Orphism and Grafitti from Olbia Author(S): Leonid Zhmud' Source: Hermes, 120
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Orphism and Grafitti from Olbia Author(s): Leonid Zhmud' Source: Hermes, 120. Bd., H. 2 (1992), pp. 159-168 Published by: Franz Steiner Verlag Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4476883 Accessed: 12-02-2016 07:32 UTC Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/ info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Franz Steiner Verlag is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Hermes. http://www.jstor.org This content downloaded from 134.34.5.53 on Fri, 12 Feb 2016 07:32:10 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions ORPHISM AND GRAFITTI FROM OLBIA* The history of ancient Greek religion fortunately belongs to that branch of classicalstudies, that develops not only throughlasting discussions,but also thanks to the discovery of some new material, which sometimes resolves old arguments. So the finds of the last years that concern Orphismmake us turn once more to some disputedquestions that have for a long time interested the students of this religious movement. While the exavations in Italy added to alreadyknown Orphic golden plates one more of the same type', A. S. RUSJAEVA'Spublication of Orphic grafitti from Olbia (Vth century B.C.)2 was much more interesting. The grafitti rather quickly became known to the European scholars3who offered their own interpretations4. The interest in Olbian grafitti is quite clear: though, unlike the Italian ones, they contain only several fragmentarywords, they are far more significantthan just the regional evidence. In the upper part of the first plate the words IMLogi'avato; 1L3ogd&kteLa are engraved, in the lower part - ALo(vuboog)or Ato(v0q)) 6QCpLXOL.The last words are especially importantfor us, but before I try to analyse this evidence, it should be noted that the second omicron in the word 6QcpLxOLis engraved indistinctly, its lines are not closed below5. That made M. L. WESTpresume it to be omega (Q) and not omicron, and read ALov1Ua(q6QpLXWL or 6QpLXCV respectively6. The reason for objecting to this are the following: 1) the lines of the first omicron are also not closed, but above, and not below; 2) the lines of the second omicron are not secluded most probably due to the irregularityof the plate just under this letter; 3) there are no traces of low gasts typical of omega; 4) in this case we have more reasons to trust the editor of the Olbian grafitti and her consultant JURIJVINOGRADOV, than Mr. WEST,who saw only the photos. That is why I * This paper was completed during a Humboldt-fellowship at the University of Konstanz. 1 G. PUGLIESECARATELLI, Un sepolcro di Hipponion e un nuovo testo orfico, P.d.P. 29,1974. The text of the plate was discussed in the works of H. LLOYD-JONES,M. MARCOVICH,R. MERKEL- BACH,M. GUARDUCCI,M. L. WESTand others. 2 A. S. RUSJAEVA,Orfism i kult Dionisa v Olvii, Vestnik Drevnej Istorii, N 1, 1978. 3 F. TiNNEFELD, Referat uber zwei Russische Aufsatze, ZPE 38, 1980. 4 W. BURKERT,Neue Funde zur Orphic, Information zum altsprachlichen Unterricht, II.2, 1980; M. L. WEST,The Orphics in Olbia, ZPE 45, 1982. 5 RUSJAEVA,Op. cit. fig. 1. 6 West, Op. cit. 22. This content downloaded from 134.34.5.53 on Fri, 12 Feb 2016 07:32:10 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 160 LEONIDZHMUD' prefer the first reading. Moreover, the epithet oQopLxois not attested in connec- tion to Dionysus, and the variant with gen. plur. oQcpLXov has the same sense as nom. plur. o6QpLXOL:(to) Dionysus (from) Orphics. In his new book WESTreproduces the inscriptionalready in the following way: ?Dio(nysus), Orphic ()?. In essence, it is not a new reading of the text, but the refusal of such a reading. Most probably, the matter is not the difficulties of interpretation,but the need to bring the Olbian materialinto correspondencewith WEST'Sgeneral views on the nature of Orphism. Then West notes: >It is not clear, whether the word 'Orphic'is being applied to Dionysus, to the votaries, or to the rites, but it comes to the same thing<7.So he tends to equate both readings: >>(to) Dionysus Orphic<<and >>(to)Dionysus (from) Orphics<<.But obviously the mean- ing and respectively the historical significance of this evidence in these two cases are far from being the same. In the first, cut variant,we have the fact of existence of Dionysiac-Orphiccult in Olbia, which extends significantlyour knowledge about geographicalspread of Orphism in that period. In the second case we actu ally receive for the first time a reliable affirmation to the idea that the religious communities, the members