I UNIVERSITÉ PARIS IV
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
UNIVERSITÉ PARIS IV - SORBONNE ÉCOLE DOCTORALE MONDES ANCIENS ET MEDIEVAUX |__|__|__|__|__|__|__|__|__|__| (N° d !enregistrement attribué par la bibliothèque) T H È S E pour obtenir le grade de DOCTEUR DE L'UNIVERSITÉ PARIS IV Discipline : Lettres Classiques présentée et soutenue publiquement par Pauline Anaïs LeVen le 25 novembre 2008 LES NOUVEAUX VISAGES DE LA MUSE AU IVe SIÈCLE AV. J.-C. (THE MANY-HEADED MUSE: TRADITION AND INNOVATION IN FOURTH-CENTURY B.C. GREEK LYRIC POETRY) Co-directeurs de thèse: Monique Trédé et Andrew Ford Jury: M. Claude Calame M. Eric Csapo M. Paul Demont M. Dider Pralon i ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of contents iii Acknowledgments v Introduction 1 Chapter 1 A collection of Unrecollected Authors? 13 1. The corpus 14 2. The methods 35 Chapter 2 New Music and its Myths 43 1. Revisiting newness 43 2. New Music from the top 63 Chapter 3 Poet and Society: the “lives” of fourth-century poets 91 1. Mousikê and middlenesss 94 2. Opsophagia and philo -xenia 103 3. Poetry and parrhêsia 115 Chapter 4 Poetics of Late-Classical Lyric 137 1. Stylistic innovations 139 2. Thematic features 164 3. A case-study: Philoxenus’ Cyclops or Galatea 190 Chapter 5 Sympotica: Genre, Deixis and Performance 203 1. Changing sympotic practices 204 2. Nouvelle cuisine and New Dithyramb 213 3. Deixis and performance context in Ariphron’s paean 231 4. Aristotle’s hymn to Hermias 239 Chapter 6 A canon set in stone? 250 1. The new classic: Aristonous 258 2. Old song for a new god: Asclepius in 4 th -cent. paeans 264 3. New song for an old god: Philodamus’ paean to 284 Dionysus Conclusion 295 Bibliography 301 iii iv Acknowledgments ACKNOWLEDGMENTS After seven years spent between Princeton and Paris, I am following Solon’s wisdom and moving on to a new stage, knowing how much I owe to the people with whom I spent my graduate career, and how much they contributed to making my work, and myself, into what they are now. My first thanks go to my two advisers, Andrew Ford at Princeton, and Monique Trédé at the Ecole Normale Supérieure. I owe most of the Greek I know to Professor Trédé, who has been my mentor for ten years. Providing me with generous advice and faithful support, she made it possible for me to come to the US for a first visit in 1998 and gave me her blessing (and numerous signatures) to return to the East Coast and work on a thèse de cotutelle . Her energy, sense of humour and elegance, as well as her love and knowledge of Greek and French literature make her, as a woman, a teacher and a scholar, a model for me to emulate. Professor Ford supervised most of my studies on the other side of the Atlantic; our dialogue started with a reading of Plato’s Protagoras in the fall of 2001, and ended, in a nice ring-composition effect, with a parallel study of Aristotle’s Hymn to Virtue in the spring of 2008. His reading of ancient and modern texts has been a constant source of inspiration for me, and words can barely express my gratitude for his attentive tutelage over the years, which has combined patient feedback (including on dozens of compulsive, never finished drafts) with warm encouragements to find my own voice as a scholar. Secondly, I would like to thank my dissertation committee, Josh Katz and Josiah Ober. I am very fortunate to have benefited from their complementary feedback: v Acknowledgments Josh Katz was at my side for the whole thesis process, listening to my developing thoughts, providing bibliographical insights, and asking the questions that helped me move ahead. Josh Ober offered me invaluable help in thinking about the larger issues brought up by my topic, and I am indebted to him for much of the backbone of my dissertation. He made himself (and his research) available even when living on the opposite coast, and often articulated my arguments in a more clear-minded, elegant and convincing form than I ever could have done myself. I am also indebted to two scholars whose work and presence in our department greatly influenced my ways of reading texts and writing about them: Leslie Kurke, who sparked my curiosity for “the New Dithyramb” and opened avenues of thought in her 2004 Wisdom Literature seminar; and Froma Zeitlin, who, with her wonderful classes and generous help all throughout the years, including for a special topic on Daphnis and Chloe , has been an endless source of intellectual stimulation and delightful conversations (ranging from Helen to peacocks, and from jewelry to vegetarians). The Princeton Classics Department and the Departement d’Etudes Anciennes have provided most of the highlights of my social and academic life in the past years. I would