2-Diss-Text-All-Draft for Graduation
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Imagining the World’s End in Ancient Greece Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Joseph Michael Lipp, M.A. Graduate Program in Greek and Latin The Ohio State University 2014 Dissertation Committee: Carolina López-Ruiz, Advisor J. Albert Harrill Anthony Kaldellis Copyright by Joseph Michael Lipp 2014 Abstract This dissertation studies world-end scenarios in ancient Greek literature. It responds, first, to an expansion and imposition of the term “eschatology” beyond biblical studies into other scholarly domains (such as Buddhist and Hindu studies), and, second, to a lack of scholarly attention to the topic within the field of Classics. After an initial survey of past and present conceptualizations of “eschatology,” Chapter 1 contends that the term is not heuristically useful for Greek material of the Archaic and Classical periods. The question is, then: how might a Classicist address specific building blocks of eschatology that do have relevance to early Greek culture—e.g., the “end” of civilizations, views of the future, concepts of hope, the fate of humanity? The rest of the dissertation pursues the first of these building blocks—the theme of “the end”—in Greek literature from Homer (ca. 750BC) to Aristotle (ca. 300BC). Methodologically, the chapters are organized by theme, each addressing a particular world-ending cause or scenario: the world’s end by water (Chapter 2), by war (Chapter 3), in periods of time (Chapter 4), and by fire (Chapter 5). Within each chapter I analyze the material according to sub-topics, and then chronologically by author or literary work. The dominant mode of analysis is close readings of texts, and my guiding question throughout is twofold: who says what about the end, and why? The approach is thus more literary than historical. I ask, for example, about themes, and about how the particular part of the text that I am interpreting fits into the text as a whole. Aside from the basic ii i i inquiries about a text’s themes and purposes, I am interested in two further aspects of the nature of any given discourse: First, is it religious or non? Second, does the text pursue its aims via personal characters or impersonal forces? In terms of closure, Chapter 1 concludes with suggestions for topics of future studies. Chapter 5 likewise ends in a way that points to a potential next “chapter” in the study of the world’s end in ancient Greece. Broadly speaking, the study results in a negative conclusion and several positive ones. Negatively, it finds “eschatology” unhelpful as a category of analysis for Archaic and Classical Greek literature and philosophy. Positively, the study finds that ancient Greek authors do talk about the end of the world as they knew it. Four areas of concern predominate: identity, ethics, political philosophy, and science. First, Greek authors throughout the period negotiate ethnic identity using the world-ending tale of the flood (e.g., Hesiod, Pindar, early Greek mythographers). Second, writers of Greek epic use world-end scenarios to provoke thought about ethics (e.g., Hesiod). Third, the end and rebeginning of civilizations as a literary theme and historical topic commonly shows up in early Greek political philosophizing (e.g., Hesiod, Plato). Fourth, Greek scientific thinkers, sometimes called natural philosophers, discuss the world’s end as a material fact (e.g., the Presocratics, Aristotle). These meditations on the world’s end do not constitute “eschatology.” But they do challenge the Classicist to imagine a time before the eschaton. iii i i Dedication To Carolina López-Ruiz βούλευε φρεσὶν ᾗσιν ὁδὸν τὴν πέφραδ᾽ Ἀθήνη (Odyssey 1.444) iv i i Acknowledgments I am honored to recognize the following individuals for their help on this project: my committee as a whole, Carolina López-Ruiz, Bert Harrill, and Anthony Kaldellis, for striking an impressive balance of criticism and compassion; Anthony Kaldellis, for unwavering support over the years (which meant putting up with countless crazy ideas) and the conversation and singular observation that sparked my interest in this project; Bert Harrill, for willingly jumping in somewhat in medias res and regularly forcing me to think harder about my assumptions; both Fritz Graf and Sarah Iles Johnston, for a small but ultimately significant piece of advice at a crucial moment; Bruce Heiden, for lessons on reading, thinking, and other things yet unknown; Benjamin Acosta-Hughes, for personal hospitality and consistently sound advice (and Italian neckties); the Department of Classics at The Ohio State University, for the opportunity to become a scholar. With deep gratitude I also recognize Lauren Brown, for generously sharing her home; Michelle and Dave, Becca and Brenda, and Tine, for quiet faithfulness; Joey Danielewicz, Marion Kruse, Laura Marshall, and Ryan Woods, for philia—Zeus will not destroy this race of men if you do for others what you’ve done for me. Without William and Margaret Veith and my mother I wouldn’t have a B.A., let alone a Ph.D.—how do I rightfully acknowledge you three? A similar aporia comes over me: yet Shanna Marie, for homophrosyne. At the end of this project my deepest debt of gratitude is for Carolina López-Ruiz. All I can say is: Telemachus had Athena. v i i Vita 2006......................B.A., Classical Humanities, The Ohio State University 2008-2014 ............Graduate Teaching Associate, Department of Classics, The Ohio State University 2010......................M.A., Classics, The Ohio State University 2014-Present.........Lecturer, Department of Classics, The Ohio State University Fields of Study Major Field: Greek and Latin vi i i Table of Contents Abstract ...........................................................................................................................................................ii Dedication......................................................................................................................................................iv Acknowledgments .......................................................................................................................................v Vita...................................................................................................................................................................vi List of Tables................................................................................................................................................ix CHAPTER 1: ESCHATOLOGY........................................................................................... 1 I. The Eschatological Imagination....................................................................................................................1 II. Status Quaestionis: “Eschatology” as a Term of Scholarly Analysis .............................................5 III. Status Quaestionis: “Eschatology” & Classics .................................................................................. 17 IV. Methodology: Sources, Organization, and Approach...................................................................... 25 V. Ways Forward: Future Time, Future Hope, and Religious Discourse......................................... 30 CHAPTER 2: WATER..........................................................................................................34 I. Introduction: The World’s End by Water ............................................................................................... 34 II. The Watery Demise of Homer’s Demigods.......................................................................................... 36 III. Deukalion’s Deluge & the End of Anonymity................................................................................... 44 IV. Natural Flood Catastrophes & the End of Civilization ................................................................... 82 V. From Water to War.....................................................................................................................................110 CHAPTER 3: WAR............................................................................................................. 112 I. Introduction: The World’s End by War.................................................................................................112 II. Troy: Zeus’ Plans & Heroic Ends ..........................................................................................................113 III. Atlantis: Where the Athenians End, Revolution Begins...............................................................150 IV. Qumran: Yahweh’s Coming War & the End of Darkness...........................................................154 V. Babylon—Troy—Qumran: Mythic Cataclysm & the Question of Planning ..........................161 VI. Conclusion: Implications—Psychological, Historical, and Religious .....................................172 CHAPTER 4: ERAS............................................................................................................ 174 I. Introduction: The World’s End in Time ................................................................................................174 II. Hesiod: The World’s End as Ethical Provocation ............................................................................177 III. Plato’s Eleatic Stranger: The World’s End as Ideology................................................................216 IV. Dikaiarchos: The World’s