of which called themselves Or- phics, existed already in the Vth century B.C.8. This very point is in the centre of long discussions about Orphism:whether it was a religious movement, and Orphic communities and people who called them- selves Orphics really existed, or we have a right to speak only about Orphic religious literature, Orphic purificationsrites, etc.? The following example demonstrates how opposite are the positions in this debate: while U. BIANCHIcalled his article >>L'orphismea existe9, WEST began his talk at the VIth International Congress of Classical Studies with the words: >>Thereis no such thing as Orphism<<10. The beginning of radical scepticism in this field is connected with the name of U. VON WILAMOWITZ-MOELLENDORFF.Obviously, there was no unanimityhere long before him: it is not difficult to see the difference between the approach of V. MACCHIORO,who imagined Orphic religion as quite unsimilarto Greek poly- theism, with its own founder, holy book, theology1",or that of J. HARRISON,for whom omophagia on Crete, Eleusinian mysteries, and >>sacredmarriage< in 7 M. L. WEST, The Orphic Poems, Oxford 1983, 18. 8 Earlier WEST noted: >>thereading is not of crucial importance: in any case we are entitled to call the owners of these little tablets Orphics<<(Orphics in Olbia, 22). In this case it is more important that they called Orphics themselves. 9 U. BIANCHI, L'orphisme a existd, Mdlanges H. CH. PUECH, Paris 1974. 10 M. L. WEST, Graeco-Oriental Orphism in the Third Century B. C., Travaux du VIe congres international d'etudes classiques, Paris 1976, 221. See also an interesting discussion in: W. BUR- KERT, Orphism and Bacchic Mysteries: New Evidence and Old Problems of Interpretation, Proto- col of the 28th Colloquy of the Center for Hermeneutical Studies, Berkeley 1977. 11 V. MACCHIORO,Zagreus. Studi intorno all'orfismo, Firenze 1929. This content downloaded from 134.34.5.53 on Fri, 12 Feb 2016 07:32:10 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Orphismand Grafittifrom Olbia 161 Athens were also Orphic12,on the one hand, and more careful and sober inter- pretations of 0. GRUPPE", E. ROHDE14,and 0. KERN"5, on the other. A great numberof problemsremained unsolved and rathercontroversial, nobody however doubted that Orphismexisted, with all those peculiaritiesthat made it so different from >>usual<<Greek religion. WILAMOWITZin his last book offered quite opposite view. Metempsychosiswas introduced not by Orphics, but by Pythagoras, as for Orphic soul doctrine, its existence had yet to be proved. Orphic theogony did exist, but theogony is by no means evidence of some special religion or religious community. 'OQcpeWTeXeoTaL, mentioned by Theophrastus,are no more, than Winkelpriester,earning their living like dream-interpretors,with the help of their books, where purificative pro- cedures are discribed. Orphismis a term, invented by modern scholars, it was not used in antiquity.The word 6Q(pLxoLis to be found only once at Apollodorus, while here Epimenides and Musaeus are meant. As for golden plates, they are interest- ing and important documents, but there are no grounds to call them >>Orphic?. And the last: Dionysiac mysterieshave nothing to do with Orphics, and Dionysus - with Orphic-Pythagoreanascetism 6. One cannot assert that WILAMOWITZ'critical pathos could immediately change the situation in this field: W. K. CH.GUTHRIE17,K. ZIEGLER18,and M. P. NILs- SON19,who wrote after him, on the whole retained the former position. But the seeds of doubt were not sown in vain, and since the second part of the 1930's a number of books have been published, whose authors seem to do their best to prove theses that appear only in the form of separate remarks in WILAMOWITZ's book. I. LINFORTHshowed in a detailed critical study that early evidence (VI-IV B. C.) connects Orpheus with Apollo, and not with Dionysus - the latter appears to be hostile to Orpheus20.On the basis of a careful analysis LINFORTHhas formu- lated his main conclusion: an unified Orphicreligion never existed. >>Theuse of the term 'Orphics'and similarexpressions cannot be taken as evidence that there was one Orphic religious institution and one only, of some unity and solidarity, whose members were devoted to a common creed and a common ceremonial. The term has a far wider range and a less precise significancethan this<<.No ancient author 12 J. HARRISON,Prolegomena to the Study of Greek Religion, Oxford 1903. 13 0. GRUPPE,Griechische Mythologie und Religionsgeschichte I-II, Munchen 1906. 14 E. ROHDE, Psyche. The Cult of Souls among the Greeks, Oxford 1921. 15 0. KERN, Die Religion der Griechen 1-111, Berlin 1928-1938. 16 U.