles envisages dan s son
etude . Les re sulta ts. Ion des en g r a nde pa rt ie sur Ie mat er iel cpigr a p hiqu
e. co nvainquen t aise me nt le lecteur du bien -fonde et du succes de
l'entr epr ise.
Prcciso ns demb lee q ue l'exer cice excl ut a just e tit r e 1

262 BOOK REVIEWs/ COM PTEs REN D US
pr emi er e est consacree a l'in ventai r e des so urces, prea lab le necessair e
aux sy ntheses subse que nte s. Y so nt d'abord etudie s. dan s lordre, les
ma gist r at s controleurs suiva nts : logistai. euthynoi. exetestei. katoptei.
tnestroi. ap ologoi et eklogistai. Pui s so nt rassernbles. en un dernier chap
itr e. « les magist r at s as soc ies ge ne r aleme nt a ceux q ui vienne nt d 'et r e
etudies. mai s pou r lesquels on ne peu t const ituer un dossier. a cause de
la rarete et de la faiblesse de s so urces » : syn egoro i. arch esk opo i. dok im
estere s. titai et . joua nt pa rf ois le ro le de magist r at s controleurs, nom
ophylakes et thesm ophylakes. No us sa urons gre a l'a uteur d 'avoir
introduit chaque partie par de s list es ordonnees et exha us tives des tem
oign ages. qui cons titue nt auta nt de petits « cat alogu es ». for t precieux.
Ces pages mettent en lumier e a la fois les diver-sites institutionnelles et
les par ticula r ites regiona les . Si Athe nes possed e tr ois typ es de magistr
at s controleurs ilogistei. euthynoi et synegoroii et qu e les cxetes tei
so nt representes sur un vas te territoir e (Eolide, Ion ie, Carie. Lesbos .
Chios. Sa mos et Crece balkani qu e), la confederatio n beo tie nne ne
connait par exemple que les ketoptei. les Cyclades que les logistai et les
regions doriennes. en grande major-ire. q ue les tnestro i. Toutes ces ins titut
ion s re leve nt de la collegia lite et ass ume nt des fonct ions qui vo nt de
la surveillance des ma gist r at s et de particuli er s a la gravure de docu ­
ment s ou a la pr opositi on de decrets . O n suivra Fro hlich q ua nd il met
en garde le lecteur contre le danger de confo ndre magist r ats controleu
r s et ges tio nnaires de fond s publics et. plus prudem me nt, qua nd il
conclut que « ces po stes de controle etaient conferes par le tirage au
sort ».
Cest au controle des magistr ats « en cours de charge » . tache aussi
importante que la reddition de co mpte « en fin de charge » , que
s'i nteresse la partie suiva nte . Le propos est origina l et vie nt pa llier les
lacun es des so urces ancienne s et des etude s modern es. Ces pages sont
l'occasion dexami ner l'eventail des op eratio ns et des magistr at s contr
oles. les p r ocedu r es judicia ire s et. aspect int er essant, la par ticipation
citoyenne au controle des magistr at s. D'u ne ana lyse meti cul euse de la
docume nta tion. il re ssort que tous les magistr ats eta ient soumis a un
controle en CO Ul ' S de charge et pouvaient Iaire face. durant leur man dat.
a de s po ursui tes pour man qu em ent a leu r devoir ou pour tout ecart
reli c a l'exer cice de leu r s fonct ions. Dan s plusieurs cas. cette su r veillan
ce et ces poursui tes pou vaient re lever de l'A ssemb lee ou du Co nsei l.
ou mern e de simp les citoyens . so ucieux de la bo nne ges tio n de leu r s
magist r at s et au fa it de pratiques dout eu ses. Ces pages et leur concl usio
n me par aissent significatives de l'orlginalite et de l'in ter et de l'et ude
de Fr-ohlich.
II en va de mem e da ns la troisie rne partie, OU l'auteur exa mi ne le controle
de s magist r ats « en fin de charge » , en dautres mots la reddition

BOOK REVIEWS/ COMP TES REN DUS
de corn ptes . qui para it Iamilicr e it bon nombre d'hist ori en s, mais qu i.
da ns les fait s. dem eu r e mal conn ue et re pose trcs so uve nt SUI' des
so urces dutilisati on cornplexe : lois. dccr et s et SUI'tOut co rn ptes graves.
At hc nes et sa ri che documentati on occupe nt un e bonne part de la discussion.
mais la reddition des co rn ptes cta it presenre dan s l'en semble
des cites helleni stiques. comme l'illu st r e bon nornb re d 'in sct -ipt ion s.
Concerna nt exclus ive me nt l'asp cct fin an cier de l'ac tion des ma gist rat s
et parallele a ux pou rsuites cve nt uelles pou r mal vers ations. l'exercice
cons istai t non pa s it re ndre com pte de la ges tion dan s so n ense mble, de
ses Iaibl esses ou de ses me rit es. mais it ve r ifie r lintcgtitc de sa ges tio n
Iina ncicre . it ev alue r en ce se ns le bien-Iond e de cha q ue op eration pecuniaire,
it r ep erer les dep en ses inutiIes ou supe tI lues ou I'enrichissem enr
illicite.
La derni cre partie donne lieu it un e int er essante ana lyse . qui vise it
dcceler et it mesu r cr les continuites et ruptures a u COUI'S des qu at re
siccles it l'ctude et mcrn e davantage. Se po se ici le pr obl cm e de la discon ­
tinuite et de l'ccart chr ono logi que. parfois prononce. entre les sources.
Pat iemrnent et prudernment s ur to ut. Fr ohlich r ep rend so us cet a utre
ang le la document ati on des chapitres preced ents et montre not amment
qu e les concl us ions it pr op os du contro le des magist r ats en co urs de
charge. des poursu ites jud icia ire s et de la r edd ition de corn ptes en fin de
charge. se maintiennent partout it la haute cpo q ue hellcn istique. Po ur ce
qui es t de la basse cpo que hellcn ist iqu e et une partie de la pcr iod e romain
e. s'il est vrai quelles so nt moin s bien documen tces, elles n'e n illu str
ent pas moin s un e certa ine continuite . du moins en ce qu i regarde
l'existen ce de contro leurs. Chose tr cs no tab le cepe nda nt. la rig ue ur de
linstitution se mble dcc roi t re it ces epoq ues et certaines so urces des II" et
III" siecles de not r e ere te nde nt meme it montre r qu e Ie role des contr
oleurs s'a me n uise alors co ns ide r-ablernent.
Tels sont. dans l'en semble, les points bien mis e n lumi cr e pal ' cet te
etude et qu e reprend la conclus ion ge ne raIe , L'ouvrage constitue sa ns
contest e un apport substa ntiel it notre connaissance des institution s
gl'ecq ues et s'avcre ra dcsorrnais - et sa ns doute pour bien des a nnces
- la refere nce en mat ie re de controle des magistrat s. Ses lim ites sont
so uve nt imposees par un e documentation pau vr e. lacun ai r e ou peu explicite.
La Icconditc de la meth ode re te n ue par l'auteu r est indisc uta ble :
rassembler l'en semble de la doc ume nta tio n. proccd er it un e ana lyse meth
od iqu e de la tei -rnin ol og ie et du contex te . prendre util ern en t . mais
p r ude mme nt. it ce ntre- pie d les et udes des prcd ecesseu rs. opcrer les I'ecoupe
me nts . etc. Ma is elle ne doit pas nou s Iaire perdre de vue la difficulte
de ge nc l'alise l' it l'en sernbl e des cites g l'ecq ues les co ncl us ions
quon peu t en tir er . La disc o nti n uite de la document ation et les cca rts