need a thousand tongues to acknowledge all the guises in which individual members of the faculty helped me: Yelena Baraz, Denis Feeney, Andrew Feldherr, Mikael Flower, Constanze Güthenke, Marc-Domingo Gygax, Bob Kaster, Nino Luraghi, Brent Shaw, Christian Wildberg all contributed in some way to the present, many-headed, shape of this project, helping me develop my thoughts, look into new directions - and keep to an acceptable timetable. vi Acknowledgments My graduate colleagues, both in Paris and Princeton, have been wonderful and forgiving friends and allies: the “classicists of tomorrow” educated me in more ways than I can acknowledge here. Special thanks go to their feedback on a chapter presented at the Dissertation Colloquium, and to Anna, for reading my dissertation and helping me look further. A good part of the logistics of graduate school would not have been possible without the help and dedication of Stephanie Lewandowski, the department’s administrator; without the great contribution of Leslie B. Forrest, who donated me seven boxes of classical books; from the Casa Shermana’s gîte, couvert et questions classiques in 2006-2008; from the Princeton Classics Department’s funding over the years; and from the Phi Beta Kappa Society’s financial support for 2007-2008, that allowed me to devote myself to research and writing; I am very grateful to have been chosen as the Sibley fellow in Greek studies this past year and wish to thank them again for this honour. Finally, I would like to thank my friends for the conversations, the coffees, the music, the trips, the barbecues, the love and all the fun on both sides of the Atlantic; my father for his kooky wisdom, my mother for her endless love and patience (and article clippings), and Thomas for his inexhaustible energy, support, and inspiring companionship. To him I dedicate this work. vii viii Introduction INTRODUCTION …because he found nothing so depressing as the collected works of unrecollected authors, although he did not mind an occasional visitor’s admiring the place’s tall bookcases and short cabinets… V. Nabokov, Ada The topic of this thesis is the melic poetry (solo or choral songs accompanied by string- or wind-instrumental music, exclusive of the songs of drama) 1 composed and performed in Greece in the century starting with a “New Music” revolution first documented by Aristophanes in the Clouds of 423 BC and ending with the close of the classical period in 323 BC. 2 As archaeological, epigraphic and literary evidence suggests, lyric poetry did not cease to be composed and performed between the death of the last great lyric poet of the classical period, Pindar, and the much-admired lyric corpora of Theocritus and Callimachus in the third century BC. However, from its original reception by the comic 1 On the definition of lyric, see the opening paragraphs of M. L. West 1993, vi: “‘Greek lyric poetry’ is a conventional catch-all term covering more or less all the Greek poetry of the centuries down to 350 BC apart from epic, didactic and other verse composed in hexameters, and drama. It cannot be considered a single genre. It is commonly subdivided into melic poetry, elegy, and iambus. But this division is not without its problems.” Seminal studies on the classification and definition of the lyric genre and subgenres include A. E. Harvey 1956 and M. Davies 1988. See also I. Rutherford 1995; C. Calame 1998; E. Cingano 2003. 2 All dates are BC, unless otherwise specified. The period under consideration roughly corresponds with the period beginning with the Peloponnesian War and the end of Pericles’ Athens, and ending with the coming of Hellenistic age. On the “periodization” of the fourth century, see for example T. L. B. Webster 1956, 4: “Apart from the fact that no clear boundary divides the fourth century from the fifth, a knowledge of the late fifth-century background is so necessary for the understanding of early Plato that my procedure needs no justification. At the other end of the century I have been concerned above all to show new Comedy as a final flowering of Greek dramatic genius and I have not hesitated to include as many works of the third century as I needed, but new developments such as Alexandrian poetry, Epicureanism, and Stoicism, however important they may be for the future, do not concern me.” 1 Introduction poets, the lyric production of the New Musicians of the late fifth and early fourth century has been the butt of jokes, the subject of witty anecdotes or an object of mere disdain. Modern scholars have inherited the biases of ancient critics, and apart from a monograph and a (to this date unpublished) Ph.D. dissertation on Timotheus, 3 there is no comprehensive study of the New Music texts.