Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-2lccl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T14:30:56.130Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Dionysiac Drama and the Dionysiac Mysteries

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

Richard Seaford
Richard Seaford
Affiliation:
The University of Exeter
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In Euripides' Bacchae Dionysos visits Thebes in disguise to establish his mysteries there. And so, given normal Euripidean practice, it is almost certain that in the lost part of his final speech Dionysos actually prescribed the establishment of his mysteries in Thebes. In the same way the Homeric Hymn to Demeter tells how the goddess came in disguise to Eleusis and finally (vv. 476–82) established her mysteries there. After coming to Eleusis she performs certain actions in the house of king Celeus, for example the drinking of the κυκεών, which have long been recognized as corresponding to ritual undergone by the initiands in the Eleusinian mysteries. It is the main thesis of this paper that just as elements of the Homeric Hymn to Demeter seem to derive from a ἱερ⋯ς λ⋯γος of the Eleusinian mysteries, so certain elements of the Bacchae derive from a ἱερ⋯ς λ⋯γος of the mysteries of Dionysos, and that furthermore Euripides consciously alludes to the Dionysiac mysteries for a dramatic effect dependent on the religiosity of his audience, rather as Aeschylus alludes in the Oresteia, on the principle μαθο⋯σιν αὑδ⋯, to the mysteries of Eleusis.

This case will suffer from two drawbacks. Firstly there is the general scepticism about ritual patterns in drama arising as a reaction to the excesses of, for example, Murray and Cornford. This means that a far greater degree of probability seems to be required from suggestions of this kind than from the more traditional mode of speculation of, say, textual criticism. And secondly, it must be immediately and frankly admitted both that we do not know much about the mysteries of Dionysos and that most of what we do know is from the Hellenistic and Roman period. In the argument that follows recourse will sometimes be had to two assumptions. The first is to suppose a degree of continuity between the Dionysiac mysteries of the classical and later periods. This assumption is based firstly on the observable continuity of the mysteries: for example the antiquity of the Eleusinian ritual described by Plutarch, which will form an important part of my argument, is attested by Aristophanes and Plato. And it is based secondly on general considerations: conservatism is of the essence of those rituals in which a community such as a thiasos perpetuates itself by the transmission of a ritual treasured as originally taught by their god. The second assumption is to suppose, on the basis of numerous observable similarities, an essential similarity between the Dionysiac mysteries and the Eleusinian, about which we are well informed even for the classical period.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Classical Quarterly , Volume 31 , Issue 2 , December 1981 , pp. 252 - 275
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1981

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

Bather, A. G., ‘The Problem of the Bacchae’, JHS 14 (1894), 244–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyancé, P., ‘Dionysiaca’, REA 68 (1966), 33–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brelich, A., Paides e Parthenoi (Rome, 1969).Google Scholar
Burkert, W., Homo Necans (Berlin, 1972).Google Scholar
Burkert, W., Griechische Religion der archaischen und klassischen Epoch (Stuttgart, 1977).Google Scholar
Burkert, W., Structure and History in Greek Myth and Ritual (Calif. 1979).Google Scholar
Casel, O., De philosophorum Graecorum silentio mystico (Giessen, 1919).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cumont, F., ‘The Bacchic Inscription in the Metropolitan Museum’, AJA 37 (1933), 232–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deubner, L., Attische Feste (2nd ed.Hildesheim, 1969).Google Scholar
Dodds, E. R., Euripides Bacchae (2nd ed.Oxford, 1960).Google Scholar
Fauth, W., art. ‘Zagreus’ in Pauly-Wissowa, , Real.-Enkykl. 9A, 2.Google Scholar
Festugière, A. J., Études de Religion Grecque et Hellenistique (Paris, 1972).Google Scholar
Gallini, C., ‘Il travestimento rituale di Penteo’, SMSR 34 (1963), 215 ff.Google Scholar
Graf, F., Eleusis und die orphische Dichtung Athens in vorhellenistischen Zeit (Berlin, 1974).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henrichs, A., ‘Die Maenaden von Milet’, ZPE 4 (1969), 223–41.Google Scholar
Henrichs, A., ‘Greek Maenadism from Olympias to Messalina’, HSCP 82 (1978), 121–60.Google Scholar
Jeanmaire, H., Couroi et Courètes (Lille, 1939).Google Scholar
Kern, O., art. ‘Mysterien’ in Pauly-Wissowa, , Real.-Enkykl. 16.Google Scholar
Mylonas, G. E., Eleusis and the Eleusinian Mysteries (Princeton, 1961).Google Scholar
Nilsson, M. P., The Dionysiac Mysteries of the Hellenistic and Roman Age (Lund, 1957).Google Scholar
Nilsson, M. P., Geschichte der Griechischen Religion (3rd ed.Munich, 1967, 2 vols.).Google Scholar
Nock, A. D., Essays on Religion and the Ancient World, ed. Stewart, Z. (Oxford, 1972, 2 vols.).Google Scholar
Picard, C., ‘Dionysos MITPHΦOPOΣ’, Mélanges Glotz, ii (Paris, 1932), pp. 707–21.Google Scholar
Pickard-Cambridge, A. W., Dithyramb, Tragedy and Comedy (1st ed.Oxford, 1927).Google Scholar
Pickard-Cambridge, A. W., The Dramatic Festivals of Athens (2nd revised ed. Oxford, 1968).Google Scholar
Quandt, W., De Baccho ab Alexandrì aetate in Asia minore culto (Halle, 1913).Google Scholar
Richardson, N. J., The Homeric Hymn to Demeter (Oxford, 1974).Google Scholar
Roux, J., Euripide Les Bacchantes (Paris, 1970).Google Scholar
Seaford, R., ‘On the Origins of Satyric Drama’, Maia 28 (1976), 209–21.Google Scholar
Seaford, R., ‘The “Hyporchema” of Pratinas’, Maia 29 (1977–1978), 81–94.Google Scholar
Thomson, G., ‘Mystical Allusions in the Oresteia’, JHS 55 (1935), 20–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomson, G., Aeschylus and Athens (London: 2nd ed. 1946; 4th ed. 1973).Google Scholar
Thomson, G., The Oresteia of Aeschylus (2nd ed.Prague, 1966; 2 vols.).Google Scholar
Tierney, M., ‘The Mysteries and the Oresteia’, JHS 57 (1937), 11–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turcan, R., ‘Du nouveau sur l'initiation dionysiaque’, Latomus 24 (1965), 101–19.Google Scholar
Wieten, J. H., De tribus laminis aureis (Leiden, 1915).Google Scholar
Zuntz, G., Persephone (Oxford, 1971).Google Scholar