BOOK REVIEWS/ COMPTES REN DUS
chronologiques. on l'a vu, minent souve nt les efforts en ce sens. sans
compter. les nouvelles decouvertes. toujours sus ceptibles de nuancer le
propos ou de jeter un peu dombre au tabl eau . Mai s tout au lon g de so n
etude. l'auteur s'est montr e con scient de ces difficult es et nul dout e qu e
ses conclusions et ses hypotheses eclaire nt au mieux et en toute pruden
ce cette institution mcconnue.
En terrninant. l'ouvra ge est soigneuse me nt present e. mal gre qu elque
s coquilles. 11 se terrnine par trois annexes et de s addenda. qui traitent
de probleme s particuli er s, puis par de s indices complets et util es.
suivis de quelques car tes. L'ab sence de bibliographie sur p re nd qu elque
peu. mai s le lecteur pourra toujours se rabattre sur la liste de s abrevia ­
tions (p . ix-xii), qui parait exhaustive.
G AETAN T HERIAULT
D EI'ARTEMENT D' HISTOIRE
U NIVERSITE DU Q UEBEC AM ONTREA L
M ONTREA L. PQ H 3 C 3 P8
JOSEPH ROI SMAN. The Rhetoric of Conspiracy in Ancient
Athens. Berkeley/Los Angeles/London: University of California
Pre ss, 2006. Pp. xiv + 199. US $49.95. ISBN 978-0-5 20­
24787- 1.
Th e present study had its origin in r esearches th e aut hor undertook for
his recent book. The Rhetoric of Manhood: Masculinity in the A ttic Or ator
s (Berkeley 2(05). In the proce ss he becam e aw are that th e speec hes
of th e orators ar e rif e with allegations of plots and cons pir acies. indi cat ­
ing the prevalence of what Roisman terms a "cons pir ator ial mind-set "
(xi), It is thi s mind-set he aim s to study through th e rh etoric that art iculat
ed it. Reisman's larger purpose is to shed light on th e Ath enians and
th eir world-view-their values. thought-pattern s. and fears.
In his introduction. Roism an outlines a "rich lexicon of cons p iracy"
(3) drawn upon by spe akers in charging th eir oppo ne nts with pl otting .
collus ion. or behind-the-scen es ma chinations. He also off er s a capacious
definition of cons piracy. exte nding it to pl ot s that are th e wo rk of one
per son r ather th an tw o 0 1' more and th at are not cr iminal in character.
Some might qu ar-rel with thi s definition and suggest th at th e word
"plot " may in man y ins ta nces be mo r e appropriate than con spi r acy. It
see ms far-fet ched . for exa m ple. to apply th e term cons pir ator . as Roisman
do es (11-13), to th e ste p-mo the r in Ant. 1 acc use d of poisoning her
hu sband with th e aid of an unwitting slave . Also in th e introduction Roisman
se ts out his p l'Ogramme: to r eveal "ho w and wh y spe ake rs allege

BOOK REVIEWS/ COM PTE'S REN DUS
conspiracy" and. wh er ever possible , to "test th e va lid ity of the ir allegation
s" (7). To th at end . he di vid es th e latt er int o a number of categories :
homi cid e (ch. I). pr op er ty (ch. 2), legal plot s (ch. 3), polit ical pl ot s w ithin
the polis (chs. 4 and 5), and internationa l conspiracies (chs. 6 a nd 7).
The fir st th r ee chapters are a un ity. ana lyzi ng case s th at are p urely
pr-ivate in natu r e, In eac h instan ce. Reisma n summa riz es th e releva nt
speech . laying bare the allegations of conspiracy or . in so me case s. th e
res po nse to such allega tions. The suits considered includ e Ant. I and 5
and Lysias I (ho mici de). Isaeus 6 and 8. Dern. 30-3 I . Hyp . 3. Oe m. 55.
and a number of maritime cases (property), an d Oe m. 28. Ant. 6. De rn .
39- 40 . 59. and 53 (legal pl ots). The pl ot s alleged are di ver se in character.
oft en presenting a cha llenge to th e mod ern rea de r 's credulity . No net heless.
Roism an believes. th ey appealed to th e cons pi ra tor ial w orl d-view
of the listeners. wh o to ok s uch sche mes for granted . es pecia lly wh en
member s of th e elite were in vol ved . Thro ug ho ut th e discussion . Roisman
highli ghts th e negati ve att ri b utes of plott ers: th ey are sha meless.
tric ky. lying. di sh on est . greedy. and Zor syco pha ntic . It is th e spea ker's
task to un cover and fr ustrate th ei r schemes and . if th e public interest is
invo lved. as it is in later chapters. to wi n gratitude a nd p ra ise for uncovering
a th r eat to th e po lis.
As part of his PUI'pose in these fir st three chapters. Re ism an un der ­
ta kes to validate some of the allega tio ns made by the speakers . FOI' exa
mp le. he atte mp ts to undermine Dernosthe nes' "self-center ed " exp lanation
of the actions of his op po ne nt s. Onetor and Ap hob us. in Dem . 30
by separating w ha t he dee ms "attested fact s" from d ubi ou s forms of
argume nta tion (23) . Apart fro m the inco ncl usive ness (a nd perhaps eve n
futi lity) of tr yin g to decid e in th ese one- sided r hetorical exercises wh o
has " t r ut h " on his side. it seems to me th at thi s co ncern fOI' va lidation
leads to a serious bifu r cation of purpose. Is thi s wo rk a stud y of r hetori
c as a Io rrn of discourse w ith its ow n mod es and implicati on s, of fer ­
ing . as its a uthor cla ims . an insight into Athe nia n socia l rela tions and
valu es. 01 ' is it an attem pt to set t he recor d str aight by seeking th e truth
be hind t he rh et ori c?
The second pa r t of the work. dealing w ith political conspira cies.
holds the answer: it is th e truth behind th e r hetoric that increasi ng ly
interests Roism an . Cha pter 4 begi ns wit h plots in Ari sto pha nes and
Thucydides, conce ntrating on Cleon. w ho is prese nted in both as "a plot
detector and a man ip ulator of con spiratorial sus p icions " (67). Roism a n
believes tha t it wa s Cleon who made this type of r hetoric popular in
At he ns. Further discussio n of the se sources wo uld sure ly have been
Ir-uitful. but inst ea d. af rer a brief disc ussio n. Roisma n retur-ns to the
orators and oligarchic consp ira cies in At he ns. The foca l point of the
chapter is Lysia s 13, elev en pages devo ted to a s umma r y and a na lysis of

266 BOOK REWEWS/ COMPTES RENDUS
the speech. concentrating on the problems with the prosecutor's account.
On the basis of a se r ies of internal diffi culti es. as well as other
sour ces for the events of 40 4. Roisman argu es that th ere wa s no oligarchic
con spiracy . as alleged . before the city' s su r r ender and the ad vent of
th e Thirty. As part of his a rgument he challenges Lysias' account of th e
role of the ex-sla ve. Agoratus , in the plot.
Chs . 6 and 7 focus on Philip of Maced on . beginning with th e jou sting
among Aesc hines , Dernosthe nes. and Isocrates in respect of th e kin g's
design s. Here for th e fir st tim e. Roisman characterizes th e r hetoric used
as belon gin g to th e scho ol of con spi rac y th eory: it pu rports to detect a
"hidde n agenda " and long-term plans on Philip's part to rule Greece
(121). The discussion around Philip culminates in ch . 7. "International
Conspir acies." whi ch is devot ed almost exclusively to the Fourth Sacre d
War. Much like th e analysis of the oligarchic conspir acy in 404 the argume
nt he re is aimed d ir ectly at establishing th e validity of th e rh et ori c
of war. And as in that discussion . th e concern for r he tor ic p er se gives
wa y to an att empt to establish th e facts. The res ults of thi s long and
r ath er tedi ou s argument pro ve inconclusive. how ever. revealing faults
in both Dern osth en es' and Aesc hines ' ver sion.
The concluding cha pter com pa res ancient and modern conspiracy
th eories. Unlike th e latt er. whi ch perceive "hidden hands or age ndas at
work" (156) . the former per sonalize cons pirato rs. Thu s whil e ancient
and modern conspiracies share some commo n featu r es. th e not ion of
conspira cy th eory is for the most pa rt inapplicable to Athe nian r hetor
ic. Roisman him self suggests as mu ch (157-158). In a diff er ent vein . he
also concludes that allega tions of cons piracy aga inst indi vidu als help ed
to explain eve nts th at oth erwise see med "inex plicable and un cont rollable"
and to mak e dan gers man ageabl e ( 158). They thus reaffi rm ed a
faith in th e valu es of socie ty and in the sys te m itself.
In th e end . I wa s not conv inced that th e Athe nians had a conspiratorial
mind- set. th ou gh th ey were suspicious and qui ck to allege plots on
th e part of an oppo ne nt. Such allegations and the negative characteristics
attributed to pl ott ers are sure ly just one as pec t of the ora tors' convention
of painting a negat ive portr ait of an oppo ne nt. Rei sm an has
done well to isolat e th is aspec t of r he torical p ractice. His seco nd pu r ­
pose. to valida te th ese allega tio ns. left th is rea der disappoint ed . As the
work conce ntra ted increasin gly and in later cha pters almos t excl usive ly
on conspiracies p er se and the scholar ship sur rounding th em. my interest
wan ed . Othe rs may react differently.

