chapter 40 The Early History of Man and the Uses of Diodorus in Renaissance Scholarship: From Annius of Viterbo to Johannes Boemus
C. Philipp E. Nothaft
Introduction
When Diodorus of Sicily took up the stylus during the middle years of the first century bce to write a whole “library” (Bibliotheke) of universal history in forty books, the gap between gods and men had become a narrow one. In a reality deeply shaped by the past conquests of Alexander the Great and the present wars of Julius Caesar, many had begun to think of historical change as a pro- cess bound up with the heroic exploits of powerful and charismatic generals, who covered vast stretches of land, founded and destroyed cities, and created conditions under which inventions, crafts, food crops, and other goods could flow at an unprecedented rate from one end of the known world to the other. Nations and city-states reacted to their dependence on the good will of this new class of Hellenistic kings by showering them with divine honors, which sometimes developed into fully fledged ruler cults. The learned approach to mythology that was most congenial to this dynamic atmosphere of hero worship is forever associated with the name of Euhemerus of Messene (fl. 300 bce), for whom even the deities of the old pantheon had once been mere mortals, who received apotheosis on account of their military and politi- cal achievements.1 In Diodorus’s Bibliotheke, which is incidentally our most important source for Euhemerus’s life and ideas, this mythographic approach is expanded to include the deification of inventors, lawgivers, and pioneers of the arts and
1 On Euhemerism and its afterlife, see Marek Winiarczyk, The “Sacred History” of Euhemerus of Messene (Berlin: De Gruyer, 2013); Jean Seznec, The Survival of the Pagan Gods, trans. Barbara F. Sessions (New York: Pantheon, 1953); Arnaldo Momigliano, “Historiography of Religion: Western Perspectives,” in Momigliano, On Pagans, Jews, and Christians (Middletown, ct: Wesleyan University Press, 1987), 11–30; Arthur B. Ferguson, Utter Antiquity: Perceptions of Prehistory in Renaissance England (Durham, nc: Duke University Press, 1993), 13–22; Franco de Angelis and Benjamin Garstad, “Euhemerus in Context,” Classical Antiquity 25 (2006): 211–42.
© koninklijke brill nv, leiden, ���6 | doi 10.1163/9789004263314_041
2 See now Iris Sulimani, Diodorus’ Mythistory and the Pagan Mission: Historiography and Culture-Heroes in the First Pentad of the Bibliotheke (Leiden: Brill, 2011). Sulimani’s study is part of a recent trend in classical studies of taking Diodorus more seriously as a historian in his own right as opposed to a mere excerptor of previous sources. The key study for this modern reassessment is Kenneth S. Sacks, Diodorus Siculus and the First Century (Princeton, nj: Princeton University Press, 1990). On Diodorus’s first book, see now also Charles E. Muntz, “Diodorus Siculus, Egypt, and Rome” (PhD diss., Duke University, 2008). 3 Ferguson, Utter Antiquity, 3, 62. On the general context, see Arthur O. Lovejoy and George Boas, Primitivism and Related Ideas in Antiquity (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1935). 4 See Anne Burton, Diodorus Siculus, Book i: A Commentary (Leiden: Brill, 1972), 44–51, for an account of Diodorus’s sources.