Representations of Semiramis from Antiquity to the Medieval Period Victoria Eileen Worrall Bachelor of Arts (Hons. I)

A thesis submitted for the degree of Master of Philosophy at The University of Queensland in 2019

School of Historical & Philosophical Inquiry

Abstract

The traditions surrounding Semiramis, the Babylonian Queen, are as rich as they are diverse. At different times and places, differing social, economic, political, and religious circumstances have combined to create a variety of versions of Semiramis to suit numerous agendas. Therefore, we do not see one singular canonical tradition on the Queen but a multifaceted version in which her story is transmitted, refracted, and distorted by numerous hands.

Running through this multiplicity of images are continual concern about Semiramis’ identity as ruler and her position as an Oriental queen. Images of Semiramis are highly conditioned by discourses relating to the East and normative expectations about gender. This thesis identifies three main themes in Semiramis’ tradition: sexual excess, ability at monumental construction, and success in military exploits. Each chapter assesses the main literary trends supplemented with a case study. The first chapter on sexual excess establishes that there is a long tradition of the Western imaginary associating the Oriental East as sexually promiscuous. This manifests in the sexualized image of Semiramis apparent in our sources, particularly with later charges of incest examined in the case study. Chapter Two, on monumental construction, demonstrates that strong Orientalist clichés and literary tropes are entrenched in the traditions of the Queen and are further reinforced by the tomb story. In contrast, the military representations of Semiramis, examined in Chapter Three, vary greatly. When mentioned in relation to Alexander the Great she is often a triumphant expansionist, whilst other sources use this representation as evidence of her despotism which is exacerbated by Late Antique sources as bloodthirstiness. However, in the Medieval sources these ideologies become characteristic of masculine strength and good sovereignty, evident in the revolt story. These receptions of Semiramis not only reflect the changes in the debates on woman, power, and female sexuality, but also academic Zeitgeist.

i

Declaration by author

This thesis is composed of my original work, and contains no material previously published or written by another person except where due reference has been made in the text. I have clearly stated the contribution by others to jointly-authored works that I have included in my thesis.

I have clearly stated the contribution of others to my thesis as a whole, including statistical assistance, survey design, data analysis, significant technical procedures, professional editorial advice, financial support and any other original research work used or reported in my thesis. The content of my thesis is the result of work I have carried out since the commencement of my higher degree by research candidature and does not include a substantial part of work that has been submitted to qualify for the award of any other degree or diploma in any university or other tertiary institution. I have clearly stated which parts of my thesis, if any, have been submitted to qualify for another award.

I acknowledge that an electronic copy of my thesis must be lodged with the University Library and, subject to the policy and procedures of The University of Queensland, the thesis be made available for research and study in accordance with the Copyright Act 1968 unless a period of embargo has been approved by the Dean of the Graduate School.

I acknowledge that copyright of all material contained in my thesis resides with the copyright holder(s) of that material. Where appropriate I have obtained copyright permission from the copyright holder to reproduce material in this thesis and have sought permission from co-authors for any jointly authored works included in the thesis.

ii

Publications included in this thesis No publications included.

Submitted manuscripts included in this thesis No manuscripts submitted for publication.

Other publications during candidature No other publications.

Contributions by others to the thesis No contributions by others.

Statement of parts of the thesis submitted to qualify for the award of another degree No works submitted towards another degree have been included in this thesis.

Research Involving Human or Animal Subjects No animal or human subjects were involved in this research.

iii

Acknowledgements

First of all, I would like to thank my supervisor Professor Alastair Blanshard for his exceptional guidance an unwavering support throughout the process of this thesis. My thesis definitely would not be at its current state without you. I would also like to thank my secondary supervisor, Janette McWilliam, for alerting me to some very useful scholarship that helped shape my thesis.

I am also grateful for the informed opinion of Christian Djurslev, fellow Semiramis enthusiast, who helped me realise what exactly I had in front of me. I look forward to reading your upcoming publication.

To my friends and peers at UQ (and ex-UQ), my warmest appreciation for your supportive environment. To Amy and Nile, my sincerest gratitude for your endless support, laughter, cynicism, and, at times, tissues. I am truly thankful for your friendship and being such a strong support system throughout some hard times. Also, Nile, thanks for putting up with me being very vocal about my constant cold extremities and hunger.

A special thanks to everyone that proof read this thesis. I am gratefully indebted to your valuable (and often comical) comments and feedback on this thesis… or with the case of my mother her sympathies for Semiramis. “Yes mum, I’m sure Semiramis could have sued for defamation.”

To my family—for their support, formatting, and “How to Get Your Thesis Done 101” tutorials. Lastly, Sonny, thank-you for reminding me of the big picture.

iv

Financial support This research was supported by an Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship.

Keywords Semiramis, reception, orientalism, babylon, historiography, gender, greco-roman, late antiquity, medieval.

v

Australian and New Zealand Standard Research Classifications (ANZSRC)

ANZSRC code: 210306 Classical Greek and Roman History

Fields of Research (FoR) Classification

FoR code: 2103, Historical Studies, 100%

vi

Table of Contents Abstract ...... i

Declaration by author ...... ii

Acknowledgements ...... iv

Table of Figures ...... ix

List of Abbreviations ...... x

INTRODUCTION ...... 1

CHAPTER ONE ...... 5

Part One: Sexual Excess ...... 5

Mesopotamia and Sex ...... 6

The First Tradition ...... 11

The Second Tradition ...... 19

Conclusion ...... 27

Part Two: Incest ...... 29

Semiramis’ Incest in the Greco-Roman Sources ...... 31

Semiramis’ Incest in the Late Antique and Christian Sources...... 35

Semiramis’ Incest in the Medieval Period ...... 38

Conclusion ...... 47

CHAPTER TWO ...... 48

Part One: Monumental Construction ...... 48

Semiramis’ Building Programme: Babylon and Beyond ...... 49

Oriental Decadence ...... 50

Controlling Nature: Hydraulics and Masonry ...... 61

The Legacy of Semiramis ...... 67

Conclusion ...... 68

Part Two: The Tomb of Semiramis ...... 69

Herodotus on the Tomb of Nitokris ...... 71 vii

The Legacy of Herodotus’ Tomb Story ...... 75

Conclusion ...... 80

CHAPTER THREE ...... 83

Part One: Military Exploits ...... 83

The Sources: Cleitarchus and Diodorus ...... 84

The Narrative of Diodorus Siculus ...... 85

Semiramis’ Ambition and Greed ...... 86

Military Skills of Semiramis ...... 90

Semiramis and Alexander ...... 91

Conclusion ...... 95

Part Two: The Revolt Story ...... 97

Rhodogyne and Semiramis ...... 101

Semiramis and the Revolt Story: Medieval Period ...... 114

Conclusion ...... 123

CONCLUSION...... 124

Bibliography...... 127

Ancient Sources ...... 127

Medieval Sources ...... 129

Modern Works ...... 130

viii

Table of Figures

Figure 1. Bronze relief of King Esarhaddon and Queen Mother Naqi’a, 681-669 BCE. Lourve, 2 Paris. AO 20185 Figure 2. Burney relief, otherwise known as Queen of the Night, Babylon c. 19th-18th cent. BCE. 7 BM 2003,0718.1. Figure 3. Britney Spears, “Everytime” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8YzabSdk7ZA 7

Figure 4. Clay plaque depicting a copulating couple drinking beer, Babylon c. 2000 BCE. The 8 Israel Museum 87.160.0743. Figure 5. Stone mosaic pavement of Ninus and Semiramis, ca. 200 A.D. Princeton University 19 Art Museum: y1937-264. Figure 6. Johann Zainer der Ältere’s illustration accompanying of Heinrich Steinhöwl’s 30 translation of Giovanni Boccaccio’s De claris mulieribus [c. 1474], Signatur B-561,1: Rar. 704, b2a. Figure 7. Portrait of Semiramis holding a chastity belt, Hartmann Schedel, Nuremburg Chronicle 44 (Nuremberg: Anton Koberger, 1493), fol. 29r. Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Rar. 287, fol. 29r. Figure 8. Glazed brick relief of lion, 605-562 BCE Babylon. Staatliche Museen zu Berlin, 55 Vorderasiatisches Museum, VA Bab 4376. Figure 9. Glazed brick relief of lion, 605-562 BCE Babylon. Staatliche Museen zu Berlin, 55 Vorderasiatisches Museum, VA Bab 4376. Figure 10. Sculptured relief from the North Palace of Ashurbanipal (668-631 BC) at Nineveh in 56 northern Iraq. BM 124939,a. Figure 11. Behistun Inscription, relief with inscription. 67

Figure 12. Maarten van Heemskerck, 1572, engraving by Philips Galle, ‘The Walls of Babylon’ in 70 the series ‘The Eight Wonders of the Ancient World’, engraving, Amsterdam, Staatliche Kunstsammlungen Dresden. 5601.101:7. Figure 13. A close up of the statue of Semiramis in front of the tomb. Philips Galle, 1572, Maerten 72 van Heemskerck, ‘The Walls of Babylon’ in the series ‘The Eight Wonders of the Ancient World’, engraving, Amsterdam, Staatliche Kunstsammlungen Dresden. 5601.101:7. Figure 14. Manta, castle, sala baronale, north wall the Nine Worthies and Female Worthies (photo: 92 Fratelli Alinari, Florence) Figure 15. Nine Worthies depicted on the west to north walls of the sala baronale at the Castello 97 della Manta, Manta, Italy. Figure 16. Female Worthies depicted on the north to east walls of the sala baronale at the Castello 97 della Manta, Manta, Italy.

Figure 17. Semiramis depicted on the north wall of the sala baronale at the Castello della Manta, 99 Manta, Italy. Figure 18. ‘Queen Semiramis with Attendants’. Tapestry. Flemish, Tournai c. 1480. Wool, silk; 121 tapestry weave. Honolulu Museum of Art. Figure 19. A close-up of the details of Semiramis’ face and hair. 121

ix

List of Abbreviations Standard References:

ABL R. F. Harper, Assyrian and Babylonian Letters, (Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press, 1914-)

ARAB Ancient Records of Assyria and Babylonia, Vol. 1 and 2, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1926/7

BM British Museum

FGrH F. Jacoby, Die Fragmente der griechischen Historiker (Berlin and Leiden, 1923-)

MLLM Mediae Latinitatis lexicon minus eds. J.F. Niermeyer & C. van de Kieft rev. von J.W.J. Burgers, 2002

MET Metropolitan Museum of Art

OLD Oxford Latin Dictionary, 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012

Sources: All sources have been abbreviated according to the Oxford Classical Dictionary fourth edition, except for the following:

Agathangelos Agath. History of the Armenians

Anonymous ADM Tractatus de mulieribus claris

Asser Asser. Al. Life of Alfred

Claudian Claud. Eutr. Against Eutropius

Christine de Pizan De Piz. Le Livre. Le Livre de la Cité des Dames or Book of the City of the Ladies De Piz. Paix. Livre de paix or The Book of Peace

Constantine of Manassess Const. Man. The Chronicle

Dante Alighieri x

Dant. Inf. Inferno

Eustache Deschamps Desch. Balade

Flugentius Fulg. De aetatibus. On Ages of the World and of Man

Geoffrey Chaucer Chauc. PF. Parlement of Foules Chauc. MLT. Man of Law’s Tale

Gilgamesh Epic GE

Giovanni Boccaccio Bocc. FW. De mulieribus Claris or Famous Women Bocc. Tes. Teseida Bocc. De cas. De casibus illustrium virorum

John Lydgate Lydg. Fall. Fall of Princes

John Malalas Joh. Mal. Chronicle

Laurent de Premierfait De Premierfait. Des cas des nobles hommes et femmes.

Michael the Great Michael Syrus. Chron. Chronicle

Moses Khorenats‘i Mos. Khor. History of the Armenians

Old English Orosius OE Seven Histories Against the Pagans

Petrarch Petr. De vir. De viris illustribus Petr. Sine nom. Sine nomine Petr. TL. Triumph of Love Petr. TF. Triumph of Fame

xi

INTRODUCTION

The traditions surrounding Semiramis, the Babylonian Queen, are as rich as they are diverse. At different times and places, differing social, economic, political, and religious circumstances have combined to create a variety of versions of Semiramis to suit numerous agendas. Therefore, we do not see one singular canonical tradition on the Queen but rather we see her being represented in a variety of ways, often in contrast to each other: timid and virtuous, yet brazen and disreputable; ingenious and ambitious, but avaricious and insatiate. Over time her story has been transmitted, refracted, and distorted by numerous hands.

Despite the rich traditions surrounding the Queen, the majority of past scholarship has focused on recovering Semiramis’ ‘historical’ equivalent.1 Today, modern scholarship generally accepts the identification of the ‘historical’ Semiramis as the Neo-Assyrian regent, Sammu-ramat, and to a lesser extent, the figure of Naqi’a.2 Hildegard Lewy in 1952 first argued that later sources, such as Diodorus Siculus, blended the two historical queens together, and as a result, presented one single legendary personage.3 The historicity of Semiramis was then revised by scholars over half a century after Lewy’s publication, most comprehensively by Stephanie Dalley. In Semiramis in History and Legend (2005), Dalley expanded upon Lewy’s argument explaining that the confusion between names was typical within the ancient Sumerian tradition. Dalley then added more archaeological and literary evidence to justify these claims over the course of two later publications, The Greek Novel Ninus and Semiramis (2013) and The Mystery of the Hanging Garden of Babylon (2013).

Links to these two historical figures have been suggested due to their association with construction, politics, and on occasion military deeds, which we find echoed in our sources on Semiramis. Sammu- ramat (c.850-c.790-785 BCE) had an unprecedented active role in the political and military spheres during the reigns of her husband, Shamshi-Adad V and son, Adad-nirari III. Inscriptional evidence lists the Queen accompanying her son on campaign to modern-day Aleppo, and another inscription on two dedicatory statues records her involvement in the construction of a new temple to the god Nabu at Nimrud.4 Similarly, there is ample evidence demonstrating that the historical Naqi’a (c.730-668 BCE),

1 See Lehmann-Haupt 1910; Eilers 1971; Capomacchia 1986; Pettinato 1988; Comploi 2000. 2 Pettinato 1988: 309-310. 3 Lewy 1952: 265. 4 BM 118888; BM 118889; Grayson 1996: 226-227. 1 otherwise known as Zakutu, exerted extraordinary authority in the Neo-Assyrian court under the reign of her husband Sennacherib, her son Esarhaddon, and grandson Ashurbanipal.5 These sources record that she made numerous donations, restored temples, and constructed a palace in Nineveh.6 We also have a visual representation of Naqi’a with her son in a bronze sculpture from Hillah near Babylon that commemorates the rebuilding of Babylon and the return of exiled gods after the city had been razed in 689 BCE by Sennacherib (Figure 1).7 The inclusion of females in any public monument was extremely rare and as such the evidence of Naqi’a and Sammu-ramat’s involvement in these affairs demonstrates their powerful position and exceptional status.8

Figure 1. Bronze relief of King Esarhaddon and Queen Mother Naqi’a, 681-669 BCE. Lourve, Paris. AO 20185.

While this thesis takes notice of this previous scholarship, it is primarily interested in Semiramis’ constructed image rather than the reality. However, in comparison to other female figures there has been

5 See Melville 1994; Svärd 2015: 40-48; Svärd 2016: 129. 6 ABL 114, 348, 368, 569. 7 Kalensky 2005. 8 Dalley 2013: 121-122. 2 little comprehensive analysis of the reception of Semiramis throughout history.9 The most exhaustive analysis has been produced by Alison Beringer in The Sight of Semiramis: Medieval and Early Modern Narratives of the Babylonian Queen (2016). This book looks at the visual communication, acts of seeing and being seen, in the narrative of Semiramis. It is limited in scope, focusing on the German Meisterlieder of the Late Middle Ages, meaning that the analysis of the Greco-Roman tradition is essentially subsidiary and lacks contextualisation. Other works only briefly examine traditions relating to the Queen. Julia Asher-Greve’s article ‘From “Semiramis of Babylon” to “Semiramis of Hammersmith”’ (2007) briefly summarises the changes in reception of Semiramis from Antiquity to the twentieth-century. However, its aim is not to explain these changes so much as to demonstrate how there has been an aversion for Assyriologists to incorporate feminist critique and methodologies of gender studies into their work, reluctance to research women’s history in general, and a lack of acknowledgment of the influence of Orientalism in the field area. Other works on Semiramis with broad scopes exhibit similar limitations. For example, Irene Samuel’s 1944 article ‘Semiramis in the Middle Ages’, which is frequently cited for the Late Antique and Medieval periods, argues (incorrectly) that a sexualised Semiramis was the conception of the Queen and was a unique invention of these periods.10 As such, these periods are in dire need of revision and re-examination.

This thesis will analyse how Semiramis is constructed in literature and visual sources from Antiquity until the fifteenth-century and aims to fill in these gaps and correct the inaccuracies perpetuated by past scholarship on the Babylonian Queen.11 As previously stated, the traditions surrounding Semiramis vary greatly. However, three main themes can be identified: sexual excess, ability at monumental construction, and success in military exploits. These three main themes form the basis of the chapters of this thesis and are divided into two parts, an overview of the main trends in the literature followed by a case study that examines in detail how these trends apply to one particular motif. As demonstrated by Charles Martindale, a pioneer of classical reception studies, ancient texts and figures do not remain static or untouched as they are passed along in the Classical Tradition. Instead, they are pliable and impressionable, reaching us in a complex state—a farrago of fact and myth—constructed by the chain of receptions that are very different from their original condition.12 As such, in order to understand how

9 See for instance, Lucy Hughes-Hallet (1990) and Mary Hamer’s (1993) works on the reception of Cleopatra as well as Heike Bartel and Anne Simon’s (2010) edited book on Medea. 10 Publication re-examining Semiramis in the Late Antique period by Christian Djurslev is forthcoming. 11 Due to the range of sources being examined all dates are CE unless specified otherwise. 12 Martindale 1993: 7. Also see Martindale and Thomas 2008; Hunter 2009; Hardwick and Stray 2008, for an overview of classical reception studies. 3

Semiramis has been received by subsequent generations, the thematically grouped sources will be chronologically examined to demonstrate how they have been appropriated, reconceptualised, and recontextualised over time. As a work of classical reception, this thesis will eschew aesthetic judgement in favour of criticism of texts and images and take into consideration the differences as well as the continuities of traditions on the Queen. Drawing upon the methodologies of past reception studies, such as Mary Hamer’s Signs of Cleopatra (1993), this will be achieved by restoring these sources to their historical context and situating them in relation to a number of cultural discourses.

