Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-rvbq7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-10T11:20:13.392Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Solar Motifs or, Something New Under The Sun

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 May 2015

K. J. McKay
K. J. McKay*
Affiliation:
University of Melbourne
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Our level of tolerance of solar and lunar symbolism is now much lower than it was when devotees went questing in the fields of mythology in the nineteenth century. Should a scholar now appear automatically to equate an epiphany of Apollo with the rising of the sun, he will find it hard to carry conviction, and rightly so. At the other pole is the thesis of J.E. Fontenrose, recently accorded the accolade by G. Karl Galinsky as neither to be ‘ignored nor disputed’. He argues that, while Diana was clearly identified with the moon in Roman literature of the first century B.C. because of her association with Hecate in the triformis dea, Apollo was never equated with the sun until the Imperial period.

Type
Research Article
Information
Antichthon , Volume 10 , 1976 , pp. 35 - 43
Copyright
Copyright © Australasian Society for Classical Studies 1976

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Cf. Dorson, Richard M., ‘The Eclipse of Solar Mythology’, Journ. Amer. Folklore 68 (1955), 393–416CrossRefGoogle Scholar = The Study of Folklore (ed. Dundes, Alan, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1965), pp. 57–83Google Scholar. There are signs of this attitude in e.g. Kerenyi, K.'s article, ‘Apollon-Epiphanien’, Eranos-Jahrbuch 13 (1945), 11–48Google Scholar = Spirit and Nature: Papers from the Eranos Yearbooks (Bollingen Series xxx. 1, 1954), pp. 49-74. (He is more circumspect in Töchter der Sonne: Betrachtungenuber griechische Gottheiten [Zurich, 1944], p. 29Google Scholar, when he calls Apollo ‘das Sonnenhafteste von alien sonnenhaften göttlichen Kindein’.)

2 TAPA 70 (1939), 439-55Google Scholar; AJPh 61 (1940), 429-44Google Scholar. Cf. AJPh 89 (1968), 30Google Scholar and n.8.

3 AJPh 90 (1969), 454Google Scholar. Cf. Latomus 26 (1967), 620.Google Scholar

4 Fontenrose, , AJPh 64 (1943), 278Google Scholar: ‘The linking of Apollo with Helios was confined to special groups, such as the Stoics.’ Undoubtedly allegorical interpretation of Homer stimulated such a development; cf. Wehrli, F., Zur Geschichte der allegorischen Deutung Homers im Altertum (diss. Basel, 1928), pp. 64–96Google Scholar; Pfeiffer, R., History of Classical Scholarship (Oxford, 1968), pp. 9–11Google Scholar. For the full development of the idea that Homer's Apollo is the sun cf. Herakleitos, Alleg. horn. 7.2 ff.Google Scholar (based on Apollodoios , 244 Fr Gr Hist 98). But was it to find no expression in philosophical or religious poetry?

5 Altheim and Fraenkel for, Vahlen and Heinze against. Cf. Fraenkel, , Horace, pp. 371-3.Google Scholar

6 Lenz-Galinsky (Leiden, 1971) do not alter the verse.

7 E.g. Lenz-Galinsky, p. 142, compare Kall. Hy. 4. 249Google Scholar; Erath, Walter, Die Dichtung des Lygdamus (diss. Erlangen, 1971), pp. 182, 190Google Scholar n. 6. For Apollo's swans cf. the authorities in Schwinge, , Herm. 93 (1965), 440Google Scholar n. 3 and add Eur. I.T. 1104Google Scholar f., Hekataios 264 Fr Gr Hist 12.

8 E.g. Marx, F.RE 1(1894), 1325Google Scholar. 63 ff.; Lenz, RE XIII (1927), 2217-26Google Scholar; Lee, A.G., PCPhS n.s. 5 (1958-1959), 15–23Google Scholar; Axelson, B., Eranos 58 (1960), 281-97.Google Scholar Cf. the curious remark of Hubbard, Margaret, OCD2 s.v. Lygdamus, p. 630Google Scholar: ‘a poet who apparently pretends to be Ovid (5. 18)’.