BOOK REVIEWS/ COMPTES RENDUS
The bo ok is well produced. with few er-rors, an ample bibliog raphy.
and three useful indi ces.
V IRGI NI A H UNTER
D EI'A RTMENT OF HISTORY
Y ORK U NI V ERSITY
T ORONTO . ON M4N 3M6
JASON K ON[ G. Athletics and Literature in the R011Jan £111 ­
pirc. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2005. Pp. xix
+ 398; 12 black-and-white figures. $95.00 CON. ISBN 0-5 21­
83845-2 (hb) .
Thi s schola rl y and stim ulating book ori ginated from a Ph .D. d issertation
at th e University of Ca mbri dge and still has th e erudite feel of a
th esis with cop io us not es. arg ume nts . and co unte r-argume nts. Emphasizing
espec ially literature and epig ra p hy. it fits well into th e Series on
Gree k Culture in the Roman World. whi ch publish es "origina l and inno
vati ve r esearch in th e art. arc hae olog y. epig r aphy. history . philosoph
y. religion and literature of th e Em pire. with an em phas is on Gree k
material." In thi s work. Koni g co mbines his int erest s in th e athletic traditions
of Greece and th e Gree k prose w riters of th e imp eri al period.
He claims with some justi fication th at his book offers exciting int er -pr etations
of Gree k athleti cs fr om th e fir st to thi rd centur ies A.D . and "a
basic und er standing of th e ways in whi ch anci ent athletics was pl'acticed
" (7- 8) . Fro m th e evide nce of numerous inscr iptions wh ere he relies
mu ch on th e pi on eering work of Loui s Robert-he cites almost fifty
art icles of his-K()ni g deduces th at man y of th e ri ch aristo cr at s in
Greece gave th eir main atte ntion to athletic pu r suits rath er th an to literature.
oratory. and philosophy. Throughout th e book. he see ks to expound
tw o major points. nam ely th at th e portrayal of athleti cs in th e
texts ofte n involves th e di scussion of conte mpora i-y culture. and th at th e
epigra phical and lite ra ry so urces. despite th eir ap pa re nt diff eren ces.
usu all y hav e re ma r kable simi larities. He at te mpts to dem on st rat e not
onl y th at th ere are conflicting view s about athletics in th e writings of
th e peri od . bu t also th at eve n th e mo st po siti ve ancie nt sta te me nts co ntain
nu an ces th at necessitat e a close reading of th e text.
Koni g reminds us th at far more literature o n C ree k athle tics has
survived from th e tim e of th e Rom an Empire th an [rom th e Class ical
Gree k period . despite its obvious popularity in th e ea r lier cent ur ies.
Ind eed . athletics. whi ch had grea te l' rel igio us . soc ial. and politi cal associa
tions th an it ha s in th e mod ern world. becam e so fashi on ab le and in-

268 BOOK REVIEWS/ COMPTES RENDUS
gr aine d in the culture of th e second and third centuries AD. that w riters
of the time found it ha rd to ignore and used it to explore wider contemporary
issue s. By th e time of the imperial er a. athletics wa s well
established not onl y in th e Greek east . but also to a lesser extent in the
Roman we st . For th e an cients who wished to compete in the numerous
festivals. athletics wa s a road full of danger. expens e. and reward. with
great fame for the mo st success ful. For some. it became even a nece ssary
accomplishment that could lead to high status in society and to citi ­
zen identity (at lea st for Greek elite mal es). One may observe. however.
that identity is a notoriously difficult thing to define in the Empire .
where it may ref er. for example. to an affinity or bond with traditional
Greek states such as Athens and Sparta. new Greek cities in Asia Minor.
or the Roman elit e. Tho se individuals who cho se not to practice athletics
intensively sometimes criticized its exce sses. or sought a balance betwe
en body and mind.
In the Introduction. Koni g begins with two lon g quotations from th e
time of the Empire that reveal va stl y different approaches to athleti cs.
The fir st is an inscription (lC 14 . 11 02). typical of many. in whi ch the
pancratiast M. Aurelio s Asklepiades boa st s of his numerous athletic
achievements in festi val s around the Mediterranean. The second pa ssage
comes from the ph ysician Galen (Pr otr . 9). who expresses st r ong
cr iticism against th e value of athletics. whi ch he believes to be usele ss.
and vehemently attacks athletic trainers for assuming that their method
s were ba sed on medical training. Koni g uses th ese two citations and
others to set the ton e for his di scu ssion of Greek athletics in th e wider
setting of the ancient world.
In Chapter 2. the author di scu sses the controversial aspects of civic
education in the Greek gymnas ium . ba sing many of his conclusion s on
th e evidence of Lucian's Anarcharsis. Lucian's debate on the relevance
of athletics allowed him to con sider the broader values of Greek tradition
and education. Konig examines the military. ed ucational. ccrernonial,
and other uses of th e gymnas ium . using in part the evidence of th e
famous Beroia inscription (SEC 27.26 1) . which he believes to be r epresentative
of the Gr eek world. He not es with justifi cation th e scarc ity of
sourc es for th e militar y asp ects of the gymnasium. which he suggests in
th e Imperial period wa s rather an elite institution for the wealthy to
advance th eir social status. Da vid Pritcha rd in Sport and Festiva l in tile
A ncien t Cr eek World (Swa nsea 20(3) 293-349. whi ch wa s probabl y publish
ed too late for Koni g to mention. r each ed a similar conclusion for
th e gy mnasiu m in Classical Athe ns .
In Cha pter 3. Koni g moves fr om th e civ ic setting to th e athletic fes tival
and discu sses th e beauty and vir t ue of outstanding athletes suc h as
th e tall and hand some Melankornas describ ed in th e or ations of Dio

BOOK REVIEWS/ COJV1PTES REN DUS
Chrysos to m (28 and 29). He ob serves th at Dio and several othe r int ellectu
als both praised and cr-iticize d th e ph ysical and moral va lue s of athlet
es and used th e mod el of athle tics-which sever al writers employed
as a metapho r for nrctc-i- tc. di scuss th e problems of combini ng a phi ­
losophical lifest yle with th e pract icaliti es of civic life. In addi tion to th e
moralizin g texts. Koni g look s at th e ten sion between r ealism and idealism
in th e stat ues of at hle te s and th e large a mo unt of inscription al evi ­
den ce th at p ra ises th eir moral cha rac ter as well as th ei r victo r ies.
In Chapter 4, th e a utho r exa mines aspec ts of th e majo r athlet ic festi ­
vals th at provided contin uity between pa st a nd present. di scussin g especiall
y the Oly mp ic Ga mes, th e ob servations of Pau sanias on Oly m pia .
and Panhellenisrn. He ob serves th at Pau sania s com me nts on th e Panhelleni
c nature of th e inscriptions and statues in th e A ltis at Olympia and
on th e incompleten ess and lack of remains Irom th e Gree k pa st. Mo r eo ­
vel'. he not es th at Pau san ias co nside re d O ly mpia (ra the r than Athe ns) to
be th e centre of th e C ree k world. just as he placed O lympia (Elis) in a
centra l po sition in his Guide book (Books 5 a nd 6). In thi s cha pter. Koni g
need s to distingui sh closely bet ween Panhelleni c elements at O ly m pia
(such as th e treasuries a nd tlicor oii . a nd th e dominance ove r th e Sanetu
ary and Ga mes of th e city of Elis . whi ch ofte n tr eat ed Oly mp ia as if it
wer e its ow n (almost as a local. ra the r th an a nati on al. fest ival) : see A th­
Ictika 53- 64 (belo w) . The dista nce fro m Elis to O lym pia by th e ancient
roa d . incidentall y. wa s pro ba bly closer to thirty-five miles (abo ut fift ysix
kilom et r es) than th e mod ern twent y- five ( 18 1)-