During the course of this thesis, the role of the East in the Western imaginary, the function of female rulers in the discourse of rulership and kingship, and how exemplary individuals contribute to moral discourse, will be explored. In order to achieve this, I will explicitly engage with the notions of Orientalism developed by Edward Said and Alain Grosrichard.13 Said argued that Western-European thought articulates the Orient through the use of patronizing and derogatory stereotypes of the East which in turn reinforces the superiority of the West. He further argued that this stereotyping was motivated by the political agendas of imperialistic society to justify the colonisation of Eastern societies that are viewed as needing Western intervention to be civilized. This ideology was said to have endured even in the post- colonialist society and influenced representations of the Near East in academia. In a similar fashion, Grosrichard’s 1979 work Structure de sérail sees “Oriental Despotism” as a product of Western fantasy evident in literary fiction of the East. This revolves around the excess of pleasure and obedience that is monopolized by the Oriental despot supported by a hierarchical system of organization including viziers, eunuchs, slaves, wives and concubines. This better explains the way in which we see the East being represented in Greco-Roman sources. While sensitive to Said’s imperial and Grosrichard’s Enlightenment context for much of Western culture’s Orientalism, this thesis will show that a number of these key themes can be traced much earlier.

As such, this longitudinal thesis sheds light on Semiramis—an important figure who has had a strong presence in traditions throughout Antiquity and onwards—that has been previously understudied and overlooked. Moreover, by correcting mistakes and inaccuracies made by past scholarship on the Queen, a more accurate and nuanced understanding will be gained. This will provide a platform for future scholarship on Semiramis, and other Near Eastern figures in general, to build upon.

13 Said 1978; Grosrichard 1998. 4

CHAPTER ONE Part One: Sexual Excess

‘Four soft but titillating syllables, sweet to the memory; a name that is quite well known, and one which for most evokes an eastern queen, legendary and lascivious…’14

His words laden down with projected desire, the popular French historian Georges Roux introduces his readers to Queen Semiramis. This sexually-charged description of the Queen was originally published in 1984 in the magazine L’Histoire, a popular magazine for the layman. Throughout his life, Roux was incessantly captivated by the seductive ancient Near East. In his spare time, while practicing medicine in Paris in the 1940s, Roux dabbled in Assyriology at École du Louvre and the École des Hautes Études.15 Unable to give up this passion, he continued to pursue this interest alongside his medical career over the next two decades. While working as a medical officer for the Iraq Petroleum Company, Roux published numerous articles on the ancient Near East for a variety of popular historical magazines, including a series called The Story of Ancient Iraq. This series was incredibly popular and was later collated and developed into the book Ancient Iraq (1964). In the foreword to the third edition of this book, Roux attributes the popularity of his work to fulfilling a previously unsatisfied need amongst the public for works on Mesopotamia.16 Instead of being dully factual like contemporaneous scholarly publications in the same area, his work on ancient Mesopotamia was informed, easily accessible, and entertaining to non-specialized readers. As such, Roux was instrumental in developing conceptions of the ancient Near East in the general public. This was particularly the case for Semiramis, as demonstrated in his introduction to the Babylonian Queen in the collaborative book Everyday Life in Ancient Mesopotamia (1991), quoted above. In presenting Semiramis in this way, Roux tapped into a long tradition about the Queen, one which saw her as the embodiment of the sexually-voracious, liberated and libertine Oriental queen, a femme fatale. In this tradition, she is associated with salacious and scandalous activities. Sources recount a range of deviant sexual acts associated with the Queen’s insatiable lust such as promiscuity, the murdering of her lovers, and bestiality. It is a tradition which stands in stark contrast to her presentation as the enlightened monument builder or cunning military strategist that will be discussed in proceeding chapters.

14 Roux 2001: 141. 15 Roux 1991: Foreword. 16 Roux 1991: Foreword. 5

Before the sexualised representation of Semiramis can be examined, it is necessary to place Mesopotamian sexuality in context. While sexual promiscuity has long been associated in the West with the East, it is worth considering the extent to which this vision of Mesopotamia refracts the lived experiences and historical context of Mesopotamian life. Following this, it will be explained how the highly sexualised nature of Semiramis developed in our sources and will explore how this theme was used by them. It will be demonstrated that there are two main traditions concerning Semiramis’ sexual nature, both of which can be found in Diodorus Siculus’ Bibliotheca Historica. The first, dubiously attributed to Ctesias, has given her much less agency, she is a desired object whose sexuality is only effectively awakened once she achieves queenship. In her widowhood, she emerges as a tyrant, with sex being one of the urges she needs to satisfy. The second, alternate tradition in the Bibliotheca Historica increases her agency and has her as a sexual object, plotting to achieve power. She is sexual from the very beginning and driven by sexual desires. It was this tradition that was particularly embraced by sources. Nevertheless, both these competing traditions construct Mesopotamia as intrinsically sexual where female desire was unquestionably embraced. Moreover, contrary to previous scholarship, it determines that a sexualised Semiramis can be traced well before the Late Antique and Medieval periods. This summary will provide context for the case study explored in the second half of this chapter: Semiramis committing incest with her son Ninyas.

Mesopotamia and Sex

The origins of this vision of the Queen are the product of a number of factors. Mesopotamian sexual mores encouraged an open eroticism that may well have contributed to this image of the Queen. This aspect of Mesopotamian life was first noticed by scholars when Near Eastern sites began to be unearthed and a number of fantastical antiquities were brought back to Europe. Ranging from monumental mythological figures of lamassu, human-bull hybrids, to reliefs of men hunting ferocious lions, these artefacts were taken and displayed in the British Museum and Louvre to the amazement of European scholars and the general public.17 But what particularly caught the interest of both parties was the abundance of imagery of nude men and, in particular, naked, voluptuous and sexually liberated women engaging in erotic acts. From a Western perspective, Mesopotamian culture seemed to be anything but prudish. This sentiment carried over into academic analysis where artefacts of this sort were branded as pornographic.18 However, in reality, in the ancient Near East, nudity did not always equate to sex or

17 Fagan 2007: 9-11. 18 See Bahrani 2001: 43-95. 6

Figure 2. Burney relief, otherwise known as Queen Figure 3. Britney Spears, “Everytime” of the Night, Babylon c. 19th-18th cent. BCE. BM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8YzabSdk7ZA 2003,0718.1. sexual functions. Instead, Assante has demonstrated that art of the ancient Near East has been unfairly influenced by nineteenth-century visual habits and gender attitudes which misled, and still mislead, scholars to come to these conclusions.19 For example, scholars have concluded that the nude, front facing woman with detailed breasts illustrated in the Burney relief must have been initially located in a brothel, completely neglecting the contextual imagery of the Underworld that surrounds the figure (Figure 2).20 A decade after this theory was proposed, the public continued to rationalize the nudity of the figure by placing it in a purely sexual context. In 2004, when this artefact was acquired by the British Museum, Peter Aspden, a columnist from Financial Times Magazine, described the figure in the relief as having ‘a cool contemporary look to her, not unlike the latest Britney Spears video’, referring to the video for “Everytime” that features a provocatively damp Britney Spears walking around only wearing a white buttoned up shirt or lounging naked in a bathtub (Figure 3).21 This sexualisation would have been further emphasised to the public as less than a month prior to the publication of the Financial Times Magazine article, Spears had been voted the “Sexiest Woman in the World” by For Him Magazine readers.22 From

19 Assante 2006. 20 Curtis and Collon 1996: 92. 21 Aspden, Financial Times Magazines 24.4.04 22 Wikipedia entry: FHM’s Sexiest Woman in the World. 7 these examples it is apparent that the Western perception of the nude body equating to a sexualised body was so heavily imposed on Mesopotamian culture that modern comparisons to pop stars were a normalised phenomenon.

Figure 4. Clay plaque depicting a copulating couple drinking beer, Babylon c. 2000 BCE. The Israel Museum 87.160.0743.

Seen to be the pinnacle of this pornographic form of art were the numerous terracotta plaques depicting sexual intercourse between couples. These plaques were distinctly Mesopotamian, and have not been found anywhere else in the ancient Near East.23 These scenes were often categorised as scenes of prostitution due to coitus a tergo, the explicit pose adopted by the couple in which a man penetrates a woman from behind.24 Figure 4 shows one such example where a crouched woman drinks beer through a straw as she is being penetrated by a man in the aforementioned position while the man is raising a cup of wine to his lips. In this context, the method of drinking was equated to a sexual innuendo for oral sex on their respective partners.25 In the past these reliefs have been construed as purely pornographic. This became a factoid repeated by scholars after Walter Andrae’s publication of the excavation of Aššur.26 Andrae erroneously attributed the original setting of sex plaques to the temple of Ishtar because of the scenes of ‘orgiastic sex’ associated with the goddess.27 More recently, it has been proposed by Assante that these depictions had a magico-religious purpose, warning away bad spirits in vulnerable thresholds of buildings, whilst also promoting an auspicious life for the residents.28 Therefore, what we would

23 Bahrani 2001: 51. 24 Assante 2000. 25 Assante 2000. 26 Andrae 1935; Scurlock 1993: 15; Pinnock 1995: 2526; Westenholz 1995. 27 Andrae 1935: 103. 28 Assante 2006: 194. 8 distinguish as two separate genres, high art and pornography, were, in fact, not separated in Mesopotamian art at all. Instead, highly erotic images could be pious works associated with a deity’s cult.29 These instances exemplify how modern social mores have been hugely influential in re-writing the archaeological record of ancient Mesopotamia.

This perception of a freely erotic Mesopotamia in the archaeological record was strengthened with the decipherment of Akkadian texts in the mid-nineteenth century. A major theme that became apparent from this breakthrough was the explicit eroticism found in poetry and narratives. Erotic elements that were often alluded to included explicit references to male and female genitalia, female pubic hair, male and female orgasm, oral sex, and sexual arousal and satisfaction.30 As such, these sources were particularly different in the way that females were presented. They featured, possibly even celebrated, female sexuality where these acts were associated more with pleasure than procreation.31 For example, in a love song dedicated to Shu-Sin (a Sumerian king of the Third Dynasty of Ur) and the goddess Inanna, erotic symbolism of sweet honey is used in relation to describing the vulva and mouth. Leick argues that this refers to cunnilingus—a sexual activity that was purely for pleasure and not essential for procreation.32 The love song reads: In the bedchamber dripping with honey let us enjoy over and over your allure, the sweet thing. Lad, let me do the sweetest things to you. My precious sweet, let me bring you honey.33

The emphasis placed on pleasure rather than procreation in Mesopotamian sources demonstrates that they did not see a division between love and sex, rather sex was a direct expression of love that produced close intimacy.34 Nevertheless, this was largely ignored by scholarship in favour of theories that conformed to Western ideological framework to explain explicit references to sex, such as fertility cults and dubious religious prostitution.

The unbridled sexual freedom of Mesopotamian culture was also perceived in their religious practices. This is particularly evident with the festival of the Sacaea, otherwise mistaken as the Babylonian festival of the Akitu by Greco-Roman sources and modern scholars.35 In the infamous book The Golden Bough by

29 Bahrani 2001: 43. 30 Bahrani 2001: 45. 31 Pryke 2017: 45. 32 Leick 2003: 94. 33 Šu-Suen B, ETCSL 2.4.4.2. 34 Westenholz 1995; Pryke 2017: 44-46. 35 See Bidmead 2002: 34-36. 9

Sir James Frazer (1890-1915), the Sacaea is portrayed as the Eastern origin of the Roman Saturnalia. As such, Oriental tropes associated with the East are clear in Frazer’s description of festival as one of sexual license, ‘when the customary restraints of law and morality are thrown aside, when the whole population give themselves up to extravagant mirth and jollity, and when the darker passions find a vent which would never be allowed them in the more staid and sober course of ordinary life... too often degenerating into wild orgies of lust and crime’.36 This was a highly popular theory, in both the academic and non- academic world, but due to the influence of sensationalising Greco-Roman sources it was seriously outdated and misinformed.37

There are many different explanations and reinventions of this festival in Classical sources. In fact, many sources mistook the Babylonian Akitu as a precursor to the Persian Sacaea.38 This means that scholars have been ready to import various traditions attached to the Sacaea. According to Athenaeus, both Berosus and Ctesias recorded that social norms were overturned during the Sacaea in Babylon, similar to Roman Saturnalia festival.39 As such, slaves gave orders to their masters and the zoganes, a specially chosen slave, dressed in the king’s clothing and ruled in his stead for the duration of the festivities that occurred over a span of five days. Furthermore, Dio Chrysostom, in a dialogue between Diogenes and Alexander, used the festival as an example of the dangers of power without wisdom.40 In this version, a criminal who is condemned to death was chosen to act as the Persian king by donning his clothing, ruling in his stead, and consorting with his concubines.

However, the actual events of the Akitu festival were more sober than is represented in Greco-Roman sources. The festival was the most important festival of the Babylonians honouring the patron deity of the city, Marduk. It occurred once a year at the beginning of the New Year in April and was carried out within twelve days. When the festival was at its most developed stage it involved sacred processions of statues of gods (most importantly Marduk), feasting, prayers, sacrifices, and the raising of the tablets of Enuma elish (the Babylonian creation myth). However, the Babylonian sovereign was needed for an important ritual, and thus the festival could only be carried out if he was present.41 During this ritual, the king was stripped of his royal insignia upon entering the Akitu temple, he was slapped until he cried, and made to

36 Frazer 2009: 630. 37 Assante 2003. 38 Langdon 1924: 65-72. 39 F4. Athenaeus 14.44 p. 639c. 40 Dio. Chrys. Or. 4.67. 41 Pettinato 2005: 222-223. 10 kneel in front of the statue of Marduk and recite a penitential confession.42 This ensured the prosperity of the people in the New Year as well as the king’s fidelity and legitimation of his position, yet there is neither evidence of a substitute king ruling during the Babylonian New Year Festival, nor of any public execution of a criminal as told in our ancient sources. Thus, it seems that the Babylonian Akitu gained its reputation as a festival of sexual license through conflation with the Sacaea and sensationalising Greco-Roman sources.

Accordingly, it would be easy to dismiss the construction of Semiramis’ lust as just the product of Western fantasy. While the West has always constructed the East in sexual terms, we should also acknowledge that very different sexual protocols operated in Mesopotamia.43 While many of the stories relating to Semiramis were no doubt the product of exaggeration, these exaggerations may have had their origins in the sexual life of the Mesopotamians and their beliefs about the sex-lives of the powerful. At the very least, knowledge of Mesopotamian sexuality may have supported (or failed to correct) the sexualised image of Semiramis. As will be demonstrated in this chapter, the Babylonian Queen’s increasing rampant sexuality is present in the early Greco-Roman tradition.

The First Tradition

There are two competing traditions on Semiramis’ sexuality. The first tradition sees the Babylonian queen with limited agency. In the following sections, I outline the principal stories that contributed to this first tradition of the sexualised Queen.

Ctesias of Cnidus, our earliest source, is cited by Diodorus Siculus as being responsible for the story of Semiramis’ sexual awakening, the defining feature of the first tradition. Ctesias served as a physician in the Persian court at the turn of the fourth-century BCE, accompanying Artaxerxes II on campaign throughout the East. His work, the Persica, is a history of Persia from its origins to the reign of Artaxerxes I. Whilst this work is now fragmentary, it has been preserved in Diodorus Siculus, Nicolas of Damascus, Plutarch, and Photius.44 For Semiramis, the source which is most extant is Diodorus Siculus’ Bibliotheca Historica who devotes much of Book Two to her. However, it has been shown by Compoli that the Semiramis we see in Diodorus Siculus is an adaption of Ctesias, merged with other sources.45 As

42 Bidmead 2002: 93-103. 43 Bahrani 2001; Asher-Greve 2007; Asher-Greve and Westenholz 2013. 44 See Llewellyn-Jones 2009: 7-20. 45 Campoli 2002. 11 explained by Llewellyn-Jones, the fragments of Ctesias actually show very little Orientalist clichés in comparison to later sources, especially after the reign of Sardanapalus. Instead what we see reflected in the Persica is a story of the harem, the inner-circle of the king, where women and eunuchs vied for rank and position within the confines of the court.46 As such, Diodorus’ Semiramis should be seen as his own representation, divergent from Ctesias.

Diodorus’ use of Ctesias’ account serves multiple purposes in his work. Firstly, it introduces the character of Semiramis and explains how ‘the most remarkable of all women of whom we have a record… rose to such great esteem’ to become his wife and queen of Babylon.47 Secondly, it demonstrates how Semiramis’ beauty drives men to extremes, foreshadowing her future behaviour in the text. In order to do this, Diodorus digresses from the tale of Ninus’ reign to create a fuller realization of Semiramis.