9 Stil und Abfassungszeit der Lygdamus-Gedichte (diss. Hamburg, 1954), p. 77. (Opposed by Erath, op. cit. [v. note 7] p. 264).Google Scholar

10 See Diggle, , Euripides:Phaethon (Cambridge, 1970), p. 147Google Scholar; Pfeiffer ad Kail. fr. 302. Theevidence for the association in Aeschylus (and for Orphic and Pythagorean connexions) is sifted – and affirmed – by Boyance, P., ‘L'Apollon Solaire’, Mélanges..Carcopino (Paris, 1966), pp. 149-70.Google Scholar

11 Rhein. Mus. 114(1971), 191 fGoogle Scholar. Examples of the commonplace listed are Eur. Hec. 635Google Scholar, Kall. Hy. Art. 249 fGoogle Scholar. (cf. Antipater, A.P. ix 58. 7 f)Google Scholar, Cat. 61. 82 ff., Hor. Carm. Saec. 9 ffGoogle Scholar. Cf. Ibycus S 166. 23 ff. (Page, Suppl. Lyr. Gr.), Verg. Aen. 7. 217 fGoogle Scholar. For further argument that in Hy. Ap. Kallimachos makes use of the Apollo-sun association see Williams, F., QUCC 19 (1975), 131 ff., 139 ff. (on lines 9 and 50 ff.).Google Scholar

12 Die historischen Personennamen des Griechischen, p. 460. He gives a list of examples on pp. 460-2.

13 Cf. Od. 14. 502Google Scholar, Arat. 607, Hesych.

14 TAPA 70 (1939), 450.Google Scholar

15 I invite the reader to consider whether the same device had not already been used at Ap. Rhod. Arg. 2. 669 ff.Google Scholar, where, when it was half-light () – three lines are devoted to the specification of the time of day –, the Argonauts put in to harbour on the island of Thynias and then Apollo appeared to them. At Orpheus' suggestion they offered sacrifice to him as (686 f.). Cf. the sun as , Orph. Hy. 8. 14Google Scholar (also of Artemis at 36.3); Pasiphae as the daughter of the sun; sol omnibus lucet, Petron. 100. At Hes. Theog. 372 fGoogle Scholar. Eos . I see this association as a reflection of ancient debates on 1) the relationship between Apollo Lykios and wolves, Lycia and light, 2) the Homeric gloss (Il. 7. 433Google Scholar).

16 Selections from Tibullus and Others (London, 1903), p. 15.Google Scholar

17 Cf. Kall. fr. 1. 11 f., 29f.; Lapp, F., De Callimachi Cyrenaei tropiset figuris (diss. Bonn, 1965), p. 79.Google Scholar

18 I include Lenz's substitution of nitet, even though he still managed to get uidit into the sentence by ousting illo, which he saw as an intrusive gloss. However non(nil)illo is a not uncommon opening for comparative structures; cf. Ov. Met. 1. 322, 4. 245CrossRefGoogle Scholar, Val. Fl. 1.191.

19 Op. cit. (n. 7 above) p. 116. Cf. p. 132 n. 1.

20 Ipse is also possible. The confusion of ipse and ille is well illustrated by Housman, , Journ. Phil. 16 (1888), 23Google Scholar = The Classical Papers of A.E. Housman(ed. Diggle-Goodyear, ),I p.45.Google Scholar

21 For the combination cf. Tib. ii 3. 25 (of Apollo in love) inornatumque caput crinesque solutos, Ov. Met. 1. 564Google Scholar (Apollo loq.) ..utque meum intonsis caput est iuuenale capillis.

22 In AUMLA 22 (1964), 195Google Scholar I commented on the striking sound effects of line 41.I have since noted that Pasquali, G., Quaestiones Callimacheae (diss. Göttingen, 1913), p. 20Google Scholar, seems to have had a similar view: ‘Ut guttae roris crebro stillantes quasi audirentur, Callimachus adversus consuetudinem suam alteram pedem ita conformavit, ut e posteriore vocis parte constaret, cuius prior primo pede contineietui.’