BOOK REVIEWS/ COMPTES RENDUS
doctors and trainers in Greek athletics and their occa sional close cooperation.
using th e literary evide nce of Galen's Protrcpticus and Philostratus'
Gymnasticu s. He believes that Galen's discu ssion of athletics
involves the problem of rivalry among physicians and the extent to
which the obsession with bodily care can be reconciled with moderation
. Philo stratus examines the role of the athletic trainer and elevates
his po sition to a higher status as representative of Hellenism. Like
Lucian. Philo stratu s com me nts on the significance of athletics for Gr eek
culture and identity.
Koni g's book also contain s a brief conclusion. useful indic es of ancient
text s. inscriptions. and papyri. and a full Bibliography. I should
modestly add that the fourteen articles of mine that he cites (and se ver al
others) now appear together in Athlctike: Studies on the Olympic
Game s and Greek A thletics (Hildesheim 2004).
In Chapters 2. 4. and 5 espe cially . Koni g overl aps with the work of
Zah ra Ne wby . Gree k A thletics in the Roman World. Victory and Virtue
(Oxford 20(5), published at approximately th e same time. Both authors
apparentl y read th e drafts of each oth er's text s. Both discu ss the eviden
ce of Lucian. Dio Chrysostorn. Pau sanias, and Philo stratus. In regard
to Pau sanias and his belief in the centrality of Olympia in Gre ece .
both owe a debt to the writings of [a s Elsner (one of the editors of the
Seri es). who exa mined the the sis of Konig and super vised that of
Newb y. Koni g. howeve r. con centrates mo re on th e inscription s. and
Newby on th e visual evid enc e: henc e Koni g ha s a mere twelve blackand
-white figures. Ne wby eighty-five halftones and ten color illu stration
s.
Thi s int er esting book is aim ed at th e scholar r ath er than th e gene ral
reader and ha s mu ch more to offer than many of the other works published
around th e time of the Olympic Games in Ath en s. It is probably
too spe cialized for st udents to use as a textbook since it tak es for
granted a close acquaintance with Greek athletics. Whether one agrees
with all his conclusion s or not. Konig is extre mely success ful in reminding
those study ing Gre ek athletic s not to take literary pa ssages out of
cont ext . but view th em with all th eir nuances within th e framew ork of
th e whole. It is indi sp en sabl e for tho se who wish to explore the intricacies
of Greek athletics in the Roman Imp erial period and in a wa y
makes a nice counterbalance to th e equally success ful work of Newb y.
NIGEL B. C ROWT HER
C LASSICA L STUDI ES /
INTERN A TIO N A L CENTRE FOR O LYM PIC STUD IES
U NI V ERSITY OF W ESTER O NTARI O
L ON DON. O N N6A 3 K7

BOOK REVIE WS/ COMPTE') REN D US
P.). H ESLIN. The Trans vestite A chilles: Gender and Genre in
Stath is' Achilleid. Cambr idge : Cambr idge Univer sity Pr ess.
2005. Pp. xx + 349. US $80.00. ISBN 0-5 2 I -85 145-9.
This w ell -wr-itten , fascinating book doe s not claim to be th e comp re he nsive
book on th e Acliillcid we a re ( 01 ' should be) waiting Ior. In th e fir st
ever Eng lish monograph on th e Acliilleid. Peter Heslin conce ntra tes on
th e ep isode of yo ung Achilles o n Scy r os, th e "d r a ft-dodging cr ossdresser"
(xi-xii). Along th e way. howev er. he offers thoughts on man y
issu es of Latin epic. litera ry patronage. rh etoric, ge l1lie l'. myth and ritual.
and re ception stud ies. This book. togeth er with th e reprint of
O.A. W. Dilkes 1954 com me ntary with a new introduction by Robert
Cowa n (Br istol Phoenix Pr ess 2( 0 5 ). brings Statius' Acliillcid into th e
centre of Latin st udies .
Heslin boldly devotes th e fir st cha pte r to th e story of Achilles on
Scyr os in baroque ope ra. Fans of Sta tius oft en start w ith a few praises
Irorn his medi eval and Ren aissan ce r ead ers in order to justify th eir
wo rk . but Heslin is looking for more than a sta mp of acceptability. He
wants us to use r ecep tion as a g uide to r eading th e old texts bett e!'. a nd
in the co urse of th e book he retu rn s often to reception. es pec ially Sta ­
tius' r eading of Ov id . Vugil, Ca ru llus. and Horn er. Baroque op el 'a
pr oves to be full of lib r etti a bo ut Achilles on Scy r os . A wom an 01 ' a cas ­
trato wa s ideall y suited to sing th e r ole of a tra ns ves tite Achilles. a nd
the plot offer ed man y co mic po ssibilities as well as ser-ious comme ntary
on th e nature of kin gs. heroes. men . and women. Eig ht pages on th e
Hab sburg succession (32-39) may be excess ive . but Heslin has crea ted a
valuable r esource Ior future scholars and he ge ne ra lly succee ds in his
pUI-pose of show ing how th e librett ist s used th e story of Achill es on
Scyr os to co m me nt on ge nde l' a nd heroism as innate 01 ' lear ned.
In cha pte r 2 Heslin convincing ly a l'gues for reading th e extant Acliillcid
as "a vel'y well-b alanced narrative " (63 ) a nd "a down-pa ym ent
against future patronage " (66) . His po sition is a welcome cha nge Irorn
th e tr aditional ob servation s on an unfinish ed Ir agm ent . Heslin re fra ins
Irorn spec ulative rec ons tructio ns and e mp has izes instead th e man y
ways Sta tius teases th e read er s of thi s fir st part into demanding th e rest
of th e poem . Sta tius cla ims in th e pl'oem th at he will write th e whole
story a bout Achilles. fro m birth to death . Heslin is eas ily able to sho w
how thi s provocati ve anno unce me nt "tur ns out to be a bluff" and by
a lluding to th e proem of th e Me tam orphoses signa ls th e Ovidian nature
of th e Acliillcid rather tha n ign oran ce of Ar isto tle (8 2) . Sta tius is also
not afra id to give us a song by Achilles whi ch is "an ae tiology for Hellenisti
c poeti cs that he has boldl y impor ted into th e world of th e Iliad"
(93) ·