A large proportion of the account on Semiramis discusses her relationship with Onnes and Ninus. The beautiful Semiramis is the object of a dramatic tale of competition between powerful men. Semiramis’ beauty is seemingly so spellbinding that it forces these men to breaking point, and eventual death, to win her over. Indeed, there may even be something supernatural about Semiramis’ beauty.48 The account begins when Onnes, the governor of Syria, laid eyes on Semiramis while inspecting the herds of her step- father, Simmas. From this one encounter Onnes was smitten and entreats Simmas with intense conviction to give him the maiden in marriage. After the two were married, Onnes became ‘completely enslaved by her and, because he would do nothing without her advice, he was successful in everything’.49 Consequently, when Onnes was away in Bactra he failed to invade the city and a siege was drawn out. Onnes, being ‘very much in love with his wife’, sent for Semiramis who achieved what the men could not.50 With a small force, she scaled the rocky outcrop and captured the city. This display of military intelligence and skill caught the attention of the Babylonian king, Ninus. Ninus likewise became infatuated with her beauty and goes to great lengths in wooing the Babylonian who was still married to

46 Llewellyn-Jones 2009: 82-84. See for example, Curtius (5.1.38) for the stereotype of harem women present in Greco- Roman literature. 47 Diod. Sic. 2.4.1. 48 Semiramis’ spellbinding beauty may have been a divine power inherited from her mother, the love goddess Derketo. We are told that Derketo was cursed by Aphrodite who caused her to have a violent passion for a handsome youth, and from this union bore Semiramis. (cf. Diod. Sic. 2.4; Luc. Syr. D. 14.) The most comprehensive analysis for this myth is Lightfoot’s (2003: 9, 59, 251-356, 473) commentary on Lucian’s On the Syrian Goddess. In this work Lightfoot explains the connections of Derketo, otherwise known as Atargatis at the temple in Hierapolis-Babyce, to the later forms of Inanna-Ishtar: the Phoenician goddess Astarte and the Greco-Roman Aphrodite/Venus. 49 Diod. Sic. 2.5. 50 Diod. Sic. 2.5. 12

Onnes.51 It is here where the narrative reaches a dramatic climax.52 To sweeten the deal, Ninus offered his own daughter Sosanê to Onnes to wed but Onnes refused. Frustrated, Ninus turned to violence, threatening to blind Onnes if he did not obey—clearly casting Ninus as a despotic figure in the tale.53 Then Onnes, ‘in part because he was terrified by the King’s threats, and in part because of his love for his wife, was consumed with rage and madness, placed a noose around his neck and hanged himself’.54 Whilst Semiramis’ beauty clearly has a dramatic effect on these men, her agency is severely limited. As her father or husband and guardian, Simmas, Onnes, and Ninus restrain her sexuality. However, this is only temporary. This dynamic dissolves with Ninus’ death, and she transitions from a wife to a widow, cast to the fringes of society where she is free to engage in sex without restraint. As such, it is in this next phase of her life as a widow where her sexual voracity comes to the fore in our sources. It is here where she transforms into the clichéd despot.

Historians of the ancient family have long been fascinated with the figure of the widow.55 This suggests that they have greater agency, and in this way, widows are likely to be more active. They occur throughout literature from Cornelia and Evadne, who refuse to marry and even kill themselves in grief at the death of their husband, to the old, ugly, and horny widows in Aristophanes’ Assembly-Women bickering over men.56 As such, they can be virtuous and chaste, or sexually voracious women.57 The former chaste type conformed to ideal gendered social roles, and the latter rejected them. The latter women are seen to reject these roles because they are unwilling to give up sexual pleasure to resign themselves to chastity after experiencing their “sexual awakening” by a man in marriage.58 Without the constraints of a man, they have lost the control exercised by a husband. With this newfound freedom they can indulge in their passion and lust. In this way, the widow adopts a male attitude and is seen to be defying her true nature.59 Thus, widows were a powerful symbol of disorder and destructive potential of

51 Diod. Sic. 2.6. 52 Llewellyn-Jones and Robson argue that Ctesias’ Semiramis provides strong evidence that the Persica could be categorized as a novella with her love-life acting as a climatic event in the story and may have been influential in the formation of Xenophon’s Cyropaedia which replicates character types of Ctesias. (Llewellyn-Jones and Robson 2004: 68-76) 53 According to Grosrichard (1998: 56), controlling the gaze was ‘the driving element of despotic power in the Orient’. As such, we see blinding as a commonly reported punishment inflicted by Near Eastern kings in ancient sources. See Llewellyn- Jones 2013a: 173-177. 54 Diod. Sic. 2.6. 55 Buitelaar 1991; Walcot 1991; Dixon 1992. 56 Plut. Vit. Ti. Gracch. 1.3; Ar. Eccl.1050-1110; Eur. Supp. 1015-20. 57 Walcot 1991. 58 Walcot 1991: 11. 59 Walcot 1991: 11. 13 uncontrolled female sexuality.60 It is this threatening empowerment that Semiramis embodies after Ninus’ death where she is seen to conform to notions of an unrestrained widow.

As a widow and queen of Babylon, Semiramis experiences sexual liberation. With her newfound freedom, she luxuriates in her sensual desires without the constraint of a patriarchal figure. It is when she transitions to this liminal position that her overt sexuality comes to the fore in the “Ctesian” tradition of the Bibliotheca Historica.61 It is also at this point where she gains greater agency. This is evident in the text when she visits the Median city of Chauon:

In this place she passed a long time and enjoyed to the full every device that contributed to luxury; she was unwilling, however, to contract a lawful marriage, being afraid that she might be deprived of her supreme position, but choosing out the most handsome of the soldiers she consorted with them and then made away with all who had lain with her.62

These soldiers were essentially her equivalent of concubines. Concubines were highly intriguing Oriental custom and were a tell-tale mark of an Oriental despot and their sexual excess in Greco-Roman sources.63 For Semiramis in particular, this theme of overcoming passion linked with death also builds upon previous episodes in Book Two. The first instance is demonstrated by her immortal mother, Derketo, who killed her lover after she was cursed by Aphrodite to lust after him.64 The second being Ninus’ and Onnes’ passion which drove the latter to his death. However, like most instances in the Bibliotheca Historica, Semiramis outdoes her predecessors.65 She does this by having a substantially higher body count.

Semiramis’ motives for these dramatic actions have been the subject of academic debate. Beringer believes that Semiramis’ unwillingness to marry, justifying the execution of her lovers, would be read as an act that diminishes the harshness of her actions.66 However, it is more likely that this reasoning offered by Diodorus was intended to be a titillating incidence demonstrating the characteristics of a despot who refused to give up power.67 As the passage makes clear, Semiramis is very concerned about maintaining her position. It is this desire that underpins her actions. This is articulated by Diodorus who recounts that

60 Buitelaar 1991: 9. 61 Seymour 2014: 64. 62 Diod. Sic. 2.13. 63 Llewellyn-Jones 2013a: 181-185. 64 Diod. Sic. 2.4. 65 Diod. Sic. 2.8; Beringer 2016a: 41. 66 Beringer 2016a: 38. 67 Waters 2017: 58. 14

Semiramis refused to contract a lawful marriage to protect her sovereignty.68 Accordingly, she is seen to use her newfound power and agency to eliminate any potential threats to her position, and being a woman, this is the threat of patriarchal dominance that comes with marriage. As such, the reading of this passage clearly links Semiramis’ unnatural and excessive eroticism to the realm of the clichéd Oriental despot.

Greco-Roman society has always held a great interest in tyrannical figures and Oriental despots.69 Each individual and time-period had different notions of tyranny that were wide-spread, malleable and ever- changing.70 People were acutely aware of the dangers associated with tyranny, whether it be the fate of citizens under this oppression or the eventual downfall of despotic leaders. This was particularly the case in the political sphere where comparisons or allusions to tyrannic behaviour were slanderous to one’s reputation and could be detrimental to one’s career. This was certainly the case for the Bithynian native, Dio Chrysostom, in the early second century CE. The orator was hit with two lawsuits and a barrage of insults while attempting to get the city of Prusa to assume responsibility for a building project that had become financially detrimental to him. The leading force opposing this, and filing the lawsuits against Dio, was Flavius Archippos.71 Archippos’ allegations of tyranny were addressed by Dio in his discourse “On the Beautification of Prusa” in which he denies these defamatory allegations by outlining the true characteristics of a tyrant. Dio does this by drawing on the example of Semiramis, the quintessential female tyrant. He comments;

For according to my understanding tyrant’s acts are like the following: seduction of married women and ruining of boys, beating and maltreating free men in the sight of all, sometimes even subjecting men to torture, as, for example, plunging them into a seething cauldron, and at other times administering a coat of tar; but I do naught of this. Furthermore, I know regarding a female tyrant, Semiramis, that, being advanced in years and lustful, she used to force men to lie with her. And of male tyrants I have heard it said that so-and-so did the same thing, outrageous old sinner!72

From this it is apparent that Dio perceived, or selectively categorised, tyranny as manifesting in sexual and violent crimes, moving away from more traditional concepts which equated tyranny to selfish adornment or construction of property e.g. Nero’s Domus Aurea.73 As such, Semiramis’ tyranny is

68 Diod. Sic. 2.13. 69 See Lewis 2006. 70 Lewis 2006: 1-6. 71 See Bekker-Nielsen 2008: 135. 71 Plin. Ep. 10.81-82. 72 Dio Chrys.Or. 47. 73 Suet. Nero. 30ff. 15 marked by lecherous and cruel actions that seemed to have developed in the later years of her life presumably after the death of Ninus when she became sole ruler of the Empire, gaining greater agency. Evidently, Dio did not see this matching his own behaviour. Nevertheless, from the letters of the imperial magistrate, Pliny the Younger, we know that the lawsuit was forwarded onto Trajan.74 The emperor dismissed the charge of desecration and demanded that Dio submit his books for inspection. However, it seems that no further action was taken on the subject.75 Nevertheless, the damage had been done and Dio never recovered from this political attack.

A later source which plays heavily upon this first tradition of the Babylonian Queen is the Ninus Romance, one of our earliest surviving Greek novels potentially dating to the mid first-century BCE.76 The romance follows a tale of two young, chaste lovers, Ninus and Semiramis, eager for marriage who have to overcome the obstacle of their young age, as well as physical obstacles, in order to be together.77 The Semiramis in the novel, who is unnamed in the fragments, is far from the fearsome warrior queen that is included in Diodorus Siculus’ Bibliotheca Historica, written roughly contemporaneously with the novel. Instead, she is so modest and shy that she cannot bring herself to mention the word “marriage”, nor can she bring herself to speak at all.78 Thus, this source is representative of Semiramis’ characterisation before she becomes a widow where she has virtually no agency and conforms to the ideals of a chaste and virtuous youth. Despite these differences, there are some parts of the Semiramis narrative that have been retained, albeit in an altered form. Most of these similarities can be found in the characterisation of Ninus who takes on many of the Babylonian Queen’s attributes. Like Semiramis, he is characterised as a bold warrior, who leads an expedition into Armenia during winter where he traverses difficult terrain and survives a shipwreck, prolonging the separation between Ninus and his beloved. In comparison, there are a small number of elements Semiramis’ characterisation that have been retained in the novel. Namely her exceptional beauty and divine mother, Derketo, who has been reshaped from an ill-fortuned murderess to a motherly woman named Derceia who tries to quicken the marriage between the two.79

74 Plin. Ep. 10.81. 75 Plin. Ep. 10.82. 76 See Bowie 2002: 48–53: Tilg 2010: 109–26. 77 See Stephens and Wrinkler 2014 for the Greek fragments and their translation. 78 A.IV.20-V.6. 79 Dalley 2013b: 121. 16

Whitmarsh argues that this lack of correlation with the Bibliotheca Historica is understandable as Diodorus tended to downplay erotic elements in favour of military ones in comparison to Ctesias’ original account.80 This is evidenced by the love story of Zarinaea and Stryangaeus, labelled ‘the most famous episode of the Persica’, which is completely omitted by Diodorus Siculus.81 As such, Whitmarsh finds it conceivable that Ctesias’ Perisca could have had a fuller romance which inspired the Greek novel but was abridged and reduced in the Bibliotheca Historica. However, due to the irreconcilable differences between the girl in the Ninus Romance and Diodorus’ Semiramis, Whitmarsh proposes that the Babylonian queen is not the love interest in the novel. Instead, he suggests that she was a previous wife or lover of Ninus who was completely omitted from the Bibliotheca Historica because she did not contribute anything to his political history of Assyria. Whilst Whitmarsh’s theory is interesting, this extrapolation of the fragmentary romance is not substantiated in any surviving sources that reference Ctesias’ Persica. Thus, it is, at best, speculative.

A range of theories on the Ninus Romance have been suggested over the years. The theories differ greatly, no doubt because of the extremely fragmentary nature of the novel and the lack of information surrounding its origins. Perry interprets the work as being aimed at juvenile readers.82 G. Anderson speculates that the novel was not a degeneration of historiography, due to its seemingly irreconcilable presentation of Semiramis as an innocent lover, but was rather following similar patterns to Inanna-Ishtar who could embody two extremes—the innocent lover and the virago.83 More convincingly, M. J. Anderson argues that the novel explores the differing responses to erotic desire and aidos, moral shame. Within the confines of patriarchal societal conventions Semiramis is timid and silenced, whereas Ninus is bold and liberated through rhetorical eloquence.84 In this sense, Semiramis is representative of the shame-stricken silent heroine who was common to other Greek novels such as Chariton’s Callirhoe and Heliodorus’ Aethiopica.85 No matter the purpose of this novel, Gera comments that the most telling aspect is that the mythological heroes of the tale have been heavily adapted from their legends. They have been rationalized and humanized, but also trivialized.86 An explanation for this has been proposed by Dalley

80 Whitmarsh 2018: 33, 163. 81 Whitmarsh 2018: 165. 82 Perry 1967: 164-166. 83 Anderson 1984: 93-94. 84 Anderson 2008. 85 In fact, Diodorus’ account of Semiramis shares many similarities with the Greek novel Callirhoe written by Chariton between 25 BCE - 50 CE. Like Semiramis, Callirhoe’s superhuman beauty attracts the attention of numerous men. Most notably King Atraxerxes, who wants her as a concubine, and Dionysius, an overprotective and jealous man who kills himself when he is unable to have the heroine. See Llewellyn-Jones 2013a. 86 Braun 1938: 10-11; Gera 1997: 73. 17 who has argued that this novel was conceived as a political scheme of the Seleucids.87 As the rulers of Babylon, she argues that Antiochus, Seleucus, and their wife Stratonice, deliberately inserted themselves into the legend of Semiramis and Ninus (the founders of the great cities of Babylon and Nineveh) by humanizing the characters to show themselves as the founders of a new historical epoch.88

Figure 5. Stone mosaic pavement of Ninus and Semiramis, ca. 200 A.D. Princeton University Art Museum: y1937-264.

The popularity of the Ninus Romance is demonstrated in a mosaic from Antioch (c. 200 CE) that shows Ninus lying on a mattress and cushion holding a portrait of a girl, believed to be Semiramis.89 This refers to scenes in the novel where Ninus pines over the Babylonian either while he is separated from her during a campaign, or in order to resist the temptation of other lovers. The Semiramis being depicted is once again the antithesis of her dominant characterisation in our sources. The Semiramis of the Ninus Romance is more akin to her pre-widowed characterisation in the Bibliotheca Hisotrica where her agency is severley restricted. In both instances she is not in control of her own love life, instead it is dictated by her suitors. These suitors have an intense passion towards her and are eager for marriage, going to great lengths to do so. In the case of the Ninus Romance, the barriers to marriage are literally mountains and rivers, whereas in the Bibliotheca Historica, they are the rivals of other men.

87 Dalley 2013b. 88 Dalley 2013b: 121-122. 89 See Levi 1944; Levi 1947: 117-118. 18

The Second Tradition

As previously mentioned, there is a second, alternate tradition of Semiramis’ rise to power that originates in the Bibliotheca Historica. This tradition is distinctly different from the first tradition in which Semiramis does not have much sexual agency until she is liberated by the death of Ninus. Instead, it sees Semiramis manifesting excessive sexual behaviour and increased agency from the very beginning of the tale. Thus, sources in this tradition present this behaviour as innate and inseparable from her persona.

Due to the increased sexual agency promoted in this tradition recorded by Diodorus, Semiramis is often labelled as a courtesan, a fitting role for a lustful woman that also makes her rise to power more remarkable. It has been proposed by Drews and others that the accounts which favoured Semiramis’ malicious rise to power as a courtesan were engaging with the previously mentioned ancient ritual of the Sacaea.90 The similarities between this festival of sexual license and topsy-turvy rituals and Semiramis’ rise to power are striking in many aspects. Like the zoganes or scapegoat figure mentioned in Greco- Roman accounts of this festival, Semiramis likewise originates from low birth and rises to the position of sole ruler during a festival setting. Moreover, like the zoganes who wears the garb of the king, Semiramis wears androgynous garb to masquerade as her son in order to retain power.91 Gera comments that whatever ritual, if any, underlies the tradition she is a definitively different figure from Ctesias’ queen.92 This figure is one that is more typical of barbarous, female queens in the Greco-Roman tradition as she only uses traditionally female weapons—beauty, seductiveness, deception, and wiles—in order to rise from a courtesan to queen of Babylon.

