Abstract
In this article, the focus falls on five Hellenistic epigrammatic poets (Theaetetus of Cyrene, Antipater of Thessalonica, Bianor of Bithynia, Apollonides of Nicaea and Antiphilus of Byzantium) and epigrams they wrote on the theme of extraordinary accidents. Typically of Hellenistic epigrammatists, each poet aimed at finding novelty and surprise, or at varying (and outdoing) predecessors’ efforts. The process generated innovative language and thought, pushing the literary epigram far away from its origins in lapidary epitaphs. The article aims at demonstrating this.
Highlights
In the Palatine Anthology (Anthologia Palatina, AP), the 10th-century collection of Hellenistic epigrams, there are clusters or series of epigrams dealing with a common theme, which Richard Reitzenstein (1970 [1893]:95–97) termed Konkurrenzgedichte [poems of rivalry]
The freak accident, described in the epigram, concerns a baby stung to death by bees – a variation on the previous epigram: κοῦρον ἀποπλανίην ἐπιμάζιον Ἑρμώνακτα, φεῦ, βρέφος ὡς ἀδίκως εἵλετε βουγενέες
The above discussion has tried to show how skilful the selected Hellenistic epigrammatists were in exploiting the brief form of the epigram to recreate the tragedy of accidental deaths
Summary
In the Palatine Anthology (Anthologia Palatina, AP), the 10th-century collection of Hellenistic epigrams, there are clusters or series of epigrams dealing with a common theme, which Richard Reitzenstein (1970 [1893]:95–97) termed Konkurrenzgedichte [poems of rivalry] (cf. Fraser 1972:611; 863–864 nn. 426–430; Nisbet 2003:29–34; Obbink 2004:27). Revulsion is expressed for the bees: they are ‘born of oxen’ (βουγενέες, 2); they acted unjustly (φεῦ, βρέφος ὡς ἀδίκως εἵλετε, 2); they were worse than adders (ἔχεων ἦτε χερειότεραι, 4); and they betrayed their own natures by causing death instead of pleasure (ἐνεμάξατε φοίνια κέντρα,/ὦ πικραί, γλυκερῆς ἀντίπαλοι χάριτος, 5–6). Antipater describes the child as ἑρπυστήν, Bianor as κοῦρον ἀποπλανίην; Antipater curses the bees as κύνες, Bianor as βουγενέες; for the act of killing, Antipater has διεχρήσασθε and ὠλέσατε, while Bianor uses εἵλετε and ἐνεμάξατε; for the bee-hive Antipater uses κηρία, Bianor μελίσσας; and Antipater refers to serpents as ὀφίων, Bianor as ἔχεων Both poets use words and ideas not found in the other. Compare LSJ and TLG s.v. ἐμμάσσομαι II; φοίνιος II. (for φόνιος); Gow and Page (1968:2.207). The Suda lexicon under Ν glosses the word as ὁ τοὺς νεκροὺς δαπερῶν [the one who carries the corpses across]; Antiphilus, uses it in the sense of someone ‘bearing the dead’.90 the participle ἀχθοφορῶν is quite rare.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