272 BOOK REVI EWs/COMPTEs RENDUS
Thetis and Deidamia are the principal figures of chapter 3. Both
women work hard at acting like women. th e human being quite a bit
more success fully than the goddess. since feminine pa ssivity and suffe ring
are in gener al eas ier for humans than for gods. As one might expect
in a poem. the success and failure of the characters may be mea sured by
how well they allude to characters in earlier poems. At the beginning of
the A cliillcid Thetis asks Neptune for a stor m to wreck Paris' fleet: she
would like to combine th e motherly conc ern of Virgil's Venu s for
Aeneas with the vengeful fury of his Juno (109). Unfortunately Thetis
(unlike Statius) doe s not control her sour ces well. and Neptune is able to
use Catullus to refuse her elegantly (11 3) . Theti s also tries to talk like a
man. using Roman male rhetorical tropes and barking out commands.
and comically fails . as a woman should (133-134: see also Joseph Farrell
on the gender of Latin in his Latin Language and Latin Culture [Cambridge
20 0 r] 52-83). Deidamia. on the oth er hand. find s the appropriate
literary models: "her invocation of th e urbanity of Catullus and the
epi stolary mod e of Ovid's heroines lend s a certain knowingness to her
adoption of thi s literary role [of Ariadne] " ( 144).
Given the self-consc ious effo rt required to pla y th e part of one 's own
biological sex. it is not sur pr ising that Achill es' mal ene ss will be exposed
. What is sur p ris ing is how long it tak es for that to happen. Yet
even before Achilles dresses as a girl. he is not an ordinary human bo y.
In chapter 4 He slin exa mines Achilles the "semivir. scmiter. semide us"
(157 ). The son of a goddess. Achilles is mo st con sciou s of being almost
the son of Jupiter-Peleu s "does not even figure in his son's account of
his ancestry" (166) . Heslin doe s not explore the parallel with Aeneas.
who as son of Venu s could have been the son of either Vulcan or Mars
instead of the son of th e human Anchises. Only a non-Virgilian Aeneas
could ignore Anchises. but th ere are many plac es where Heslin shows
that Statius was drawing on multiple traditions. and que stions about his
parentage would suit a comic Aeneas. As Heslin points out lat er. th e
young Achill es is very like the Homeric Telernachus in his uncertainty
about his ab sent fath er (293- 294) . Becau se Achilles is neither full y di vine
nor full y human. he has the heroic tendency to be confused with th e
beasts: Chir on even rai ses Achilles on raw meat . including the marrow
of a half-alive wolf. Heslin notes. in one of man y good observations on
Statius' other poems. that the g r uesome cannibalism which costs Tydeus
the gift of immortality in the Thebeid ha s become "comedy" and part of
a proud child 's training in bein g a hero ( 175) .
The bestial Chiro n may be rai sing an animal. but at least he is rai sing
a fighter and a poet such as we know Achilles sho uld be when he gr ows
up . The draft-dodging and cross-dressing are ap parently the fault of his
biological parents. although He slin doe s not spe ll out wh ether it is a

HOOK REVIEWs/ COMP Tt-S REN D US
problem of nurture 01 ' nature: pOOl' parenting skills or heredit a ry problem
s with normal gend el' roles. Peleu s is ab sent in Sta tius version, contrary
to tradition (170 -1 73) . Th eti s alt ernately negle cts and coddles him
to little good eff ect: " Neglecting to immerse the point of th e heel
wh ereb y she held her bab y is not ve ry cleve r. and it is of a piece with
her ge ne ral lack of com pe te nce in th e Acliillcid" ( I (9). The sentime nta l
famil y portrait s that are a feature of th e Silvnc are largel y abse nt Irom
th e A chilleid. Even Deida mias lath er Lycom ed es is ind ecentl y eage l' to
displa y his daughter s to mal e visitors (149 , 155). In his int roduction Heslin
call s th e Achillcid "lig ht-hearted" (xv iii), but as with Ov id 's lighthearted
verse. th ere is more than a little cruelty here.
In cha pte r 5 Heslin attempts to establish th e histo ry of Achilles '
cr oss- dressing on Scyr os , He argu es that th e story of Achille s sac king
Scyr os and th en marrying Deid ami a is th e onl y archai c ve rs ion and that
th e Scy r ians ca me up with a version to protect th eir national pr-ide
whi ch becam e more widely known through th e Athe nian conq ues t of
Scyr os ca . 476 -463 BC (199-2oI). Heslin is ve ry sce p tical of th e traditional
theory th at th e myth presel'ves th e memory of an old initi ation
ritual (207). In an exte nde d detour th rough African ethnology , Heslin
r evi ew s th e mod ern evide nce used by comparativists to r econ struct
Gree k practice and find s it highly un satisfa ctory. He not es that transvesti
sm in coming-of-age rituals is more oft en found in th e old er mal e
g uide who do es a "co mic burlesqu e " of women: "the transvesti sm of
pubescent or prepubescent bo ys ca r-r ies th e danger th at it might succeed
all too well. thus deli vering th e wrong message about th e incom ­
men surability of th e sexes" (230). Heslin in verts th e usual seq ue nce
from an cient ritual to mod ern myth a nd gives a detailed reading of Sta ­
tiu s' use of th e lan gu age of conte mporary mystery cult initi ation to descr
ibe Achilles ' tran svesti sm (23 1- 236).
Cha pte r 6 begins with Statius ' "p hallic humor" in th e imagery of th e
feminine th yr su s and drum and th e ma sculine speal' and shield (240 ). As
in cha pte r 5, Heslin thinks it mo re likel y that Statius is making references
to conte mporary practice th an r ecalling historical eve nts . He arg
ues th at Sta tius "offers a r evision of Pentheu s' tr an svestism in th e Hacclute
th at serves as a n alternat ive ae tiology Ior male particip ation in th e
myst eri es of Bacchu s at Rom e " (243) . Pentheu s is vicio usly punish ed Ior
spying on women 's myst eri es, but Achilles eme l'ges triurnphantly Irom
his tim e among women eve n though ( 01 ' becau se) he danced badl y and
raped his best fri end. As Heslin not es, an odd feature of Sta tius' Achill es
is that he is still a cr oss- d resser wh en Ne optolemus is bor-n nin e months
afte r th e unv eilin g of th e phallus (269) . Ulysses' tri ck with th e weapons
of met al is what reveals Achilles as a man , By contrast. Ov id's Achilles
in th e A I'S A matorin throws off his disgu ise instantly wh en he r ap es

274
BOOK REVIEWS/ COMPTES RENDUS
Deidamia (268). Sta tius see ms to be presenting th e case for culture as th e
creator of gender. but He slin points out that Ulysses doe s not just present
Achilles with weapons. He "fills the symbolic pla ce of th e fath er for
Achill es" (292) and he also whi sp er s in Achilles' ear that he should do
things to make his father Peleu s glad (294).
Achilles rapes Deida mia at a festival of Bacchu s. In th e last cha pter
Heslin int erpret s Achilles' displa y of his biological sex in th e light of
Lacan 's discussion of th e cultic unv eilin g of th e ph allu s in th e basket "as
not only a symbol of male pot en cy . but also of its oppo site: a symbol of
cast r ati on . and of the possibility of detaching masculinity fr om th e
man" (278). Afte r' Heslin 's detailed cr itique of th e myth and ritual
schoo l in his discussion of Achilles ' transv esti sm and initiation rituals. it
is somewhat surpr ising that Heslin does not venture cr iticis m of either
Lacan or Freud. Heslin evidently prefers Lacan 's non-biological constr
uction of th e gender-ne utra l ph allu s to Freud 's mor e limit ed peni s.
but as he him self admits. the ra pe is success ful in the se nse that a child is
conce ived . and fur thermore Achilles is the biological son of a her o wh o
raped a go dde ss (275).
In the end . Heslin sits on th e fen ce. 0 1' has Sta tius sit on the fen ce. betw
een nu rture and nature (294-2 95). Th e rea de r may feel let down by
th e str aightfor wa rd and dem on strably true claim that ge nde r is pa rtly
biological and partl y cult ur al. It would not be fair . how ever. to cri ticize
Heslin for th e ban ality of th e human condition. We have learned much
mor e th an we knew before we star ted. not only ab out baroqu e ope ra
and Afr ican ethno logy . but abo ut Latin liter atu r e. Th er e is still mu ch
mor e to re ad in th e A chilleid. bu t thi s book is an esse ntial guide.
REBECCA NAGEL
DEI'ARTMENT OFHISTORYANDCLASSICS
UNIVERSITYOFALBERTA
EDMONTON. AB T6G 2H4
] AC LYN L. M AXWELL. Christianiza tion and Comm unication
in Late A n tiquity: John Clirysostom and his Congregation
in A ntioch. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2006.
Pp . xi + 198. CON $96.00 . ISBN 13: 978-0-521-860 40-6.
Chris tianity and Com m unication in Late A n tiquity is a study of John
Chrysos to m 's ser mons to his congregation in Antioch. It began as a
Princeton Ph .D. th esis written und er th e super vision of Peter Br own.
and its basic pu rpose is "to learn abo ut th e Ch r istianization of late antiqu
e society" (3). As Max we ll mak es clea r in th e Int r odu ction . she has