As previously mentioned, the malicious account of Semiramis’ rise to power first appears in the Bibliotheca Historica. This version is sourced not from Ctesias, but Athenaeus.93 Much concerning Athenaeus is speculative. Both the birth place and date of Athenaeus have, and continue to be,

90 Drews 1974: 389-390; Boncquet 1987:126-127; Pettinato 1988: 91-94. The motif of Eastern rulers having sex and then killing their lovers is also found as the frame for One Thousand and One Nights, a collection of ancient Middle Eastern folk tales complied in the ninth-century BCE. In this tale, King Shahryār marries, beds and subsequently kills a succession of virgins until he marries the wily daughter of the vizier who spins a continuous tale of stories to capture the king’s attention and prolong her life for one thousand and one nights. See van Leeuwen 2018. 91 Just. Epit. 1.2; Oros. 1.22. 92 Gera 1997: 77. Some outliers of this narrative that still fit into these characterisations include Moses Khorenats‘i (1.15), who states the demeanour of the Babylonian was so frightening that Ninus abandoned the throne and fled to Crete. Whilst Macrobius (In Somn. 2.10.7), states that Semiramis was Ninus’ daughter and would have consequently inherited the throne. 93 Diod. Sic. 2.20. 19 contentiously debated by scholars. Early scholarship led by Marquart and Krumbholz have proposed that he was a native of Athens, however more recent scholarship has refuted these claims.94 Additionally, dates from the fourth to first century BCE have also been suggested with similar futility.95 Although our knowledge of Anthenaeus is lacking, it is apparent that his narrative greatly varied to Ctesias’. This story starkly contrasts to Semiramis’ seemingly passive rise to the throne in which power was gained through marriage to Onnes then Ninus. Instead, she is a comely courtesan who tricks her way onto the throne. By using a combination of beauty and cunning Semiramis was able to gain complete control over Babylon during the New Year’s festival in a short amount of time by progressively gaining acceptance and power in the palace until she became the king’s wife. Then, taking advantage of the king’s love for her, she persuaded him to yield the throne to her for a period of five days. On the first day she received the sceptre and the regal garb and held a banquet where she gained complete trust of the commanders and other royal dignitaries. Then, on the second day, she enforced this power by having the king arrested and thrown into prison. After this, she did not relinquish her power and instead kept the throne for herself. In this version, Semiramis has great agency from the beginning of the tale and uses her feminine charms to further her position. Other narratives on this alternative tradition are similarly less flattering, playing into Oriental tropes of the female as a seductress and harlot.

This narrative is exaggerated and expanded upon, in Plutarch’s Moralia. In the essay “The Dialogue on Love”, the Babylonian Queen’s voracious sexual behaviour is paired with her propensity for killing men. The dialogue discusses the intended marriage between a young man, Bacchion, and a wealthy widowed woman, Ismenodora. There are two opposing stances on the marriage being discussed. Protogenes argues that only desire, not genuine love, can be found in heterosexual relationships and that virtuous friendship, which accommodates love, can only be found in homosexual pederasty.96 As such, Ismenodora is seen to conform to the negative stereotype of widows prevalent in Greco-Roman society. To Protogenes she is essentially a “cougar”, ten years his senior, preying upon and enslaving younger men because she is driven by desire and cannot control her sexual urges. Daphnaeus, the other interlocutor, argues against this. He adds that many fruitful relationships have come from poor men marrying rich and noble women, whereas only weak men let themselves be exploited and emasculated by women. To reinforce this argument, a list of women of this calibre are recited. Included are women who ‘have trampled on the crowns of kings’; Samian flute-girls, ballet dancers, Agathoclea the mistress of Ptolemy IV and her mother

94 Boncquet 1987: 124-5; Marquart Krumbholz 1897. 95 BNJ 681; Stronk 2016: 120n155. 96 Plut. Mor. Amat. 750. 20

Oenanthê, as well as the mysterious figure of Aristonica.97 An extended example is given with Semiramis. The version follows a similar pattern to Athenaeus, but with added hostility in which Semiramis is directly responsible for the death of her husband. According to Plutarch, the Syrian was the lowest of the low; a servant and concubine of a house-born slave of the king. Despite this, when Ninus caught sight of her he instantly fell in love, which remains unrequited throughout the text. Semiramis, now motivated by hate, went about her usual way of using her cunning to slowly amass power, and then once she had full control decreed that Ninus be seized, put in chains, and then put to death.98 In this reiteration of the tale Semiramis’ despotism has been increased, not only does she usurp the throne but she also kills Ninus.

The next of our sources to give a rendition of this tale was Aelian in his Historical Miscellany of the third century AD.99 Under the Severan dynasty in the second- and third-centuries, the Roman author compiled his Historical Miscellany from a selection of anecdotes, biographies, and other types of miscellaneous information.100 These titbits were grouped together in thematic chapters for the convenience of the reader. As shown by Johnson, Aelian often uses human behaviour in everyday life, instead of deeds accrued over a career, as reflection of an individual’s character to be used as exempla.101 In the case of Semiramis, the anecdote relating to her rise to power is the first entry to book seven which relates maxims and titbits on luxury and modesty and how they relate to tyranny and virtue. Aelian’s tale goes as follows;

Semiramis of Assyria has been variously celebrated by different authors. She was the most attractive of women, even if she was rather careless of her appearance. When she appeared before the Assyrian king, summoned because of her notorious beauty, he fell in love with her at their first encounter. She asked the king for royal dress and five days rule over Asia, with everyone carrying out her orders. She was not refused. When the king placed her on the throne and she realised that everything was in her hands and subject to her will, she instructed the bodyguards to kill the king, and in this way she acquired the kingdom of Assyria. This is the account of Dinon.102

Semiramis’ lust for power and usurpation of the throne is indicative of other immoral actions for which she is known—her tyrannical sexual rapaciousness. Like other versions of this story, particularly the Bibliotheca Historica, Semiramis’ beauty is stressed. However, in this account it made clear that her

97 Plut. Mor. Amat. 753. 98 Plut. Mor. Amat. 752-753. 99 His account is very similar to that of Plutarch who was a prominent source for this work; however, Dinon of Kolophon (the father of Cleitarchus) is named as his source. This suggests that Dinon was the original source of the two versions. (Wilson 1997: 10.) 100 Johnson 1997: 212. 101 Johnson 1997: 213. 102 Ael. VH. 7.1. 21 carelessness of the effect of her beauty directly resulted in the death of the king.103 Furthermore, Llewellyn- Jones comments that the account reflects the Persian belief that the Great King’s robe possessed supernatural powers of monarchy. Thus, the throne could be usurped by the removal of them.104 Nevertheless, Semiramis’ feminine charms promote agency in this position and her notoriety for killing her lovers is applied to this tale, further emphasising her despotic actions.

It is evident that these macabre versions of Semiramis’ rise to power were of particular interest to Greco- Roman sources. More sources conform to this second tradition than the first. It can be theorised that this was due to the entertaining factors of the drama and villainy of this alternative version. Moreover, it also played upon preconceived notions of the dangers of female sexuality that was typical of Eastern women. Thus, this tale was so intriguing and popular that in the hundred and seventh Olympiad, Aëtion the famed painter, illustrated this episode of Semiramis raising from slavery to royal power.105 It is also apparent that this highly dramatized rendition continued to be appealing for later sources, and especially in Christian sources who embraced this tradition with enthusiasm.106

Semiramis, as well as notions of Babylon, were radically and irrevocably changed in Christian sources, with a number of sources responsible for this radical change in perception. Justin’s Epitome of Pompeius Trogus’ Philippic Histories was one such source which was important for the later rendition of the Christian Semiramis. Most importantly, he lists Ninus and Semiramis as the first rulers of noteworthiness and the first rulers to wage war.107 Featured heavily is the Greco-Roman tale of Semiramis cross-dressing to pretend to be her son in order to retain the throne after the death of Ninus.108 He ends with the short outline of Semiramis’ incest with her son Ninyas.109 This is the first time this event is mentioned, and as such will later become extremely influential in the sexualisation of the Babylonian Queen in the Christian sources.110 Next we have Eusebius-Jerome’s Chronicon that was compiled in the fourth-century CE and was the first to place Ninus and Semiramis (again as the first pagan rulers of noteworthiness) into a Christian timeline at the same time as Abraham.111 This was detrimental to their reputations, especially

103 Ael. VH. 7.1. 104 Llewellyn-Jones 2013b: 64. 105 Plin. HN. 35.78. 106 Parr (1970) argues that this tale influenced the allusion to Semiramis in Chaucer’s Man of Law's Tale. 107 Just. Epit. 1.1. 108 Instances of cross-dressing being used deceptively and as a weapon are also found in other Greco-Roman sources. See Hdt. 5.20; Plut. Vit. Pel. 11.1-6. 109 Just. Epit. 1.2. 110 Beringer 2016a: 51, 59-60. 111 Jer. Chron. 1-7, 20. 22 due to the importance of the Latin translation of the chronicle that became a key history in Medieval Europe.112 Samuel comments that by making the two rulers contemporary to Abraham and the formation of the Christian faith, they were designated the pagans opposed to the origins of the religion.113 Roughly a century later, this was then added to by St Augustine in his City of God. In this text, Babylon was constructed as the antitype of the heavenly kingdom of God that was reached through Christian piety and observance in the Last Judgment.114 In comparison, the earthly city of Babylon, the first Rome, was located in people’s hearts, created through selfish love of oneself rather than God. The earthly city was led by the bloodthirsty and immoral Ninus and Semiramis, and like Rome after it, it would eventually be conquered by Christianity.115 As such, for his account of Semiramis, Augustine combined the parallelism of Eusebius-Jerome (Abraham-Babylon and Jesus-Rome) with the details of Justin (Ninus and Semiramis as the first rulers to wage war) and omitted any other details of the Greco-Roman tradition that were deemed superfluous.116

This tradition was also built upon in the Historiae Adversus Paganos by Paulus Orosius, a Church father writing in the early fifth-century CE and student to St Augustine. His history consisted of a continuous narrative of the troubles and disasters that preceded Christianity. Similar to Justin, he states that Babylon was led by Ninus and Semiramis. Not only were they the stereotypical evil pagans, but their sinful ways were described as spreading like a plague, infecting other nations. Of this pair, Semiramis in particular, was purely connected with insatiable sexual appetite and bloodlust.117 This behaviour was innate and a product of her paganism, not a sudden shift in behaviour that came with widowhood.118 By doing this, Orosius is seen to deviate from his main source for this period of history, Justin’s Epitome of Pompeius Trogus’ Philippic History, in which Semiramis’ sexual nature is only briefly touched upon.119 Therefore, it seems that Orosius is largely innovative in his characterisation of a highly sexualised Semiramis.

Orosius remarks that ‘[Semiramis], ablaze with lust and thirsting for blood, lived amid unending fornication and murder’, employing the biblical themes of carnal passion and bloodlust associated with

112 Laistner 1940: 243. 113 Samuel 1944: 34. 114 August. De civ. D. 4.6; 16.3, 17. 115 August. De civ. D. 18.2. 116 Samuel 1944: 35. 117 Samuel 1944: 35. 118 Van Nuffelen 2012: 128. 119 Samuel 1944: 34; Fear 2010: 15. 23

Babylon.120 Orosius also adds Diodorus’ story that the Babylonian queen killed men after she had sex with them. However, they are not explicitly identified as soldiers. Instead, it is stated that they were ‘men she had summoned as a queen, but detained as a prostitute’, implying that it was a common occurrence.121 To further amplify the debauchery of her actions, it is added that she illicitly conceived a son with one of her concubines which she then impiously exposed. Fear comments that the Whore of Babylon from Revelation may have been the inspiration for this highly eroticised image of Semiramis.122 In Revelation, the Whore of Babylon was the personification of the evils and corruption of Babylon and the pagan world, which in turn was a metaphor for the decline of Rome.123 By drawing these parallels, Orosius added to the concept of Babylon, the earthly city of Augustine, as the first empire that fell due to corruption and paganism, while Rome prevailed because of Christian faith. However, this hyperbolic treatment is not just found with Semiramis. Van Nuffelen comments that other women in the work (Amazons, Thamyris, Artemidora, the matrons poisoning Rome, and the Gallic and Germanic women) also overstepped the limits of their sex in a similar way. Thus, while Semiramis is unprecedently sexualised, it was not an isolated incident within the text. Nevertheless, Orosius’ Historiae Adversus Paganos was one of the most widely read and popular works in Medieval Europe, thus it was highly instrumental in the later receptions of Semiramis.124 This is particularly evident in the work of Dante Alighieri, who places her in the second circle of Hell resigned for carnal sinners.125 Petrarch and Boccaccio also find fault with her increasingly voracious sexuality. However, in these later instances, Semiramis’ immoral sexuality is shown with a different example, an example that demonstrates that she reached the lowest possible standard of sexual morality— incest with her son Ninyas.126 This will be discussed in the case study of this chapter.

The excessively sexualised and bloodthirsty Semiramis promoted in Christian sources is perpetuated by later sources. One such example is recorded in the eighth-century by Moses Khorenats‘i whose History of Armenia is quite distinct from other traditions we have encountered. Posing as an eyewitness in the fifth-century, Moses blends the oral Armenian tradition with Greco-Roman and Christian sources to create a fictitious history of his homeland in the “Golden Age” of Armenian literature.127 In this case,

120 Oros.1.4.7. 121 Oros.1.4.7. 122 Fear 2010: 52 n145. 123 See Revelation 17.1-6. 124 Brumble 1998: 302. 125 Dant. Inf. 5.55. 126 Petr. De viris. 5.45 127 Thomson 1980: 20-61; Darling Young 2018. 24 the Armenian tradition of Semiramis (known as Shamiram) as a sorceress is combined with her characterisation as a libidinous tyrant found in our Greco-Roman sources.128 Semiramis’ rampant sexuality is linked with unrequited love for the Armenian king, Ara the Beautiful. As his name suggests, Ara was renowned for his beauty. So much so that the lascivious Semiramis, before they met, wished to marry him. However, Semiramis was still married to Ninus. This forced her to conceal her inherent promiscuity and restricted her agency until her husband fled to Crete, then allowing her to ‘freely parade her passion’ for the Armenian King.129 It is apparent that this predatory behaviour was innate but hidden, as Ninus justifies his abandonment of his kingdom after discovering Semiramis’ ‘pernicious and evil way of life’.130 With Ninus out of the picture, she is able to fully embrace her lifestyle. The Queen sent Ara gifts and offerings to entice him to Nineveh, ‘either to marry her and reign over the whole empire that Ninus had ruled, or to satisfy her desires and then return to his own land in peace with magnificent gifts’.131 When Ara refused, the Babylonian queen was outraged and travelled to his land ‘anxious… to subject him and dominate him to fulfill her desires’.132 Moses also notes that Semiramis had become ‘madly inflamed simply as if she had already seen him’.133 During the battle, Ara was slain, despite Semiramis’ orders for him to be captured alive. ‘Being demented by desire’ and wishing to avoid continuous warfare with the Armenians, Semiramis attempted to resurrect Ara from the dead. However, her attempts were unsuccessful and she ordered Ara’s decomposing body to be disposed of in a ditch.134 To quell the locals, Semiramis disguised one of her lovers as Ara and spread the rumour that the gods had brought Ara back to life, thus convincing the Armenians not to continue the war. After this, Semiramis ruled over the land for some time all the while eliminating any threats to her power, including her sons.

Hacikyan comments that in the Armenian tradition Ara and Semiramis are the antithesis of each other. Ara is a “faithful husband” who remains loyal to his wife Nvard despite Semiramis’ advances and

128 In Armenian legend, Semiramis seems to gain her magical powers by a set of pearls or a talisman. When they are thrown into the sea the queen is turned into stone. (Mos. Khor.18) Hacikyan also records of another unnamed variation in which Shamiram used her powers to seduce young men, whom she then killed. Her magic pearls are stolen by an old man, who the Queen pursues to Lake Van and uses her hair to as a sling to cast a large stone at him but misses, and the pearls are thrown into the water causing the Queen to lose her power. (Hacikyan 2000: 41) 129 Linguistic similarities have been found with Nectanebo’s desire for Olympias in the Alexander Romance and Diocletian’s lust for the beautiful Rhipsimē in Agathangelos’ History of the Armenians. (Agath. 140; Thomson 1980: 21, 96n1.) 130 Mos. Khor. 17. 131 Mos. Khor. 15. 132 Mos. Khor. 15. 133 Mos. Khor. 15. 134 Mos. Khor. 15. 25 allurements.135 Ara is patriotic to his country and family, whereas Semiramis is a depraved despot. Thus, the Armenian tradition preserved by Moses Khorenats‘i is seen to continue the link between sexual excess and tyranny found in preceding Greco-Roman sources. However, in the end it is a Christian source so Semiramis gets the Christian treatment. Rather than transforming into a dove mentioned in other Greco-Roman sources, divine justice is served with her death at the hands of her victims.

It is in the Christian tradition where Semiramis gains the most agency in comparison to previous sources we have seen. This is clear in the late Byzantine romance The Narrative of Alexander and Semiramis, the Queen of Syria and Concerning the Eleven Riddles (c. late fourteenth- to early fifteenth-centuries) by an unknown author.136 In the romance the unknown author plays upon preconceived Christian tropes associated with the Queen—rampant sexuality linked with violence—and uses them as barriers that the protagonist, Alexander the Great, must overcome and tame.137 Not only are these themes of sex and bloodlust retained but are exacerbated by applying the violence of Medusa and the eroticism inspired by the Alexander Romance under the name of Semiramis.

It has been suggested that this romance was inspired by Alexander’s encounter with Candace of Meroe in the Alexander Romance.138 Candace, a descendant of Semiramis, is described as a very beautiful middle-aged widow with three sons, who reminded Alexander of his own mother.139 Disguised as Antigonus, Alexander met the Queen but was recognized by her from a portrait she had of him and nothing came of their relationship. This was deemed an unsatisfactory ending for many Byzantine scholars. Stoneman argues that John Malalas reworked the tale into a story of sexual conquest.140 In his reworked account, he similarly has a disguised Alexander being foiled by the widowed Candace who recognized the Macedonian’s physical characteristics. Diverging from the previous tradition, she then stated ‘Emperor Alexander, you have captured the whole world but one woman has captured you’, and they wed.141 Since Malalas’ reworked account and the Byzantine romance share common elements of disguise, identification, and marriage it would seem that Candace has been replaced by Semiramis in

135 Hacikyan 2000: 38, 41. 136 The romance is preserved in two manuscripts: Codex 197 from the Greek Monastry of St. Barlaam at Meteora, and Cod. Gr. 2122 from the Egyptian Monastery of St. Catherine at Mount Sinai. Translations of these codices can be found in Ulrich Moennig’s Die Erzählung von Alexander und Semiramis. 137 See Chapter Three, ‘Semiramis and Alexander’. 138 Stoneman 2008: 134. 139 AR 19, 22. 140 Stoneman 2008: 134. 141 Joh. Mal. 8.195. 26 order to add more dramatic elements to the story. A similar interchange in the romance happens with the well-known legend of Medusa. However, instead of Medusa’s piercing gaze that turns men into stone, it is Semiramis’ overwhelming physical beauty that leads men to their death.142 By using these two legends the author could play with the themes of eroticism and sadism that Semiramis was associated with during this period. This is fully realised from the first moment we are introduced to the Queen in the romance.