23 I join him at least in reading myrrhea (myrrea g) rather than myrtea (mirthea A). Myrtea is odd, and possibly a confused memory of Tib. i 3. 66 et gerit insigni myrtea serta coma.

24 On possible interplay between statues and the divinities they represent cf. Rothstein on Bacchus in Prop, iii 17. 31: leuis odorato ceruix manabit oliuo.

25 Cahen, , Les hymnes de Callimaque, p. 59Google Scholar.

26 Hellenistische Dichtung, ii p. 83.Google Scholar

27 Proc. Brit. Acad. 47 (1961), 239-41Google Scholar; Themes and Variations in Shakespeare's Sonnets (London, 1961), pp. 165-7Google Scholar; The Art of Marveil's Poetry?2 (London, 1968), pp. 80-2.Google Scholar

28 ‘L'Aurore et le crépuscule (thémes et clichés)’, REL 24 (1946), 82–115Google Scholar. For modern information on dew I recommend Knowles Middleton, W. E., A History of the Theories of Rain and other Forms of Precipitation (New York, 1966), pp. 177-93Google Scholar.

29 E. g. RE V 2669. 21Google Scholar on Eos: ‘Spätere Dichter sprechen von ihren tauigen Haaren, Ovid … Sil. Ital… Stat…’

30 Cf. Verg. Georg. 1. 288Google Scholarcum sole nouo terras inrorat Eous, Ov. Fast. 2. 314Google ScholarHesperus roscidus (Carm. Lat. Epigr. 1109. 7 f. Buecheler : Lucifer roscidus), Plin. NH ii 6. 38Google Scholar (Venus) in alterutro exortu (i.e. as Lucifer and Vesper) genitali rore conspergens…

31 Euripides:Phaethon, App. A (pp. 180-200). For Nonnos' knowledge of Claudian's works, cf. Cameron, Alan, Qaudian: Poetry and Propaganda at the Court of Honorius (Oxford, 1970), pp. 8–11.Google Scholar

32 Roscher, W. H., Uber Selene und Verwandtes (Leipzig, 1890), pp. 49–55Google Scholar; Bailey, Shackleton, CQ 41 (1947), 90CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Préaux, Claire, La lune dans la pensée grecque (Brussels, 1973), p. 64.Google Scholar

33 Even Dover ad loc. seems a little uneasy (Theocritus: Select Poems [London, 1971], p. 214Google Scholar): ‘The scholiast thought that dew “fell” at daybreak, but it is hard to believe that Theokritos had never been out at night late enough to learn better..’

34 Progymnasmata of Ioannes Geometres, ed. Littlewood, A.R. (Amsterdam, 1972), p. 7. 23.Google Scholar

35 Grande Encyclopedic Françaisem, xv p. 651 bGoogle Scholar (cited by de Savignac, J., Nouvelle Clio 6 [1954], 345Google Scholar n. 1).

36 ‘La rosee solaire de l'ancienne Égypte’, Nouvelle Clio 6 (1954), 345-53Google Scholar. He notes two interesting associations. Firstly, ‘chose etrange, la rosee est plus frequemment rapprochee dans les textes d'un parfum que de l'eau’ (p. 346). Secondly, dew is associated with incense (śntr: ‘celui qui rend divin’), under circumstances which suggest that both were conceived as ‘un agent de résurrection’ (p. 347). To the Jews too, since ‘in the dry Palestinian region life would be impossible without dew’, it was a protection against death and the food of immortality (van den Broeck, R., The Myth of the Phoenix [Leiden, 1972], pp. 341-56Google Scholar). This is not the place to explore whether there is a relationship between dew and ambrosia-nectar, but in passing the concomitants of Kallimachos' image, and , should be observed. Lilja, Saara, The Treatment of Odours in the Poetry of Antiquity (Helsinki, 1972), p. 83Google Scholar, thinks that the former expression ‘must be divine ambrosia’ because of the nature of its epithet.

37 La Crue du Nil, Vol. i (Paris, 1964), p. 187.Google Scholar