BOOK REVIEWS/ COMPTES RENDUS
diverse audience. Maxwell uses references in the ser mons to argue convincingly
that it wa s diverse. Thu s she find s evidence for the rich. the
middling classe s. artisan s and workers. slaves and women. Th er e were
also the poor. and Maxwell is careful to show how Chr ysostom adju sted
his definition of "poor " to fit the particular ser mon. However. as Maxwell
shows . the Syriac-sp eaking farmers seldom joined the congregation.
and thi s fact rai ses que stions about Chr ysostom's attitude towards
the urban/rural and Creek/ Syriac cultural and economic divides of late
Roman Antioch which might have been worth pursuing. Were the se
divides less important to Chrysostom than the distinctions of wealth
and class which he str ove to ove rcome?
In chapter 4. Maxwell progresses from th e demographics of
Chrysostorn's congregation to his teaching of them. Here she finds continuity
with the psychagogy or spiri tual guidance popular in th e Second
Sophistic. for Chrysostorn's aims and methods were similar to tho se of
the public philosophers. The bulk of th e chapter is a detailed and perceptive
examination of Chrysostom's con gregation as learners. and his
purposes. expectations and methods. all of which will prompt tho se of
us who teach large. introductory universit y classes to mutter the old
cliche . plus c;a change .. .. Chr ysostorn's injunction to his flock to study
their Bibles at home prompts Maxwell to demonstrate convincingly that
literacy was not the preserve of a male elite. but would have been widespr
ead among the men and women of his diverse congregation. It is not
clear. however. wh y she should find that "the difference between th e
simple Greek of the Gospel s and the Greek of lat e antique writers is
pu zzling" (93). esp eciall y giv en what she has said above about th e com ­
mon people's enjoyment and appreciation of rh etoric. If thi s really is a
problem. then it de serves more than on e superf icial paragraph.
Maxwell discu sses the content of Chrysostom's teaching in chapter 5.
His congregation. although no less Chr istian than he was. did not alway
s agree with him about how the y should live as Christians. and
Chrysostom addressed th e differences in his ser mons. Maxwell points
out that preacher and lait y did not pla ce the same relative moral value
on particular sins and virtues. Chrysostorn. for example. declared that
envy wa s worse than fornication. while th e lait y plac ed a high er value
than he did on attending Church and fasting. Thi s chapter is an inter esting
exposition of late antique popular Chr istianity . and also paints a
revealing picture of Chr ysostoms personal piety.
Chapter 6 is a stor ehouse of information on social history and popular
piety. Here. Maxwell maintains that Chr ys ostorn 's view of th e world
wa s so different from his congregation's that th ere wa s no ba sis of
commonsen se or tradition that could bridge th e ga p between them .
Thu s Chrysostorn tried to change their basic. inh erited beha viou r by

BOOK REVIEWS/COMPTES RENDUS
sion of his eightieth birthday. (A Festschrift had already been presented
on his seventieth birthday: Satura lenx. Festschrift fuel' Werner A .
Krenkel zum 70. Geburtstag. Spudasmata 62 [Olms 1996].) The English
title is somewhat misleading. as several papers do not concern sex or
gender. However. Krenkel himself selected the papers. and all are
worth reading.
English-speaking students of ancient sexuality who know Krenkel
for his work on oral sex-which has served as a major resource for ancient
sexual vocabulary-will be acquainted with his distinctive style of
scholarship. On 233. referring to Suetonius, Krenkel writes: Er breitet
seine Fakten ohne Reflexionen vordem Leser aus und ueberlaesst ilim
ihre ... Deutung. ... aus del' Freude am Detail und am einzelnen Beleg
... mit groesster Akribie alle Steitichen. helle und dunkle. sammelt. sic
in Kacstchen ordnet und stapelt. This could so easily be said of Krenkel
himself that one may be tempted to imagine that he wrote it tongue-incheek.
Of course. it would not be entirely fair. since the pointed reflections
which do occasionally season his smorgasbord of citations can be
perceptive. Krenkel's virtuosity as a philological detective should also
be mentioned: he often finds clues for assessing evidence in other material
far removed from the topic under discussion.
Krenkel seems uninterested in some of the issues discussed in America
after Foucault. although he is aware of them. At times he strikes a
note which some may regard as "essentialist." He defines tribads
straightforwardly as wcibliclie Homosexuellen. and asserts that although
the word "tr ansvestism " is modern. die Sache selbst existed as
"Die Neigung. sich wie das andere Geschlecht zu kleiden" (465. my emphasis).
Sometimes. too. he teases by merely alluding to a controversy.
Thus. after presenting extensive evidence on women's use of dildos followed
by a complete translation of Herondas 6. he cautions fleetingly
that males' fantasies might colour such reports (446). Krenkel does reveal
a modern orientation. but it is informed by medicine and psychology
rather than philosophy. and he likes to highlight parallels. rather
than differences. between ancient and modern sexuality. To this end. he
often cites modern authorities. particularly Kinsey. and the parallels
shown are intriguing. (Kinsey's remarks usually comprise footnotes.
which merit the reader's attention.)
In response to the comparison with Suetonius, Krenkel might cite his
own view of the ancillary role of philology: Del' Philologe kann neue
Fregen an die alten Texte hcrentregen. Manchmal geben sic Antwort.
manchmalnicht. Er hat zu semmeln. zu sichten und zu ucbcrsctzen. Er
kann hottcn, dass durch seine Arbeit moderne Untersuchungen del'
Soziologie. Psychologic. Medizin und anderer Disziplincn-s-vielleicht-»um
den Bereich del' Antike crwcitcrt werden ... diese Form del' Auf-

BOOK REVIEWS/ COMP TES REN DUS
bcreitung crlcichtcrt-s-hottc ntlich-s-dic Bcnutz ung des Materials bci
klecrcttdcn modctncn Fo rs chun gen (135). Thi s mod est dedi cation has
yielded s u mptuous fruit. fr om which a banquet is se r ved in th e p resent
volu me : ex ha us tive source material on th e subjects treated . helpful list s
of spec ial terminology. and int ri guing details on everything Irorn abortif
acients to obscene ly sha pe d bread .
Th e fea st is not laid out for conveni ent sa m pling . There is no obvious
principl e determining wh eth er Kr enkel quotes his texts in th e orig inal
lan gu age. Eve n so me texts whi ch in vol ve lin gui stic d iffi culties 01 ' controversy