In this unique romance, Semiramis retains a persona of ferociousness, intelligence, and self-preservation. Semiramis, who was in search of a husband and heir, wages that she will marry any suitor who can look upon her and answer a number of riddles. Stunned by her beauty, none are successful and are put to death for their ineptitude, their heads displayed on the city gate. Beringer comments that she is a mixture of the Sphinx, the poser of riddles, and a Gorgon, able to kill at a glance.143 At its core, the romance is a repartee of intelligence, where an incognito Alexander, like Perseus, out-smarts and tames the monster. Alexander does this by linguistically deflecting Semiramis’ trickery by correctly answering riddles, and subsequently taming her through marriage. Indeed, it seems that Alexander was the only appropriate match to conquer the queen. Moreover, this initial wager demonstrates that she was not opposed to marriage but would only submit to an equal.144 In her pairing with Alexander, the Queen does not lose any power. When the two are to be married, Semiramis sends Alexander a letter explicitly subjugating herself and her kingdom to her beloved. However, she does not revert back to the Semiramis that we have seen in the first tradition. Instead, Alexander replies, affirming his love for her and submitting himself to her as well and they live in marital bliss continuing to rule side by side until their death. Semiramis’ sadistic tendencies abate after their marriage as she never becomes a widow, and so the audience is left unaware if she would return to her previous way of life.

Conclusion

This chapter has demonstrated that there is a long tradition of Western imaginary associating the Oriental East as sexually promiscuous and the constructions and receptions of Mesopotamian sexuality may have supported (or failed to correct) the sexualised image of Semiramis. In the past it has been perpetuated by scholars, such as Irene Samuel in her frequently cited article Semiramis in the Middle Ages, that a sexualised Semiramis was purely the product of later sources, particularly in the Medieval period.145

142 Ovid. Met. 4.797. 143 Beringer 2016b:137. 144 Cod. Gr. 2122. 80-86. 145 Samuel 1944. 27

However, this is simply not true. As demonstrated above, Semiramis was associated with a variety of sexual excesses in a range of early sources. In these sources, two competing traditions arise. The first, originating from Ctesias in the fourth-century, sees Semiramis as an object of infatuation that causes the demise of men whilst under patriarchal control. Then, upon widowhood she is liberated and gains greater agency, both sexually and politically. The competing, and more popular tradition, originating with Athenaeus, sees Semiramis manifesting greater agency and exhibiting excessive sexual behaviour from the very beginning. Regardless of the traditions, the Queen’s excessive sexual acts increased over time as a manifestation of her despotism. Similarly, Oriental discourse is found in later sources on the Queen, often reciting the same sexual excesses found in the Greco-Roman tradition. However, in these later sources, focus is placed on Semiramis’ incestuous advances and sexual freedom law. This will now be analysed in depth as the case study of this chapter.

28

Part Two: Incest

Figure 6. Johann Zainer der Ältere’s illustration accompanying of Heinrich Steinhöwl’s translation of Giovanni Boccaccio’s De claris mulieribus [c. 1474], Signatur B-561,1: Rar. 704, b2a.

De Mulieribus Claris (1361-1362), by the famous Florentine writer Giovanni Boccaccio, was the first collection of biographies in Western literature that was exclusively dedicated to women.146 The work consists of 106 biographies of historical women, featuring Semiramis as the second woman. Surviving in over a hundred manuscripts, the collection was the fountainhead of its genre, remaining popular throughout the Medieval period and inspiring many imitations and vernacular renditions.147 One early example is Heinrich Steinhöwl’s fifteenth-century German translation of the work. This vernacular translation increased the availability of this work to a wider audience in this region and was particularly influential for the later Meisterlieder tradition—a form of didactic poetry of the later Middle High German period.148 However, the text itself is only one part of the story. The illustrations within, drawn by Johann Zainer der Ältere under the careful curation of Steinhöwl, are eye-catching to say the least.149

146 Brown 2001: xi. 147 Brown 2001: xxii. 148 This tradition has been examined in Alison Beringer’s 2016 publication Sight of Semiramis: Medieval and Early Modern Narratives of the Babylonian Queen. 149 Steinhöwl was a local physician, translator, and financial supporter of Johann Zainer’s print shop in Ulm, Germany. (Domanski 2007: 46-50.) 29

Figure 6, which accompanies the passage on Semiramis, drips with palpable eroticism. Nestled in between three half-naked women in the midst of de-robing and a statue perched on a base looking on voyeuristically lies the naked figures of Semiramis and Ninyas tangled in an incestuous embrace. Not only does this erotic scene refer to Semiramis’ sexual perversion, namely incest, but also how she domineeringly controls others’ sex lives. This manifests in the three women in the left of the scene that evoke a monstrous law of complete sexual freedom that was implemented by the Queen as an act of subterfuge to mask her own rapacious and grotesque sexuality. The purpose of these illustrations, then, was to emphasise characteristics or acts of the protagonists from the work. Through the inclusion of incestuous and sexually charged imagery alongside the text, the Babylonian Queen is firmly entrenched as a figure considered outside the realm of “normal”, a transgressor of normal societal boundaries, especially sexual ones. Not only is this scene one of perverted morals and bacchic frenzy, but it is also one of inverted humanity and normality, a “verkehrte Welt” or a topsy-turvy world.150 All previous restrictions are off: mothers are fornicating with their sons and women are giving into their carnal desires. In fact, it seems that everyone has traded places and genders, or is at least attempting to. The women in undergarments allude to the popular Medieval concept of “Battle for the Breeches”—the metaphorical struggle for power and sexual favours between the sexes.151 Often images of this theme occurred in overtly moralizing formats, such as “verkehrte Welt”, in which women’s power over men was caricatured and the overbearing females ridiculed to warn against domineering viragoes, such as Semiramis.152

As demonstrated in the previous half of the chapter, Semiramis is associated with a variety of sexual excesses and perversions in our sources. Her insatiable libido drives her to engage in multiple sexual acts with endless lovers, sadistic sex murders, and we even see her charged with bestiality.153 The most outlandish of these crimes that grabs the attention of our sources is her incest and the law enacted by the Queen to legalise this criminal act. However, incest and the sexual freedom law was a fairly recent tradition, but a particularly pervasive one, within the Babylonian Queen’s mythology. In this case study it will be demonstrated that prominent sources throughout the Late Antique and Medieval periods—St Augustine, Orosius, Dante, Petrarch, Boccaccio, and Chaucer—combine cruelty and immorality to the

150 Domanski 2007: 229. 151 For “Battle of the Breeches” see Peacock 1989: 85; Grössinger 1997: 15-17; Gibson 2009: 226. 152 Peacock 1989: 100, 109; Peacock 1999. 153 Pliny records that Semiramis’ horse was seemingly so human-like that the Babylonian fell in love and had sex with it. (Plin. HN. 8.64. See Roller 2003: 226n86.) An eleventh-century French manuscript recounts that she fell in love with a bull, later revealed to be Jupiter. (See Dronke 1970: 66-113; Beringer 2016a: 113-117) 30 charges of sexual excess, manifesting in Semiramis’ incestuous advances towards her son.154 Since these sources have all been researched extensively and have a strong history of transmission it is apparent that there has been an unbalanced focus on these actions, particularly in modern scholarship. As such, this chapter will examine the narrative of incest and the incest law, taking into consideration how it has perpetuated Semiramis’ reputation as sexually transgressive figure.

Semiramis’ Incest in the Greco-Roman Sources

Associations of Semiramis with incest first appear in Augustan literature. By adding this element to the narrative, our sources are seen to be engaging with contemporary fascination and abject horror provoked by incest. In Roman society, like the majority of others throughout history, incest was deemed a cultural taboo. In Latin literature incestum, deriving from incastum (the antithesis of chastity), was a broad term for ‘a sense of moral revulsion at specifically polluting forms of sexual intercourse’.155 These acts were seen to disrupt the family, wider society, natural order as well as the pax deorum and, as such, were seen to be a form of religious pollution as well as corruption of social norms.156 As such, the punishment for this crime was duly harsh with the culprits executed by being flung from the Tarpeian Rock, a method reserved for especially heinous crimes.157 This harsh punishment was inflicted upon anyone that went against the ius gentium, the common set of moral and legal doctrines that bound Roman citizens and all civilized people.158

Despite being a cultural taboo, incest held an intense fascination for Greco-Roman society. This is evidenced by the numerous tales of incest in ancient literature, such as plays and political discourses that were a socially appropriate outlet to explore the topic—the most famous being Oedipus. During the Roman Empire, false allegations and malicious gossiping of consanguineous relationships ran rampant in the histories and biographies of Roman emperors. For example, both Nero and Caligula are said to have seduced their sisters, Domitian his niece, and Nero was rumoured to have infamously succumbed to illicit relations with his own mother, Agrippina.159 These charges were a means of isolating and externalising an enemy.160 As such, these figures were often associated with barbarism and tyranny, with

154 Petr. TL. 3.76-78; Bocc. FW. 2; Dant. Inf. 5.55; Chauc. MLW. 358-59; Chauc. PF. 279-94. 155 Shaw 1992: 169. 156 Moreau 2002; Lennon 2013: 57, 71. 157 Tac. 6.19.1. 158 Justinian, Digest 23.68. 159 Suet. Cal. 23, 24; Suet. Cl. 26, 39; Suet. Dom. 22; Suet. Nero. 28. 160 Lennon 2013: 73. 31 incest as an expression of their excess, impropriety and loss of control.161 Females in any position of power or liminal status as well as individuals of the barbaric Other were often targeted with these allegations.162 Semiramis was one such individual who was not immune to this treatment in this period.

The first time we encounter the story of incest is in the fragmentary remains of the Diegeseis by the Augustan mythographer Konon, persevered in Photius. The Diegeseis were a collection of fifty stories mostly concerning foundation myths and aetiologies, employing a combination of quasi-historical anecdotes, paradoxography, fables, and parables.163 According to Photius, it was dedicated to Archelaus Philopatris who ruled Cappadocia from 36 BCE to 17 CE. 164 Other than this, nothing further is known about Konon. Then sometime in the ninth-century, the Diegeseis was summarized by Photius (c.810- c.893), an important Byzantine intellectual who had twice held the patriarchal throne in Constantinople. His Bibliotheca includes “reviews” of 280 books that Photius had read and was produced at the request of his brother Tarasius, who seems to have had a propensity for Near Eastern works, in preparation for the patriarch’s absence while on a diplomatic mission. Wilson speculates that the Bibliotheca was composed in a hurry with the contents not in any perceivable order and was sent off unfinished and unrefined to his brother either when time came to leave Constantinople, or because his mission was called off, and that there was no longer a need for the text.165 Nevertheless, the text was not published until 1601, nor was it widely circulated until this date.166

It has been noted by Hawes that the stories included in the Diegeseis tend to be obscure, demonstrating that Konon preferred little-known variants and peculiar details.167 We see this same focus on peculiarity with the account of Semiramis. In this source, Semiramis is said to have ‘in secret and unwittingly’ had intercourse with her son, with Konon remaining silent on how this curious set of circumstances came about.168 Upon discovery of this incestuous crime, Semiramis openly took Ninyas as her husband. Now lawful, it was adopted as a tradition of the Medes and Persians.169 However, it seems that this tradition

161 Pagden 1986: 82; Moreau 2002: 29-52; Isaac 2004: 210-211, 379. 162 Gera 1997: 82. See Bigwood (2009) who demonstrates that the common citation of Achaemenid incest lack evidence, indicating that it was a motif associated with the tropes of barbarism. 163 Lightfoot 2005: 299. 164 Hawes 2014: 138. 165 Wilson 1994: 3. 166 Wilson 1994: 18-20. 167 Hawes 2014: 138. 168 Phot. Bibl. 186.9. 169 John Malalas (sixth-century) and Constantine Manasses (twelfth-century) recount a slightly different tradition. (Joh. Mal 1.10; Const. Man. 550.) They attribute the tradition of close-kin marriage to Ninyas and Semiramis; however, Ninyas is said to be the lustful instigator. 32 may have not originated with Semiramis. Photius remarks that Konon ascribes everything that is usually associated with Atossa—another militaristic, cross-dressing, and Eastern queen—to Semiramis.170 He was also unsure ‘whether he thought the woman was called by two names or whether he did not know the stories about Semiramis in another way’.171 We see a similar conflation between these two figures perpetuated in Caster of Rhodes and Eusebius who both have them ruling together as well as Claudian who seems to have completely mixed them up.172 Prompting this conflation was the similarities in their association with inventions as well as their use of clothing to mask their gender and retain power.173 However, Atossa is never associated with incest, instead it seems to be a tradition purely associated with Semiramis.

Solely associating the incest story with the Babylonian Queen is Justin’s Epitome of Pomepius Trogus’ Philippic Histories. In this work it is apparent that the allegation of incest forms a larger discussion about her refusal to follow convention and morality. This is manifested in a number of ways in the text and in other sources. These include her adoption of clothing normally worn by a man, the way she becomes a sexual predator, and her maternal love that gets reworked as erotic love. This refraction of Semiramis was highly influential to later Christian authors, such as Orosius, who heavily relied upon Justin/Pompeius. However, despite the importance and popularity of the epitome, surviving in over two hundred manuscripts, little is known about either of the authors. The only concrete evidence is that Pompeius Trogus was a Romanized Gaul writing sometime during the Augustan period and that sometime after this, the forty-four volumes of the work were epitomized by the Latin historian Justin, otherwise known as Marcus Junianius Justinus.174 The Philippic Histories, as the title suggests, records the history of the Macedonian Empire and the Near East. Written in Latin, it concentrates on the deeds and behaviour of kings and tyrants, as well as the nature of imperialism and succession.175 It is apparent that Justin took liberties in his epitome of the work for the sake of intrigue and amusement and thus the version we have is quite different to Pompeius’ original.176

170 For Atossa see Gera 1997: 141-150. 171 Phot. Bibl. 186.9 172 FGrH 250 F1d; Eusb. Chron. 583; Claud. Eutr. 1. 339-42. 173 According to Hellanicus (ADM 7) the Persian Queen was the inventor of eunuchs and wore tiara and trousers to hide her gender. A similar tradition has Semiramis also using clothing to hide her gender and masquerade as her son to rule. (Just. Epit. 1.2) 174 Develin 1994: 2-3. 175 Develin 1994: 6-10. 176 See Yardley 2016. 33

One such example is the incest story added to Semiramis’ account. Linguistic analysis has determined that it was an insertion of Justin, seemingly independent to Konon, and dates to a post-Augustan age.177 More specifically, the phrase concubitum filii petisset shares linguistic parallels to poetry and post- Augustan prose, often in instances of incest.178 As such, dramatic flair is added to the account by recounting Semiramis’ attempt to have sexual relationship with her son in the last line of the section on the Queen.179 Whether this act was consummated or not is unspecified by Justin, leaving it open to uncertainty and speculation. What is interesting about this account is that incest is the only sexual transgression mentioned by Justin. Other instances of Semiramis’ sexual excess found in the Bibliotheca Historica, such as her numerous lovers and their execution, are not found in this account. In Justin’s account, focus is placed on maintaining power rather than her indulgence in immorality. Riley supports this stance, arguing that softer rather than harsher language is used to demonstrate that Semiramis was ‘so obsessed with keeping power that she seeks to hold it through a sexual relationship with her son and so ensures a hardy line of successors strengthened by her genes’.180 As such, we see concubitum, meaning sexual intercourse, being used over a more pejorative term such as stuprum which indicates a debauched relationship. This is further reinforced with the two other uses of concubitum in the work. In both instances, it is used to describe Thalestris, the Amazonian Queen, requesting to have sex with Alexander in order to conceive a super-warrior child.181

By becoming his mother’s lover, Ninyas is effeminized, and Semiramis takes on the traditional male- gendered role of the pursuer in romantic relationships. However, Semiramis was not able to retroactively justify her actions with marriage or law in the same way as Konon. This is because, as remarked by Justin, during this ancient period people were bound by will and not laws.182 Instead, the inversion of natural order was corrected in the only other possible way: through the Queen’s violent death at the hands of her son. Within the whole scheme of the work, Riley shows that Semiramis’ incestuous advances act as a cautionary tale of female power. At the same time, it also reinforces female rectitude.183 Semiramis, as the first woman in the work, initiates these themes of female ambition and overbearing mothering that are then reemphasized by the other seven women in Book One.184 This was particularly relevant to its

177 Yardley 2016: 118-119. 178 Ov. Rem. Am. 399; Ov. Met. 4.206-207; Sen. Ag. 30; Hyg. Fab. 189.2; Suet. Nero. 28.2. 179 Just. Epit. 2.10. 180 Riley 2002: 98, 107. 181 Just. Epit. 12.3.6 (propter expetitum cubitum); 42.3.7 (concubitum Alexandri petisse). See Baynham 2001 for the complex nature of this episode. 182 Just. Epit. 1.1. 183 Riley 2002. 184 Just. Epit. 1.4.1-8, 1.4.9-12, 1.7.1, 1.7.15-19, 1.8. 2-13, 1.9.15-18, 1.10.14. 34 post-Augustan setting which saw imperium being held by a single individual. As such, incest demonstrated that Semiramis, like the other women in the work, were not suitable to enter to the political sphere.

