444 PHOENIX Demiurge, but rather its continued preservation. Plato’s point is that the world would come to an end if the Demiurge, somehow, did not continue to preserve it: his will is a stronger bond than the ones he used for ordering the world (41b4–5). Without this guarantee, one may assume, the disruptive factors would eventually gain the upper hand. This last point also has implications for Broadie’s argument (Chapter Seven) that Plato’s positing of a temporal origin for the order of the world does serious philosophical work that could not have been accomplished by an account that makes the cosmos sempiternal. In order to maintain both the connection and the distinction between the intelligent cause and nature, she argues (see first thesis mentioned above), Plato needs a deist account, according to which the Demiurge’s ordering of the world is completed once and for all and from then on the cosmos goes on to lead its own life, so to speak. But the Demiurge’s speech seems to suggest a very important sense in which the Demiurge cannot withdraw completely from the world once he has completed his task: without his continued influence, the world would not exist for all time in the future. There is no dead weight in Broadie’s exposition, and she takes no shortcuts. Every stance which the author develops rewards its reader. This study is truly a major accomplishment , and it is bound to set the terms of the debates about Plato’s Timaeus for a long time to come. University of Notre Dame Gretchen Reydams-Schils Cruelty and Sentimentality: Greek Attitudes to Animals, 600–300 b.c. By Louise Calder. Oxford: Beazley Archive and Archaeopress. 2011. Pp. x, 227. The past several decades have witnessed the publication of a prodigious amount of literature relating to the place of non-human animals in the life of the Greco-Roman world.1 Broadly speaking, the works that comprise this vast body of scholarship view animals either in their role as images or symbols or as living beings. The former view of animals predominates in archaeological, art historical, mythological, and religioushistorical studies, while the latter is prominent in zoological, ethological, philosophical, and ethical studies.2 Calder’s volume, a revision of her Oxford dissertation, is unusual in combining insights from both approaches in an attempt to determine how this evidence, in combination, can help us to understand how the Greeks interacted with, treated, and valued the animal species that shared their world. One aim of Calder’s work is to remedy what she terms the emphasis on “élite values and activities” (1) that predominates in extant artistic and literary remains by showcasing material illustrative of “more mundane social spheres and species” (vii). In her Introduction (1–11), Calder sets forth the themes and boundaries of her study, admitting that the sheer volume of extant material relating to human-animal interaction in antiquity requires selectivity and assures incompleteness. She limits her work to land-dwelling mammalians, while birds, reptiles, aquatic species, and insects, as well as mythological Mischwesen such as centaurs and satyrs, receive scant coverage. The six chapters that follow examine the whereabouts of animals in human space (Chapter One), 1 An extremely useful bibliographical guide to this literature, updated to May 15, 2006, is provided by Thorsten Fögen, “Animals in Graeco-Roman Antiquity and Beyond: A Select Bibliography ,” at http://www.telemachos.hu-berlin.de/esterni/Tierbibliographie Foegen.pdf. 2 The organization of Fögen’s bibliography reflects this dichotomy. BOOK REVIEWS/COMPTES RENDUS 445 sheep and goats (Chapter Two), draught and burden animals (Chapter Three), pests and animal allies (Chapter Four), pets (Chapter Five), and philosophical and ethical issues relating to the treatment of animals (Chapter Six). The material remains that Calder analyses include pottery, small terracottas, figurines in metal, coins, and animal bones. Among literary sources that she cites we find expected agricultural authorities such as Xenophon, Cato, Varro, Columella, as well as less obvious sources such as Aristophanes, the fabulists Babrius and Phaedrus, and the authors of the Palatine Anthology, who refer to animals with surprising frequency. Boldface numbers in the text direct the reader to...
Read full abstract