2S0 BOOK REVIEWSjCOMPTES REND US
5. Zur Biogrepliic des LuciJius (19 72): Another misleading title : the en ­
tire paper is concerned exclu sively with determining the year of Lucilius'
birth, which Kr enkel fixe s at 180 Be.
6. Hypcrthertnie in Ancient Rome (1975): The fashion for overheated
baths may have led to reduced fertility as well as to an effeminate rhetorical
trend in th e ea rl y Roman Empire.
7. Curs ore s meiores minorcsquc ( 1976 , in English): On foot-races.
8. Exhibitionism us in del' A ntike and 9. Skop op hilic in del' Antikc. on
exhibitionism and voyeurism re spectively. were originally published
together in 1977. Th e topics are broadly defined to include graffiti. mi rrored
sex chambers etc. Material is collected from poetry. myth. statuary.
and letters. Some texts are quoted at length. mo stly in Cerrnan.
ro. Del' Sexualtrieb: seine Bewertung in Griechenland und Rom (19 78) :
Misleading title. Not only sexual plea sure. but plea sure in general. and
the attitudes of philosophers toward it are sur veyed. A more spe cific
study of er os mi ght have avoided the inclusion of familiar standar d material.
Misinterpretations (e.g. of Epicureanism) by hostil e critics (e.g.
Christians). Sen eca 's ranting. inscriptions. comedy. and poems fr om the
Latin Anthology all seem to be quoted un critically: but Krenkel's aim is
not an accurate reconstruction of philosophers' doctrines so much as a
survey of their popular image and of public opinion. Taken thi s way. it
is an original and valuable paper.
I I. Masturbation in del' An tike ( 197 9): "Mas tur bation " includes dild os.
Herondas' sixth sketch is quoted in full (in Ger man) and 17 illu strations
are described.
12. FeJJatio and lrrutnetio ( 1980 ): Greek terminology is coll ected on 207
and Latin on 208 . In regard to the frequent references to oral se x. e.g. in
Martial. Krenkel quotes Kinsey: "It is difficult to know whether such
representations r ecord th e usual. or whether th ey record th e unusual
and th erefore the repressed desires of a culture ." Th e ess ay concludes
with a useful se ries of inscription s.
13. Sex und politische Biogrephie (1980): Kr enkel traces the Roman obsess
ion with sex ual political scandal from th e Republic to Elag abalus .
but chiefly in th e Historie A ug usta. He find s a gra de d scale of disapprobation
from near approval for heterosexual fornication to str ong
disapproval for fellatio and prostitution. Krenkel r eturns to thi s subject
in paper 2 I: and papers 17 and 22 al so con cern Roman politics.
14. Tonguin g (198 1): Thi s paper conc erns oral sex ge ne r ally and cunnilingu
s. but also bestiality . and social asp ect s: e.g. since a cunnilinctor
"ser ved " th e fem ale. thi s act wa s associat ed with gold- digge rs (leg acyhunters).
There ar e len gthy quotations in Eng lish and a list of inscrip-

tion s (298) .
BOOK REVIE WS/ COMPTES REN DUS
15. Libido im Gricchisclien und Latcinisc hc n (198 2): This pap er focuses
chiefly on th e terminology. fir st Gree k a nd th en Latin.
16. Me tua forma cepit ( 1984. in German): The titl e is O vid ia n, th e s ubject
th e role of sight in ar ousa l. Krenke! stresses th e importance of visual
stim ulus for the an cient s. and th e fact that th e evidence att est s an
exclus ively mal e point of view. Althoug h no mention is mad e of "the
gaze." enthus iasts of thi s mod ern concep t ma y be int erested in thi s paper
. Afte r tr eating th e aesthetic principles. Krenkel examines art. cosmeti
cs. pla sti c sur ge ry. false teeth. wig s. hail ' styles and dy e. and depilation.
A di scussion of br ea st terminology on 35 2 and on e for the buttocks
on 360 are not in th e ind ex.
17. Oiticium procreandi-die crs tc Buergcrptlicht ( 1988): Althoug h Au ­
g ustus' marriage law s were inv asiv e and off en siv e to Roman famil y
valu es. legal ste ps to promote population growth exte nde d from 13 1 Be
to lat er empe r ors . Kr enke! link s th e declining citize n populations to
Rom e's incessant warfare. citing ev ide nce th at eve n th e child welfare
pl'ograms of Ne r va and Tiaj an were aim ed at breeding manpower for
th e milit ary.
18. Pueri incritorii Rom ani (1987. in Ge r ma n): These wer e mal e prostitut
es. Krenke! shows th at in spite of legal r estrictions. man y fr eeb orn
boys accepted loss of th eir privileges to becom e prostitutes. He ca n not
imagin e th eir moti ves. but suggests financial necessit y. (It do es not occur
to him that so me ma y hav e en joye d it. )
19. Trib nden (1989): As usu al. the an cient ev ide nce is thoroughl y
scanned without di scussin g mod ern cont r oversies vel 'y deepl y. Th ere
are tentative suggestions that Sa pphos female sex ua lity may hav e been
limit ed to kisses and embr aces a nd that th e evide nce on dildos may invol
ve male fantasies. Krenke! do es. howev er. beli ev e that women 's religious
fest ivals involved sex .
2 0 . Transvcstism us in del' A ntike (199 0 ): Becau se he believ es th at psychology
has not ye t resol ved th e roots of tran svesti sm. Krenke! aims
only to collect th e evide nce . How ever . he do es offer so me so und ge ne l'aliza
tions . A mix of ge nde r fea tu res wa s ex pe r ienced as sex ua lly attractiv
e. Male tr an svestit es were associated with pnthici. Topics include tyrants'
affa irs. Ne ro a nd SpOI'US. Elaga ba lus, a nd th e customary rant
Irorn Seneca.
2 I . Sex ual A llegn tions for Political Ends (1990): Acc us ing opponents of
sex during th eir yo uth was as co m mon in Rom an politics as kissin g babies
in Ame r ica . Kr enke] had a sus ta ined int ere st in th e s ubject. and thi s
lat e paper is a masterly di scussion Ir orn a ripen ed cy nical persp ecti ve.

BOOK REVIEWS /COMPTES RENDUS
Krenkel reveals Cicero's politically motivated reversal s and cite s Quintilian's
comment that th e goal of rhetoric is to win , not to secure a clear
con science.
22. Caesar und del' Mimus des Lebcrius ( 1994): Offended by a mime
composed by Laberius. Caesar compelled the author to ri sk his equestrian
status by going on stage. Krenkel inv esti gates the fragment s to
identify the offense. The mime title Lescrpicierius suggests Caesar's
theft of silpliium from the treasury.
23 . Varro: Mcnippcisclic Satiren (2 ()()O): Misleading title. Thi s is not
about Varr-o's satires. Rath er it is a ser ies of brief investigations taking
fragments from Varr-o as their points of departure and leading sometim
es to textual emendations, but always to miscellaneous unrelated
topics. Each investigation is a philological tour de force with a s ur p rising
conclusion . The paper is an exhibition of Krenkel's virtuosity as a
sor t of philological Sherlock Holmes.
For such a dense. multilingual text. there are few typographical errors.
The y are more frequent in the English papers.
JAMESJOI' E
685 COO PER STREET
O TTA WA, ON KIR 5J3
www.jamesjop e.ca

BELLA SCHIAVA
Ne r a si. rna se' bella . 0 di Na tura
Fr a le bell e d'Amor leg giadro mo stro.
Fosca e l'alb a appo te: perde e s'oscur a
Pr esso l'eb eno tuo l'avorio e 1'0Stl'O.
O r qu ando . 01 ' dove il mondo a ntico 0 il nostro
Vide si viva mai . se nti Sl pura
o luc e uscir di ten ebroso in chiostro.
o di spe nto car bon na sce re arsura?
Se rv o di chi m' e se rv a. ecco ch'a vo lto
Porto di bruno laccio il core intorno.
C he pel ' ca nd ida man non Iia m a i sciolto.
La 've pi ll ardi, 0 Sol. sol per tu o sco r no
Un so le e nato: un Sol. che nel bel volto
POI'ta la notte ed ha negli occhi il g ior no.
GIAM BATT ISTA M AR l 0
Fusca. in forrnosis Pu eri formosa pu elli s.
glor-ia naturae. prodigiumque nit en s .
ist o nempe ebeno solis nunc vincitur o rt us.
purpura nunc lan gu et. nunc heb et aru r eb ur .
di c ubi. di c qu ando portentum tempore prisco
tantum vel no st ro tempore contige r it:
lumina pura micant (0 qui sn a m talia vidit").
ex atra rne nto lumina pUl'a mi cant:
nec pl 'un ae flagrant (0 qui sn a m tali a sens it").
sed ra men ex prunis viv ida Ila rn ma ve nit.
en farnula e fa m ulus porto s ub pecto r e Iu rvum
nodum qu em numquam ca nd ida dextra secet .
sol novus es t natu s qu a Sol mpidissimus a r de t .
so lq ue no v us Solem (p r o pudor') exs upe rat,
in specie pul chra mir acul a tali a p r aeb en s:
nox nigrat in fac ie. lu x nit et ex (Kuli s.
P. M URGATRO YD
M cMASTEl, U NIVERSITY
H AMI LTO N . ON L8S 4 M 2