Semiramis’ Incest in the Late Antique and Christian Sources

In Late Antiquity, under Christian dominance, the incest story gets taken up with renewed vigour. During this period, moral reflections of ecclesiastical writers influenced harsher restrictions and wider definitions of consanguinity in comparison to previous Roman conceptions. The most influential of these writers were St Augustine and Ambrose in the fifth- and sixth-centuries, however their reflections were not yet codified in law. In the Frankish kingdom during the sixth- to seventh-centuries, these views started being debated in a small number of legal cases and ecclesiastical gatherings, but no clear definition or law was formulated.185 It was not until the Carolingian period in the ninth-century that codified laws concerning restriction on marriages came into practice. Christian dogma defined marriage as a permanent legal union and ecclesiastical ritual undertaken before God which was largely based on New Testament texts, and rulings by Church Councils, and Church Fathers (in particular St Augustine).186 Marriages were prohibited up to the seventh degree of consanguinity, with degrees counted in steps between relatives passing through a common ancestor or ‘as far as memory could go back’.187 To make things even more complicated, consanguinity included spiritual relationships such as godparents and their family, and extra-marital bonds. Due to the complicated nature involved with calculating familial ties, a number of texts were created to help explain marriage prohibitions to avoid incest.188 During this period we likewise see an increased interest in the legal and moral nature of Semiramis’ incest. Not only does she commit incest with her son, but she retroactively creates a law to make her actions legal.

The story of how Roman conceptions of consanguinity became more restricted begins with St Augustine. As previously mentioned, incest plays an important role within this work that will become influential to later theological discussions and codification of marriage laws. Complying with Biblical scripture, Augustine’s The City of God states that incest was a necessary and acceptable way for Adam and Noah to reconstitute the human race in the antediluvian ages.189 However, in later biblical history this practice was unacceptable and deemed an infraction of the divine law labelled by Augustine as one of the

185 De Jong 1989. 186 Duby 1978; Bof and Leyser 2016. 187 De Jong 1986: 41. 188 Rapp 2016: 231-235. 189 August. De civ. D. 12. 35

‘miseries and evils to which the human race is subject to as a result of the first sin’.190 By placing Semiramis as a contemporary to Abraham, Augustine subjects the Queen to these regulations of morals and laws governed by the Church. He clarifies Justin’s ambiguous assertion and records that Semiramis did indeed commit incest with her son stating that she ‘dared to pollute him, her son, by incestuous embrace’.191 By doing this, Semiramis is seen to defy these regulations, eschew correct morality and, as the ruler of Babylon, epitomize the wickedness and perversion of the antithetical City of God. To which Archibald states ‘and what more appalling perversion, for a queen and a mother, than to exploit her tyrannical status by seducing her own son?’192 To reinforce this Augustine relates Ninyas’ matricide which, in relation to the contemporary setting, is clearly justified in moral terms.

Contemporary to Augustine, the priest and historian, Orosius, also included a narrative of Semiramis in his The Seven Books of History against the Pagans, covering the deeds of humanity from creation until his own day in the first quarter of the fifth-century.193 Surviving in 249 manuscripts and extracts, Orosius’ Histories Against the Pagans was continually read throughout the Western Middle Ages and formed the dominant template for the writing of history in the Medieval period.194 Unlike those before him, Orosius was writing a secular history from a Christian perspective. Whilst differing from Augustine’s City of God in this way, Orosius did draw upon elements found in the work. He built upon the image of a degenerate Babylon personified by the transgressive sexual pleasures of Semiramis by deriving inspiration from the Whore of Babylon from Revelation.195 Working from Justin and Augustine, he emphasises the Queen’s abhorrent promiscuity and lust with unmatched vigour and zeal.196 This fervour is maintained throughout the account. For example, he states that Semiramis ‘lived amid unending fornication and murder’.197 To reinforce this, he adds the story of the Queen having many lovers, further dramatizing it to also include her detaining the men as prostitutes and then killing them after ‘enjoying pleasures of the flesh’.198 Orosius also adds that during these promiscuous exploits Semiramis illicitly conceived a son who she then exposed. However, the pinnacle of these libidinous actions was reached when she unwittingly committed incest with this son, and upon learning of this transgression covered her ‘personal disgrace’

190 August. De civ. D. 15; Shell 1988: 30. 191 August. De civ. D. 18.2. 192 Archibald 2001a: 47-48. 193 In Fulgentius’ On Ages of the World and of Man, greatly indebted to Orosius, Semiramis knowingly commit incest with Ninyas and marries him. Demonstrating an inherited progression of adultery. (Fulg. De aetatibus. 3.) 194 See Rohrbacher 2002: 148-149. 195 Fear 2010: 52n145. 196 Samuel 1944: 34; Newman 1996: 98; Archibald 2001a: 39. 197 Oros. 1.4.7. 198 Oros. 1.4.7. 36 by retroactively legitimizing her crime by endorsing complete sexual freedom for her subjects.199 The law entailed that there should be ‘none of the natural reverence between parents and their children when it came to seeking a spouse and that everyone should be free to act as he pleased.’200 By doing this, she inflicted her monstrous crime and unnatural proclivities upon the whole empire. Moreover, differing from Augustine’s account, Orosius omits Ninyas’ matricide or attempted matricide (nor is Ninyas even mentioned by name). By removing any instance of matricide, Ninyas appears to be complicit to the crime, worsening the whole ordeal. This is the lasting impression we have of the queen, her tyranny and lasciviousness combining to control the sex lives of her subjects.

The popularity and wide readership of the Histories Against the Pagans is also demonstrated by its abridgment and translation into Old English in the ninth-century and an Arabic translation a century later.201 The Old English version of Orosius was produced by an unknown Anglo-Saxon author and is sometimes erroneously attributed to Alfred the Great.202 The work was adapted to suit an Anglo-Saxon audience by shortening the length, adding explanations and rationalizations, as well as adopting a more objective but still Christian tone.203 The Semiramis that appears in this text is an extremely feminine one, prone to emotional outbursts and manipulations through her body. For example, Semiramis is described as inciting Ninus to war with her lusts and once she took the throne invaded Ethiopia with wiflice nið or ‘womanly spite’.204 The account still contains all the other manifestations of lust and we see the Queen committing ‘manifold illicit intercourse with most immeasurable wickedness’ by bedding and then killing anyone she discovered to be of royal blood.205 The account concludes with Semiramis knowingly committing incest with her son, and establishing the acceptance of incest to get around the condemnation of subjects.

This depiction of Semiramis aligns with Anglo-Saxon thoughts of leadership, especially the problematic state of queens following the rule of Queen Eadburh, a divisive figure.206 The ninth-century Welsh monk, Asser, lists the Queen’s transgressions in his Life of Alfred recounting such crimes as tyrannically controlling and poisoning her husband King Beorhtric of Wessex and his advisors. Moreover, after

199 Oros. 1.4.7-8. 200 Oros. 1.4.8. 201 Pucci 591 202 See Batley 2015. 203 Kretzschmar 1987. 204 OE. 1.2. 22/8-28. 205 OE. 1.2. 22/8-28. 206 Klein 2006: 12-13. 37 offending Charlemagne she was committed to a nunnery where she was later caught not keeping to her vows of chastity and was kicked out onto the streets.207 These actions were deemed so bad and reprehensible that ‘all the inhabitants of that land swore en masse that they would never allow any king to reign over them who chose to command his queen to sit beside him in his lifetime, on the royal throne’.208 Consequently, heavy restrictions were put in place to limit female power. For example, the term for queen, cwen, was rarely given to a king’s wife, and a woman could only gain this position through marriage as a consort.209 In the Old English version of Orosius we see Semiramis conforming to these notions of irresponsible queenship. Like Eadburh, Semiramis’ power is expressed in terms of excessive and deviant lust demonstrating the dangerous potential of extreme and undiluted female power.210 This includes the dangers of female sexuality, which could result in such atrocities as incest.

Semiramis’ Incest in the Medieval Period

During the Medieval period, we notice a similar interest in incest coinciding with the revival of Greaco- Roman myths. Moreover, the definition of the crime and its seriousness continued to be a matter of contention. Whilst restrictions on consanguineous relations continued to be imposed by the Church, incest was also endorsed as the exemplary sin—péché monstreux—where sinners could only be saved by repentance and the magnitude of God’s grace.211 We see this reflected in a range of literature, particularly in romance genres, produced during this period. In these sources, various incestuous stories were circulated with incest either being unwittingly committed, purposefully committed, or realised at the last minute.212 In general, when incest was committed, males often achieved high spiritual status after repenting their sins, whereas females would only ever be reaccepted into society. In the case of the most serious close-kin crime, mother-son incest, the son often retreated from the world, repented and was sanctified whereas the mother would confess at the last minute, be absolved, and then die.213

This period also marks a shift away from previous notions of incest as a manifestation of barbarian, pagan, heretical, tyrannical, or animalistic behaviour. Rather it was believed to be an overwhelming

207 Asser. Al. 14-15. 208 Asser. Al. 13. 209 Klein 2006: 10; Stafford 2006: 144. 210 Walker 2016: 72. 211 Archibald 1999; Archibald 2001a: 27. 212 Forker 1989; Archibald 2001b. 213 Archibald 1999: 168. 38 emotion and evil that could strike anyone, even virtuous Christians.214 This was particularly the case for women, who were perceived as constant sources of temptation and prone to lust. Christian men, in contrast, did not have these same faults. Therefore, we see a relative lack of interest in male aggressors of lust and incest. This is most evident in the Oedipus myth, in which the political implications of incest overpower the act itself.215 Nevertheless, Classical sources remained as the authoritative sources for such matters, and well-known stories of incest and lust continued to circulate.216 Sources such as Ovid and Juvenal were plundered for characters demonstrating the dangers of lust, such as Myrrha, Phaedra, Canace, and Byblis.217 Sourced from Justin and his legacy, Semiramis was also another character that was popular for these purposes.218 We see her being listed among other infamous sexually immoral figures in the works of dominant authors of the period: Dante, Petrarch, Boccaccio, and Chaucer.219 This no doubt firmly entrenched Semiramis within the stereotype as the epitome of Babylonian vice and uncontrollable female desire within the popular imagination.

The impact of St Augustine and Paulus Orosius in setting the foundations of a sexually excessive Semiramis cannot be stressed enough.220 One of the most pervasive sources to latch onto this construction of the Babylonian Queen was the immensely influential Divine Comedy of Dante Alighieri (c. 1265-321), which has the richest manuscript tradition for any Medieval vernacular work surviving in over eight- hundred extant manuscripts.221 Through her association with prostitution, bestiality, castration, cross- dressing, and incest, we find the Babylonian Queen confined to the second circle of the Inferno reserved for carnal sinners who ‘subject their reason to their lust’. 222 As punishment they are ceaselessly hounded by the terrible winds of a violent storm. The defining figure of this canto is the scandalous Francesca da Rimini who, inspired by the romances of Arthurian legend, re-enacted the erotic embrace of Lancelot and Guinevere with her brother-in-law Paolo Malatesta. Caught in the act of this adultery, the couple were murdered by her deformed husband Giovanni Malatesta.223 In comparison, Semiramis is reduced to an ancillary figure, the first of a catalogue of other great literary figures who succumbed, often fatally,

214 Archibald 2001b: 231. 215 See Archibald 2001a. 216 Pampinella-Cropper 2012; Forker 1989: 217 Archibald 2001b: 68. 218 Samuel 1944: 33. Semiramis is found in Ovid but her incest is not mentioned. (Ov. Am. 5.10) 219 Petr. TL. 3.76-78; Bocc. FW. 2; Dant. Inf. 5.55; Chauc. MLT. 358-59. 220 Samuel 1944: 33; Marchesi 2018: 128. 221 Shaw 2019. 222 Dant. Inf. 5.37. 223 Ledda 2019: 34. 39 to lust.224 They include Dido, Cleopatra, Helen, Achilles, Paris, and Tristan. The presence of Semiramis in this list is interesting because Phaedra, a figure made famous for her incestuous advances, would have been more appropriate choice. Not only is she a more infamous figure associated with incestuous behaviour, but ‘impious’ Phaedra is also the first shade encountered in Aeneid VI during Aeneas’ descent into the underworld.225 Since this passage of Vergil’s Aeneid formed the geography of the Inferno, we see Dante discarding and replacing figures from the Aeneid—Semiramis instead of Phaedra. A possible reason that influenced this substitution was the concept of the translatio studii et imperii (transfer of learning and power).226 According to this concept, power and knowledge were seen to be inherited from East to West in a linear narrative that was divinely ordained. Marchesi identifies the catalogue of sinners in Inferno V working in the same way starting from the ancient east with Semiramis the biblical queen of Babylon, to the Tyrian/Carthaginian Dido, and the Egyptian Cleopatra. In the second part of the catalogue, this is continued with Helen, Paris, and Achilles (Greek and Trojan characters), passing through Tristan (a knight of the Round Table), to reach the contemporary Italian lovers Paolo and Francesca.227 As such, Semiramis was deemed an appropriate figure to start off this linear progression as she was both Near Eastern and associated with incestuous carnal desire. Thus, she replaced Phaedra.

When Semiramis is mentioned, Dante identifies her lussuria (lechery or wantonness) as her sin that consigns her to the second circle. He states:

“The first of those about whom you wish to learn,” he said to me then, “was empress over many languages. She was so given to lechery that she made lust licit in her law, to take away the blame she had incurred. She is Semiramis, of whom we read that she succeeded Ninus and was his wife; she held the land the Sultan rules.228

However, it is not her rapacious and often fatal sex life that is being referred to, but rather the ‘vice of lust that in her laws made licit’.229 Virtually quoted from Orosius, this alludes to her legalization of sexual freedom to mask her crime of incest.230 As such, emphasis is placed on the Queen’s self-exculpation— the legislation that negated sexual restraint rather than the act of incest itself. The magnitude of this crime

224 Kay 2019: 143-145. 225 Verg. Aen. 6.451; Jacoff 1988: 133. 226 Marchesi 2018: 134. 227 Marchesi 2018: 134. 228 Dant. Inf. 5.37.52-58. 229 Dant. Inf. 5.37.52-58. Archibald argues that because Dante is not specific with Semiramis’ crimes that the story of her incest and infamous marriage law were well known. (Archibald 2001a: 41) 230 Orosius’ ‘ut cuique libitum esset iberum fieret’ becomes ‘libitio fé licito un sua legge’. (Oros. 1.4.8) 40 is also demonstrated with Semiramis’ description as ‘the empress over many languages’.231 By indicating the sheer size of her empire that is big enough to contain different languages she is seen to inflict this crime upon a vast amount of people, rather than just her son. Her actions have severe ramifications that change the course of history, similar to the other figures that accompany her. Thus, a clear juxtaposition is created for Semiramis between political power and sexual transgressions, similar to the other women in the circle.232

Contemporary to Dante were two other literary giants of the Medieval period: Francesco Petrarca (otherwise known as Petrarch) and Giovanni Boccaccio.233 These figures promoted a new appreciation and acceptance of Greco-Roman literature, pioneering the humanist movement. In the works of Petrarch we see similar female figures being associated with some, but not all, versions of Semiramis. The Babylonian Queen could be compartmentalised into two versions, one in which she displays admirable masculine strengths and another where she displays all the negative traits associated with femininty. These divisions could be selectively emphasised or omitted by Petrarch to suit the current need. As will be discussed in Chapter Three, despite being female, Semiramis is included in De viris illustribus, a catalogue of famous men throughout history.234 In this work, the Queen is applauded for her militaristic, masculine traits and her lustful ways are somewhat excluded and rationalized in order to be a suitable entry into the work. In this sense, these actions are gendered female, an example of feminine excess. At the same time, she is denigrated in other works for these same feminine attributes. One such work is the Trionfi—a series of poems evoking a Roman triumph in which famous figures from history processed in honour of the allegorical figures Love, Chastity, Death, Fame, Time, and Eternity. In the Triumph of Love, Semiramis is listed alongside two other individuals, Byblis and Myrrha, ‘whose love was evil’ and ‘oppressed with shame for their unlawful and distorted love’.235 These figures have been linked together for their infamous acts of incest. Yet, in the same work the four poems later, Triumph of Fame, Semiramis is applauded for her valour as a warrior-queen. As such, we see very different versions of Semiramis appearing in his work—sometimes within the same one. Nevertheless, it is clear that like Dante, Semiramis’ lust was a point of condemnation in her character.

231 Dant. Inf. 5.54. 232 Jacoff 1988: 132. 233 See Kircher 2015; Bernado 2016. 234 Petr. De viris. 5. 235 Petr. TL. 3.76-78. 41

It is apparent that Petrarch’s De viris illustribus had a lasting influence on the reception and reinterpretation of the Classical tradition in the Medieval period. This was especially the case for fellow Renaissance humanist, Giovanni Boccaccio, who regarded Petrarch as a model writer and scholar.236 This is typified in Boccaccio’s modelling of the De mulieribus claris (1361-1362), a catalogue of the deeds of famous pagan women, to Petrarch’s catalogue on famous men, De viris illustribus.237 Despite being based on Petrarch’s work, which largely omits any extant reference to Semiramis’ incest, Boccaccio’s De mulierbius claris brings Semiramis’ sexuality to the fore. The Babylonian Queen features as the second woman in the work who inherits the sins and consequences of the first woman, Eve—a woman born to greatness but through feminine fickleness (levitate feminea) who foolishly (stolide) succumbed to the Devil’s temptation and committed the original sin.238 As such, Holderness argues that the Babylonian Queen equated to the second fall or failing of the female sex. To demonstrate this, Semiramis’ positive manly traits are first emphasised but are, in Boccaccio’s words, ‘undone in the end by her innate feminine licentiousness’.239 The failures of the Queen are recounted in immense detail, including all varying accounts of her sexual debauchery. These actions are strictly gendered female and, as such, are seen to be the product of her unbridled femininity. However, not only is she seen to be a figure of feminine excess, but also a figure who controls the sex lives of all around her. These sexual transgressions, as well as her desire to control people’s sexual habits, combine and culminate in incest and the legislation of her crimes. In the end this transgression results in her death at the hands of her son.