MORE EPIT APH S
Her e dead we lie because we did not choo se
To live and sha me the land from whi ch we spr ung.
Life. to be sure . is nothing much to lose:
But young men think it is. and we were young.
A.E. H OUSM A N
Hic nostra ossa iacent quod erat nobi s superesse
et patriarn nostram dedecorare nefa s.
vitae iactura est certe leve, sed leve nulli
esse putant iuvenes. et iuvenes fuimus.
Life is a jest . and all things show it .
I thought so once. but now I know it.
JOH N G A Y
Esse iocum vitam nec non hoc cuncta probare
credebarn quondam: nunc mihi facta fide s.
Here lies the bod y of Sir John Gui se.
Nobody laughs and nobody cries.
Where his soul is. and how it fares.
Nobody knows and nobody cares.
A NO NYMOUS
Nec flen s nee rid ens. nemo scit. nemo laborat
vel quid agat vel quo fugerit umbra mea.
Thu s youth. and ag e. and all things pa ss awa y.
Thy turn is now. as his wa s yesterday:
Tomorrow shall another take th y room.
The next da y he a prey for worms become:
And on your du sty bon es shall others tr ead.
As now you walk and trample on th e dead .
Till neither sign or memory appear.
That you had ever birth or being here.
A NON YM OUS

Eheu. sic senium t r an sit tr an sirqu e iu ven tu s:
hie peri it nuper : tu q uo q ue nempe per is.
omnia sic fugiunt: succedet er as tibi quida m .
conti nuo sed erit ve rmibus ip se cib us.
tu nunc sub pedibus p utrefacta cadavera calcas ,
insistent cinerern mox aliiq ue tuum:
non erit indicium tandem vel te esse crea t urn
vel vixisse umquam: non eri t indicium.
I'm Smith of Stoke . aged sixty-odd .
I've lived without a dam e
From yo uth-time on: and w ould to God
My dad had don e th e sa me.
T HOM AS H AR DY
Longa m per vita m vixi sine coniuge cae lebs.
di , cur non cae lebs noster erat ge nitor?
EPITA PH OF T HO MAS A LL EYN AND H ISTwo WIVES
Dea th her e adva ntage hath of life, I spye:
One hu sband with tw o w ive s at once may lie.
Hic mihi ve l melior vita mors esse vide tur :
cum ge minis un a coniugibus iaceo .
Her e lies my poor w ife. mu ch lam ented.
She is happy and ( am conte nted .
A NONYM OUS, ON A SH REW
Hie mea nupta iace t. multo defleta do lore.
de nique non tri sti s: nunc nequ e tristi s ego .
He re lies o ne w ho lived Ior ot hers:
Now she has peace. And so ha ve th ey.
EREc rE D BY HER SORROW I IG BROTH ERS FOR M ARTH A CLAY

286
Quae iacet hie quondam curabat res aliorum:
nunc illique quies, nunc alii sque quie s.
Good people as you pa ss by
1pray you on me cast an eye
For as you are so once wa s I
And as 1am so must you be
Therefore prepare to follow me .
EPITAPH O F JO SEPH D AIN
Quod vos esti s er arn: quod sum vos esse nece sse est:
me spectate . precor. meque parate sequi.
P. M URGATROYD
M cMASTER U N IVERSITY
H AMILTO N. ON L8S 4M2
API S
Un 'ape esser vorrci
Un 'ape ess er vOITeL
Donna bella e crudele,
Che sus ur r ando in voi suggesse il mele
E. non potendo il cor. potesse alm eno
Pun gervi '1bianco seno
E 'n SIdolce fer -ita
Vendicata Iasciar la propria vita .
T O RQ UATO T ASSO
o api s ess e velim volitans et len e sus urrans:
tum tua mella bibam, candida Leuconoe.
pro cor de et pungam tua pectora. dura pu ella :
dulci ultu s vitam vulnere proiciam.
P. MURGATROYD
M cMASTER U NIVERSITY
H AMI LTO N. ON L8S 4M2

MOUSEION
Index to Volume Ll - Series III. Vol. 7. 2007
A RTICLES
Martin Beckmann. The Meaning ot' Pon s in the Inscription ot'
Adrnstus (CIL 6.1585) 123
ROI'y B. Ega n. The Prophecies olCnlcluis in th e A ulis Narrative ol
Aeschylus' Agamemnon 179
Alison M . Keith. Imperial Building Project s and Architectural
Ecp hrns cs in Ovid's Metamorphoses and Sta tius ' Theba id
Wade Richardson. Petroniann 27
David W. Rupp. The fieldwork ot' the Canadian Institute in
Gre ece. 2006 13 I
Janice Siege l. The Coens ' D Brothel'. Where Art T ho u? and Homer' s
Od ysse y 2 13
Carola and Ala stair S ma ll. Archaeological field Sur vey at San
Felice in Apulia
BOOK REVIEWSj COMPTt-S RENDUS
Gabor Bete gh. The De rvcni Papyrus. Cosm ology. Theolo gy and
lntctprctntion (Penelope Ska rs o uli) 77
Kath er-ine Blouin. Le Contlit judco-Alcxandrin de 38 - 4 1: L 'idcntitc
juive

IN DEX TO VOLUME L1- SERIES III. VOL. 7 . 2007 288
M. Finkelberg. Gree ks and Pre-Greeks. Aegean Prehistory end
Greek Heroic Tradition (Reyes Bertolin Ce br ian) 247
Pierre Fro hlich. Les cites grec ques et Ie contro le des m agistrats
(IV'-r r siecle avantf.-c.) (Caetan Th eri ault) 260
Justina Gregory. ed .. A Companion to Gree k Trage dy
(C.W . Ma r sha ll) 253
Wa ldemar Heckel. Who's Wh o in the Age ofA lexander the Grea t:
Prosopograp hy of A lexander 's Em pire (Carol Th omas) 53
P.J. He slin . The Transvestit e Achilles: Gender and Genre in Stetius'
Achilleid (Rebecca Na gel) 27 I
Simo n Kea y . Ma rtin Mill ett . Lidia Paroli, and Kri stian Strutt,
Portus. An A rchae ological Sur vey of the Port of Imperial
Rom e (John Pet er Oleson ) 164
Jason Koni g. A thletics and Literature in the Rom an Emp ire
(Nige l B. Crowther) 267
David Kova cs. Euripides Tertia (Mar tin Cropp) 257
Werner Kr enkel, Na turalia non turpis. Sex and Gen der in
A ncien t Greece and Rom e. Schritte n z ur antikc n Kultur- und
Sex ualwissenscha ft(Ja me s [op e) 277
Mary R. Lefk ow itz and Ma ureen B. Fant. Wome n 's Life in Greece
and Rom e: A So urce Book in Translation (Lisa A. Hu gh es) 64
Arno ld A. Lelis. William A. Percy. and Beert C. Verstraete . The Age
ofMarriage in A ncient Rom e (Judi th Eva ns-G r ubbs) 67
Bru ce Louden . The Iliad . Str ucture . My th. and Meaning (Jonathan
Bur gess) 250
Iaclyn L. Ma xw ell. Christienization and Comm unication in Late
A ntiquity :John Clirysostom and hi s Cong regation in An tioch
(David F. Buck) 274
Lauren Hackworth Peter sen. The Freedm an in Roman A r t and
Art HistOIy (Gu y P.R. Metraux) 160
Dav id S. Pott er. The Rom an Emp ire at Bay: A.D. 180-395
(T.G. Elliott) 58
Joseph Roism an . The Rhet oric ofConspiracy in A ncien t A thens
(Virg inia Hunter ) 264
Ir en e Bald Rom an o. Classical Sculp ture : Catalogue ofthe Cypriot.
Gree k . and Rom an Stone Sculp ture in the University of
Pennsy lva nia M useum ofArcheeology and A nthropo logy
(Jessica Powers) 155
Cha rles Sta nley Ross. tr an s.. Publius Papi ni us Stetius. The Th eb aid :
Seven against Thebes (Robert Na u) 7 /