After recounting Semiramis’ manly achievements, that are lauded in the first half of the bipartite structure, this praise quickly turns to chastisement: ‘with one unspeakable act of seduction Semiramis stained [all her accomplishments]’.240 The proceeding narrative centres on the Babylonian Queen’s sexual excess that is unfalteringly categorized as female. Semiramis’ downfall is blamed on her ‘carnal desire’ which she shares with other members of her sex.241 Boccaccio details Semiramis’ downfall in prurient detail relating her tales of incest, nymphomania, the murder of her lovers, and finally her own murder by her son and lover Ninyas. These sexual excesses are often linked with gender inversion. By providing multiple versions concerning her sexuality Boccaccio perpetuates this tradition of excess.242

236 Kolsky 2004: 39. 237 McLeod 1991: 62; Zak 2015: 141. 238 Bocc. FW. 1. 239 Holderness 2004: 97. 240 Bocc. FW. 2.8. 241 Bocc. FW. 2.8. 242 Kolsky 2004: 160. 42

Figure 7. Portrait of Semiramis holding a chastity belt, Hartmann Schedel, Nuremburg Chronicle (Nuremberg: Anton Koberger, 1493), fol. 29r. Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Rar. 287, fol. 29r. The first of the many stories ascribed to Semiramis is her establishment of the law that lifted any sexual restraint of her subjects, including her ‘beastly’ relationship with her son.243 Semiramis’ incest is an extension of the gender inversion, by taking an active role in the sexual relationship she unnaturally dominates and emasculates him.244 In Justin it was unclear if this consanguineous relationship was ever consummated or not, whereas Boccaccio takes care to clarify that the incest did occur, thereby worsening her actions and crime.245 To further play upon this overbearing characterisation of the Queen, she is attributed the invention of a form of chastity belt the femoralium, Medieval Latin for breeches, which she is said to have girdled (cinxit) the females of the household to prevent them ‘stealing her son from her bed’ (Figure 7).246 This further serves as an element of gender reversal as chastity belts were envisioned as being utilised by husbands in an attempt to control their wives fidelity.247 As such, as stated

243 Bocc. FW. 2.13. 244 Phillippy 1986: 184. 245 Beringer 2016a: 69. 246 MLLM s.v. ‘femoralia’. This unusual part of the narrative can also be found in Boccaccio’s Teseida (7.50 gloss). Beringer identifies an image of Semiramis holding a chastity belt in Hartmann Schedel’s 1493 Nuremberg Chronicle. (Beringer 2016a: 70n53) However, peculiarly, the belt is not mentioned in his account of the Queen (Figure 7). 247 Classen’s study of the chastity belt in the Medieval period has demonstrated that it was a myth that was largely perpetuated by eighteenth-century audiences due to its ‘highly curious and salacious nature which might titillate so many an uninformed reader… evokes numerous images about devious practices, falsely confirming negative evaluations of the past, yet inciting the erotic fantasy’. (Classen 2007: 17) This promulgation continued up until modern day, taking on a mythic quality not 43 by Archibald, the chastity belt is ‘a mark of her monstrous and perverted nature, and her tyrannical abuse of power’.248

Another reason for the creation of this law is adapted from Orosius and has her copulating then killing her many lovers to hide her crimes.249 However, these crimes were occasionally revealed through illicit pregnancies, therefore the law was put into place to decriminalize her actions. Quilligan argues that Semiramis is the ‘primal scandal of female shame’ as she does not feel any ill-repute for these actions and uses her political power to cover her criminal deeds.250 However, this was not always the case. In an earlier work by Boccaccio, his Teseida (c.1340-1341) written more than twenty years prior, it was shame imposed by her subjects that drove the Queen to implement the law rather than a desire to hide her immoral crimes.251 The Teseida consisted of a main storyline and contains supplementary textual glosses giving further information and description on elements within the work. In one of these textual glosses, a painting inside a Temple of Venus on Mount Cithaeron is described in immense detail. In the course of describing the Queen he states:

But although she was otherwise a valiant woman, she was nonetheless enkindled by such a fire of Venus, that perceiving that her son Ninus was such a comely youth, she went to lie with him and kept him hidden among her damsels…Finally, when the sin which she had indulged in for a long time was discovered, and she learned that people talked about her to her shame, she made a law to remove her shame, decreeing that whatever lewd acts gave anyone pleasure were lawful.252

In this way, the earlier version of Semiramis expresses remorse to better link her with the accompanying figures also depicted inside the temple who were tragically afflicted by Venus’ fire: Pyramus and Thisbe, Hercules and Iole, as well as Biblis and Cauno.253 Other than this notable discrepancy, many of the

matching the historical reality presented by museum artefacts. This has been further reinforced by a more recent study by Ley which has shown that whilst the chastity belt may have been a figment of fifteenth-century imagination, their actual use was in the Renaissance and only in rare circumstances. (Ley 2012: 176-177) It was in the eighteenth- and nineteenth-centuries that these objects appeared as curiosities, jokes, or anti-masturbation devices. (See M.574 in the British Museum.) Moreover, when it does appear in literature prior to this date it is used as largely anecdotal fashion or in burlesque fiction. 248 Archibald 2001a: 44. 249 Cf. Bocc. FW. 2.17; Orosius. 1.4.7. 250 Quilligan 1991: 89. 251 Bocc. Tes. 7.50 gloss. 252 Bocc. Tes. 7.50 gloss. 253 Chaucer, in his Parlement of Foules, is seen to combine elements of Boccaccio’s description of the temple of Venus with Dante’s Inferno V to emphasise a combination of love and death. (Smarr 1998: 116.) To the pre-existing list of lovers in the temple of Venus, Chaucer adds six more names, most of which are taken from Inferno V. The figures include: Semiramis, Pyramus and Thisbe, Hercules and Iole, Biblis and Cauno, Dido, Tristam and Isaude, Paris, Achilles, Helen, Cleopatra, Troilus, Silla, and the mother of Romulus. (Chauc. PF. 281-294.) 44 elements in this text will remain the same in the De mulieribus claris, including her retroactive incest law.

It is this law over the actual act of incest that spurs Ninyas to kill his mother. Again, numerous reasons are suggested for Ninyas’ actions. Boccaccio states ‘[Ninyas] could not bear to see others share in that incest that he thought to be his alone, or because his mother’s excesses brought him shame, or perhaps because he feared the birth of children who would succeed to the throne.’254 The multiple motivations for Ninyas’ matricide stresses the criminal nature of her actions and its severe ramifications that are seen to influence not only her son, but her people, and future generations of the empire. As such, Ninyas selflessly acts for the greater good and eliminates the monstrous Queen to restore moral and public order.255 This is also reinforced in another tradition stated by Boccaccio that has Ninyas killing Semiramis ‘stricken with desire’ in her older age when she summoned him to bed.256 The mere attempt of the act was enough to incite matricide.

We also see Semiramis’ incest briefly alluded to in Boccaccio’s De casibus virorum illustrium (1356 to 1360 and revised in 1373) recounting the biographies of famous men and women, from Adam and Eve to present-day individuals, who had metaphorically fallen on Fortune's wheel. This work was incredibly popular and was translated and adapted numerous times, first by the French ecclesiastic clerk, Laurent de Premierfait (13807-1418). Not only did he translate the work in 1400, and then again in 1409 as De Cas de Nobles Hommes et Femmes, but he greatly expanded upon the work. Budra notes that the result of this was a translation that was ‘so free that it should probably be considered a new work’.257 The two lines in the original texts were expanded upon by de Premierfait, adding biographic information about Semiramis as well as recounting her incestuous advances towards her son.258 It was this French translation that became known in England and was translated by John Lydgate into English titled Fall of Princes between 1432 and 1438, and was published under Boccaccio’s name. Lydgate pledged to stay true to the version, and as such focused on the Babylonians’ Queen’s rampant sexuality found in de Premierfait’s version. This is evident in the following:

Queen off Assirie and wiff to kyng Nynus, And be discent douhter to Neptunus,

254 Bocc. FW. 2.18. 255 Dulac 1978: 320. 256 Bocc. FW. 2.16. 257 Budra 2016: 6. 258 Cf. Bocc. De cas. 1. Fo.XII; de Premierfait.18.26-27. 45

Semiramis called in hir daies, Which off all men wolde make assaies.

She nouther spared straunger nor kynreede; Hir owne sone wat nat sat a-side, But with hym hadde knowlechyng in deede, Off which the sclaundre wente abrod ful wide, For with on man she koude nat a-bide, Such a fals lust was vpon hir fall, In hir corage to haue a-do with all.259

Through the popular works of Boccaccio, Laurent de Premierfait, and John Lydgate, it is clear that the tale of incest associated with Semiramis has remained a point of intrigue that was consistently included and perpetuated throughout the De casibus tradition. The popularity of these works greatly influenced the conceptions of the lustful Semiramis as a sexually transgressive figure, particularly in the popular imagination in Late Medieval England.260

This misogynistic narrative of Boccaccio was completely upturned by Christine de Pizan in her 1405 work The Book of the City of Ladies. De Pizan created a metaphorical, utopian city to protect womenkind from the misogyny of men by collecting and using an array of historical women as the building blocks. In order to justify Lady Reason’s selection of Semiramis as the foundation stone of this city, Christine rationalizes and explains her incest.261 Instead of being contemporary with Abraham, Christine, taking Boccaccio’s description of the Queen as ‘most ancient’ (vetustissima), places her within a prelapsarian period at the beginning of time before the Fall of Man, but more importantly before the establishment of laws.262 By placing Semiramis at a time when ‘people lived according to the law of Nature, where all people were allowed to do whatever came into their hearts without sinning’ any blame for her incest is waived.263 However, incest is still condemned by de Pizan and she clarifies that if Semiramis had known of the wickedness of her actions then she would not have acted in such a way. In this way Christine deflects the blame from Semiramis, but not from Semiramis’ actions; she transforms the Babylonian queen’s ‘erreur’ into an object lesson on the importance of education to virtue.264 Despite these efforts

259 Lydg. Fall. 6632-6643 260 Shakespeare. Titus Andronicus. Scene 2. Act 1; Taming of the Shrew. Scene 1. Act 2. 261 Semiramis’ notorious reputation and charges of incest were identified as the reason why she was selected. See Quilligan 1991: 70; Holderness 2004: 98; Carr 2017: 78. 262 De Piz. Le Livre. 1.15.2; Holderness 2005. 263 De Piz. Le Livre. 1.15.2. This is further demonstrated by the erasure of Ninyas’ matricide as well as the exclusion of any nefarious sexual conduct. Any attempt of matricide would undermine the allegation that the queen was not doing anything wrong in the eyes of her own society. (Archibald 2001b: 46.) 264 Holderness 2004: 100. 46 by Christine de Pizan to create a new history for Semiramis, her work did not make it very far past the French court as a piece of peculiar and curious writing because it was written by a woman.

Conclusion

There is a long tradition of Semiramis being constructed in the popular imagination as a sexual figure. Not only did she exhibit characteristics of sexual excesses in sources such as St Augustine, Orosius, Dante, Petrarch, and Boccaccio, but she was seen to combine cruelty and immorality. Thus, we see her being associated with promiscuity, an insatiable sexual appetite, sadistically killing her many lovers, controlling the sex lives of others with chastity belts, castration, and sex laws, and transgressing natural and societal boundaries, culminating in bestiality and incest. However, as will be discussed in the following chapters, Semiramis is a complicated figure, who was lauded for her virtue as often as she was damned for her vices. However, these positive receptions have been largely dismissed by modern scholarship who instead unfairly focus on her darker, erotic sides. By doing this, they perpetuate the issue and claim that the dominant opinion of Semiramis was a negative one.

47

CHAPTER TWO Part One: Monumental Construction What one-eyed Cyclops built all this vast stone mound of Assyrian Semiramis, or what giants, sons of earth, raised it to reach near to the seven Pleiads, inflexible, unshakable, a mass weighing on the broad earth like to the peak of Athos? -Antipater of Sidon265

Throughout Antiquity, Semiramis was known as a builder. Her constructions were complex and varied, but more importantly, they were monumental. So monumental, in fact, that Antipater compares the works of the Assyrian queen to the labours of Cyclops or giants, in height reaching the stars, and in size and strength as steadfast as a mountain built by the gods. Babylon was a great beneficiary of her work. Here, the Assyrian queen was famed for building city walls of gargantuan proportions, taming the raging Euphrates, erecting two sumptuous palaces on either side of it, and sometimes even credited with building three of the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World, most notably the Hanging Gardens of Babylon. Outside of Babylon her deeds were no less prolific. While the queen campaigned in the east she continued a similar policy. Constructions that were left behind in her wake included more lavish palaces, exotic gardens, colossal images carved into the sides of mountains, and numerous mysterious “Mounds of Semiramis”. However, in our sources these monumental constructions were not always lauded as achievements. Instead, they were often seen to demonstrate the traits of an Oriental despot.266 Nevertheless, long after the death of this industrious queen her monumental constructions continued to persevere in the memory of anyone passing through the Middle East.267 The legend of Semiramis the builder continued to grow. In fact, Berossus, a Babylonian priest in the Hellenistic era, complained that too many Babylonian monuments were being wrongfully attributed to Semiramis.268 As such, it is

265 Anth. Pal. 7.748. From this inscription, by the second-century BCE Greek poet Antipater of Sidon, it is apparent that he was aware of the circulating tradition of Semiramis as a builder of monumental projects. Antipater is also known for his list of the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World, of which the walls of Babylon and the Hanging Gardens were both listed. At some time both of these monuments have been attributed to Semiramis. However, they predate the first citations of Semiramis as a creator. 266 As such, we see this motif associated with other figures. One that is particularly relevant to Semiramis is Alexander the Great who is also associated with excessive and monumental constructions. See for example, Plutarch’s (De Alex. fort. 4.3.) commentary on the moral implications of a monumental carving of Alexander into Mount Athos. (See Stewart 1993: 28-29, 37-41) 267 In the sixteenth-century, the Austrian nobleman Georg Christoph Fernberger travelled from Egypt to India and through the Near East. In his diary Fernberger mentions a dry canal-bed running from Baghdad along the road taken to reach the supposed Tower of Babel and writes of the ruined remains of an aqueduct that he attributed to Semiramis. Whilst, the dry river bed has been identified as the Sawqlawiyah canal, Ooghe proposes that Semiramis’ aqueduct seems to have been ‘a figment of the Austrian's vivid imagination’. (2007: 237) In 1783-5, the French botanist, André Michaux, whilst visiting Baghdad discovered an elaborately decorated large black stone (later identified as a kudurru or boundary stone) ‘among the ruins of a palace known by the name of the garden of Semiramis, near the Tigris’. (See Fagan 2007: 20, 26; Finkel and Seymour 2008: 28.) 268 Joseph. CA 1.142. 48 apparent that the association of Semiramis as a builder of monumental constructions was deeply ingrained in our sources.

This chapter seeks to explain why the figure of Semiramis came to be synonymous with monumental construction as well as how this theme was utilised in our sources. It will be argued that Semiramis’ constructions were gross exaggerations of reality and reflects how Western sources viewed the East through an Orientalistic lens by imposing tropes of the Near Eastern despotes onto the Queen. It further demonstrates that later sources continue to associate Semiramis with monumental construction. This directly challenges the frequently cited work of Irene Samuel who states that a sexualised Semiramis was the representation of the Late Antique and Medieval periods.269 This overview provides context for the case study explored in the second half of this chapter: the monumental tomb of Semiramis.

Semiramis’ Building Programme: Babylon and Beyond

The first major source that recounts the construction deeds of the figure that will be known as Semiramis is Herodotus’ Histories. Throughout the Histories, Babylon is noted for its wondrous qualities; ἄξιον θώματος and ἀξιοθέητα.270 Adding to the city’s enduring allure are two Assyrian queens of noteworthiness. The first is Semiramis, known as Sammu-ramat in Assyrian records.271 The other queen that is mentioned is Naqia, known as Nitokris in the Histories.272 Both these women are ascribed deeds of water-related infrastructure. This included the rerouting and embanking the Euphrates River, and the construction of canals, dykes, and basins.273 To a modern audience these constructions may sound like impressive achievements, however in the context of Herodotus’ Histories they are also offered as signs of Oriental decadence, being hubristically monumental, largely self-serving and lavish. In consequence, they help to perpetuate the idea of Babylon as a “soft” culture.274

The most fruitful source detailing Semiramis’ building programme, both within the city of Babylon and outside of it, is Diodorus Siculus’ Bibliotheca Historica that was written in the first-century BCE. Sulimani argues that the intended purpose of the Bibliotheca Historica was to create a geographically

269 Samuel 1944. 270 Hdt. 1.185.3, 1.184. 271 Pettinato 1988: 309-310. 272 Lewy 1952. 273 Hdt. 1.184-187. 274 Munson 2001: 8-9. 49 accurate picture, essentially a literary map, of the inhabited world from the third- to the first-centuries BCE.275 As such, the parameters of the work were largely defined by the conquered regions of Alexander the Great and the waning Hellenistic world that had prompted an infatuation with the East. The accounts of Egypt, Mesopotamia, Scythia, and Arabia, are dominated by detailed descriptions of conspicuous landmarks, topographical accounts of sites, as well as accounts of their most famous leaders. The history of Mesopotamia in Book Two of the Bibliotheca Historica, is dominated by Semiramis. This includes a detailed account of the queen’s building programme that was instigated in Babylon as well as other notable cities that the queen journeyed to in the East.276

In Herodotus’ Histories and Diodorus Siculus’ Bibliotheca Historica, Semiramis’ building programme can be divided into two overarching themes: Oriental decadence and the hubristic control over nature.

Oriental Decadence

A major theme that occurs when recounting Semiramis’ constructions is their ornate and superfluous nature. This is primarily indicated by the opulent materials of the structures, such as precious metals and gemstones, as well as their weight and monumental size. Moreover, the construction is carried out under slavish conditions, completed by a large work force in a short amount of time. When compared to their historical equivalents they are greatly over exaggerated. As such, the description of these monuments comply with the conventional themes of a soft culture and the barbaric despotes with Semiramis’ position within these paradigms being reinforced.

i. Foundation of Babylon and the Construction of its Walls One of the first constructions built by Semiramis, after the tomb of her husband Ninus, is the foundation of Babylon and the construction of the cities walls. Diodorus’ account of Semiramis’ building programme is prefaced by the achievements of Ninus, achievements which the queen strived to surpass. After expanding the Assyrian Empire to its greatest size yet, Ninus ‘was eager to found a city of such magnitude, that not only would it be the largest of any which then existed in the whole inhabited world, but also that no other ruler of a later time should, if he undertook such a task, find it easy to surpass him.’277 In order to do this, he ‘[gathered] his forces from every quarter and all the necessary material’,

275 Sulimani 2005: 63; Sulimani 2011: 165. 276 See Sulimani 2005: 46-51; Sulimani 2011: 204-211. 277 Diod. Sic. 2.3. 50 and founded the city of Nineveh.278 The total length of the fortified city equated to 480 stades, with a width of three chariots, and 1,500 towers with a height of two-hundred feet. Like her husband, Semiramis was also ‘eager for great exploits and ambitious to surpass the fame of her predecessor’.279 So, following his suit Semiramis decided to found her own city, Babylon.280 So in order to outdo the king and to achieve this mark of excellence, Semiramis had to go above and beyond Ninus. She did this by employing two million skilled artisans and architects from across the world to build her fortified city. This is an excessively inflated number of tyrannical proportions that trumps Ninus’ efforts in Nineveh. However, when the size of Nineveh is compared with the measurements given for Semiramis’ Babylon, Nineveh is substantially bigger. Despite this, it was Semiramis’ Babylonian walls that were considered to be one of the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World.

The Walls of Babylon are included as an ancient wonder in the lists of Antipater, Strabo, Philo of Byzantium, and a few Roman and Christian writers.281 In Babylon, by Nebuchadnezzar II’s reign, these walls had reached their monumental size, and in Nineveh Sennacherib had also enlarged the fortifications of the city. Following the same pattern of conflation seen with the deeds of past rulers, Semiramis too, gets attached to this monument. In fact, the Walls of Babylon are one of the structures most persistently associated with the queen.282 Using naturally occurring materials from the area (baked mud-bricks and bitumen) Semiramis was supposedly able to fortify the city on a monumental scale.283 The scale of these walls vary. Nevertheless, authors take great pleasure in listing their own measurements of the walls, between 360 to 385 stades long.284 The authors also often describe the size of the walls as being wide enough for chariots to pass without touching.285 These measurements are embellished over time as the legend of Babylon and Semiramis became more removed and distant. For example, Julian, writing in the fourth-century, states that the walls were nearly 500 stades in length.286 Moreover, the walls become

278 Diod. Sic. 2.3. 279 Diod. Sic. 2.7. 280 Diodorus also attributes Semiramis with founding cities along the Euphrates and Tigris. (Diod. Sic. 2.11.1-3.) In c.100 CE, Semiramis and Ninus also became associated with the foundation of Aphrodisias in Caria, later renamed Ninoe after the eponymous founder of Nineveh. Reliefs from a basilica in the city depict the two figures. (see Yildrim 2004: 23-52) 281 Diod. Sic. 2.11.5; Anth. Pal. 8. 177; Anth. Pal. 9.58 (Antipater of Sidon); Strab. 16.5. The walls were often substituted by the Pharos of Alexandria in later lists. 282 FGrH 688 F 1b = Diod. Sic. 2.7; Curt. 5.4.; Ov. Met. 4.55; Strab 16.1; BNJ 93 F 1b; AR 3.18; Fulg. De aetatibus. 3; Paulus Silentiarius 5.25; Bocc. FW. 2.8; Petr. De viris. 5 283 Amm. Marc. 23.6.23; Just. Epit. 1.2.; Mart. Epigrams. 9.75; Prop. 3.11; Diod. Sic.2.12; Vitr. De arch. 8.3. 284 See Diod. Sic. 2.7; Strab. 16.1.5; Curt. 5.4.. 285 Anth. Pal. 9.58; Diod. Sic. 2.7; Porp. 3.11. 286 Julian. Or. 3.127. () 51 more grandiose with towers and moats being added to the description.287 Despite the discrepancies in the measurements of the walls, all sources agree that they were monumental. It is due to the monumental scale of the walls that they were sometimes listed as one of the Ancient Wonders of the World.

Monumental Babylonian walls matching the description of the Classical sources have yet to be found and it is likely that they never existed in this exaggerated form. Seymour comments that if such a wall had been built, then it would not have been maintained in the landscape of irrigation canals land swamps fed by the Euphrates.288 However, archaeological evidence suggests that Herodotus, amongst other sources, amalgamated the features of two dilapidated walls to create the legendary wall. The first was the outer enclosure wall excavated by Koldewey that was very wide but only a few kilometres in length, and the second was Habl as-Sahr, the wall forming the outermost defence of the region which was narrower but fifty kilometres in length.289 From this archaeological evidence it is evident that the Classical sources manipulated and exaggerated the measurements of the boundary walls of the Babylonian region. In fact, Diodorus’ measurements are seven and a half times bigger than the archaeological remains.290 As such, these sources are seen to conform to the Wests’ perception of the Oriental East as exotic and excessive in every aspect of their society.

ii. Two Palaces Another way in which Semiramis surpassed her predecessor was by undertaking massive building projects in her territory. Muntz comments that many of these projects served to benefit the Queen rather than her people.291 This is particularly evident with Semiramis’ ornate and monumental palaces. Diodorus records that on each side of the Euphrates River, Semiramis built not one but two splendid palaces. One is said to have faced the rising sun, and the other faced the setting sun.292 According to Diodorus, the motivation to build these palaces was to secure a good view of the entire city. This is also evident in the work Dio Chrysostum, the first-century Greek orator, who links Semiramis’ enormous and extravagant palaces with tyranny.293 For example, in the essay Diogenes, or on Tyranny, Dio comments that man has been softened by luxury ever since Prometheus gave humankind fire. As such, Diogenes,

287 Diod. Sic. 2.7; Claud. Olyb. 160; Const. Man. 5520, 6440; De Piz. Le Livre. 1.15.1 288 Seymour 2008: 114. 289 Seymour 2008: 114. 290 Stronk 2016: 99n.52. 291 Muntz 2017: 161. 292 Diod. Sic. 2.8. 293 Semiramis is used in a similar way alongside Darius and Xerxes’ in the essay On Kingship 2. (Dio Chrys. Or. 2.) 52 who lived his life in poverty is presented as the antithesis of the opulent Persian king, Darius Codomannus (336-331 BCE). As such, Diogenes endured the harsh Greek seasons in the same clothing while the Oriental despot moved between palaces, like Babylon, in order to experience pleasant weather. Due to Diogenes resilient nature he argues that he was the happiest man alive because of his lack of possessions. In contrast, the Persian king who has everything is said to be the most miserable man alive because he had everything to lose. 294 As such, ‘the mansions of Semiramis, nor the walls of Babylon were of any help to him’, implying that he was living in constant fear even within the protection of his own home.295 From this account, one also gets the sense that Semiramis also preferred to create as many barriers as possible between herself and the city’s inhabitants. This is further reinforced by Diodorus’ description of her palaces. The palace facing west, which was more elaborate than the other, had three fortification walls of great proportions and cost. According to Diodorus’ description, these walls got taller and wider as they got closer to the palace.296 Moreover a set of triple gates, two of which were bronze, were set into the walls and opened by a mechanical device.297 However, it is apparent that these details have been exaggerated to add to the characterisation of the queen as a recluse tyrant. Remains found by Koldewey at Babylon confirmed that Nebuchadnezzar’s southern palace had three turreted walls.298 However, they were purely defensive, and not anything sinister or out of the ordinary, as is alluded to by Diodorus. Nevertheless, Diodorus continues to discuss the exceptional nature of the walls.

Along with being excessively large, the second and third walls were lavishly decorated with colourful bricks engraved with images of exotic animals and hunting scenes. This included imagery of Semiramis and Ninus on horseback with the queen hurling a javelin at a leopard whilst the king thrusted a spear at a lion.299. Similar depictions of animals and humans have been found in excavations in the Near East. For instance, the renowned Ishtar gate, which connected with the processional way in Babylon, is decorated by the same colourful glazed bricks recounted by Diodorus. The sacred gate was likewise decorated with animals including more than five-hundred young bulls (auroch), lions, and dragons

294 Dio Chrys. Or. 6.35. 295 Dio Chrys. Or. 6. 296 From inner to outer walls they increased from twenty, forty, and then stades. (Dio. Sic. 2.8) 297 Diod. Sic. 2.8. Herodotus also attributes a bronze gate in Babylon bearing Semiramis’ name. (Hdt. 3.155.) It has been argued by Baumgartner that this gate was actually the Ishtar Gate. MacGinnus adds that it is likely that Herodotus knew the gate by its popular name rather than the official religious name. (Baumgartner 1950: 75; MacGinnis 1986: 70) 298 Koldewey 1914: 139. 299 Diod. Sic. 2.8. In the early third-century CE, Aelian also states that the queen enjoyed hunting, but rather preferred to capture lionesses rather than killing a lion or leopard. (Ael. VH. 12.39) While excavating the “Persian building” in Babylon, Koldewey claimed to have found the white face of Semiramis in a hunting scene like the one described by Diodorus Siculus. (Koldewey 1914: 130-131) 53

Figure 8. Glazed brick relief of lion, 605-562 BCE Babylon. Staatliche Museen zu Berlin, Vorderasiatisches Museum, VA Bab 4376.

Figure 9. Glazed brick relief of lion, 605-562 BCE Babylon. Staatliche Museen zu Berlin, Vorderasiatisches Museum, VA Bab 4376.

(sirrush). Moreover, lion and animal hunts were a kingly pursuit of ancient Near Eastern cultures,54

(sirrush). Moreover, lion and animal hunts were a kingly pursuit of ancient Near Eastern cultures, including the Assyrians and Persians. In Assyria, these hunts symbolised the obligation of ruling monarch to his people from the savage wilderness.300 This included the most menacing animal in the region, the lion. As such, depictions of lion-hunts, were found on royal seals and royal reliefs. For example, dramatic scenes of lion-hunts survive from Ashurbanipal’s palace at Nineveh (645 BCE). In fact, one relief depicts Ashurbanipal on horseback thrusting a spear at a lion in a similar fashion to Diodorus’ account of Ninus (Figure 9). In contrast, the second palace, whilst not being as extravagant as the first, was still very extravagant. Its walls were smaller (thirty stades) with depictions of battle scenes and hunts, and bronze statues of Semiramis, Ninus, and Belus. Filling those who gazed upon them with pleasure.301 Foreign travellers that journeyed to these lands, such as Ctesias, were likewise captivated by these striking depictions when they gazed upon them or heard stories about them. Consequently, they transmitted them into their works, explaining them to be the work of the Babylonian ruler they knew to be associated with construction, Semiramis.

iii. Gardens Another thing that was particularly associated with Babylonian and Assyrian palaces were gardens, and Babylon was home to a very famous one, the Hanging Gardens of Babylon. The legends surrounding the Hanging Gardens of Babylon are varied, unclear, and elusive. This has led some scholars to speculate that they might not have even existed.302 Among these legends are sources that attribute the garden to Semiramis. For example, Pliny ascribes the garden as either the work of Semiramis or Cyrus, however he died before discussing it further in another work.303 In contrast, Diodorus Siculus felt obliged to clarify that the Queen did not have a hand in the garden.304 Instead, he favours the more common legend that an unknown Babylonian king (later identified as Nebuchadnezzar II) planted the gardens for his Median wife (Queen Amytis) because she longed for the hills of her homeland.305 Despite this strong tradition,

300 Reade 1998: 72-79. 301 Diod. 2.7.6. 302 Koldewey’s excavation of Babylon found no definitive evidence of the gardens. This led other scholars to suggest that the gardens may have been located in other cities. Oppert (1863) suggested Amran. In 1920, Budge was the first to put forward the idea that they never existed. Later Nagel (1979) offered a suitable location of the gardens on the western outwork, a badly damaged part of the central palace. However, more recently Dalley has argued that the Hanging Gardens were located in Nineveh (2013). 303 Pliny. 19.19. 304 Diod. Sic. 2.10. 305 Diod. 2.10; Curt. 5.1.35; Joseph. CA. 1.19. 55 it is apparent that a minor legend existed in which Semiramis was among the list of people accredited with planting the Hanging Gardens of Babylon.

Figure 10. Sculptured relief from the North Palace of Ashurbanipal (668-631 BC) at Nineveh in northern Iraq. BM 124939,a.

Gardens were a distinctive part of the landscape of the ancient Near East and were always a luxurious and costly royal prerogative due to the arid climate of the region.306 As such, irrigation was necessary in order to grow any vegetation. This required great technological skill that was refined and perfected for over two millennia throughout Mesopotamia and Assyria, culminating in technologically advanced hydraulic systems that made it possible for variety of gardens and parks to be sustained.307 These included ambassu that were essentially game parks, kiru or orchards, habburu or grass plains, and kirimahu that were gardens with trees and fruits.308 These feats of engineering and agriculture were often celebrated by the Assyrian monarchs in inscriptions and reliefs. For example, Sennacherib recalls how he transformed the once barren landscape of Nineveh to prosperous agricultural land and flourishing gardens in the Bavian inscription;

306 Finkel and Seymour 2008: 109. 307 See Dalley 2013: 83-106. 308 Tuplin 1996: 83-87. 56

At this time, I, Sennacherib, king of Assyria, first among all princes, who from the rising sun to the setting sun, … (with) waters from the canals which I had caused to be dug, [supplied] Nineveh, together with its neighbourhood. Garden, vineyards, all kinds of … products of all the mountains the fruits of all lands, … I planted(?), letting out the waters where they did not reach the thirsty (field), [and reviving] its vegetation, damaged(? By drought) … of all the orchards, at the entrance … above (the city) and below(?)… from the midst of the town of Tarbisi to Nineveh, providing, for all time, water for the planting of grain and sesame…309

It was also Sennacherib who arranged an elaborate irrigation system so that he could grow cotton and exotic wildlife at Nineveh.310 As such, gardens like this were also a display of power and fertility that would have been memorable to any visitor or traveller to the palace.311 Despite their appeal, many of these stately gardens have been lost to time because of erosion and the repurposing of stone.312 However, we are able to reconstruct what these gardens would have looked like from visual representations on reliefs. See for example, a panel from Ashurbanipal’s palace at Nineveh that depicts a garden consisting of elaborate wooded hills with varying vegetation fed by canals from an aqueduct (Figure 10).

Gardens were also transmitted into ancient texts as a monarchical preoccupation of eastern rulers. Semiramis is one such ruler in which this motif materialises. In the account of Diodorus Siculus the planting of gardens are used to demonstrate the frivolous indulgence of the queen on three separate occasions.

The first garden mentioned in the Bibliotheca Historica are the Hanging Gardens of Babylon, which are described in detail by Diodorus. Even though they are not attributed to the Queen, Muntz argues that they demonstrate how Semiramis’ opulent ways perpetuated with later rulers who also indulged in projects to benefit themselves rather than the people.313 As such, Semiramis’ planting of gardens also echoes these sentiments. The first incidence occurred at Bagistanus Mountain, in modern-day Behistun, between Babylon and Ecbatana. Here she is said to have created a park with a circumference of twelve stades.314 The park was irrigated from a spring on the plain so that plants could be grown. Another park was then created at the Median city of Chauon with some extra additions. This time not only was a park created but ‘lavish buildings’ were erected on a plateau in the middle so she could look down upon the

309 ARAB. Bavian Inscription 5.7. 333. 310 BM 103000. 311 Stonach 1990. 312 Dalley 2008: 172. 313 Muntz 2017: 161. 314 Diod. Sic. 2.13. 57 garden and her encamped army.315 Diodorus states that she did this to ‘satisfy her taste for luxury (τρυφὴν)’ and it was here that the queen ‘passed a long time and enjoyed to the full every device that contributed to luxury (τρυφὴν)’, primarily sexual escapades.316 However, it is apparent that her yearning for luxury was not satiated as at Ecbatana the height of the Queen’s indulgence and hubris is reached. Here Semiramis went to enormous efforts to bring water to the arid city. A tunnel measuring fifteen feet wide and forty feet high was cut into the base of the Orontes Mountain in order to get to a lake on the other side. This mountain was twelve stades away from Ecbatana and twenty-five stades high, and a massive undertaking. Throughout the account the Queen’s insatiable greed and her daring are seen to increase with the construction of each park. This consequently presents Semiramis as neglecting or, at the very least, being distracted from her campaign duties and preferring to indulge in sensual pleasures.

This notion persists into later traditions. For example, the eighth-century Armenian historiographer, Moses Khorenats‘i, also mentions the queen in regards to creating lavish gardens in his homeland. Posing as an eyewitness in the fifth-century, Moses blends the oral Armenian tradition with Greco-Roman sources to create a fictitious history of his homeland in the “Golden Age” of Armenian literature.317 In the History of the Armenians, Semiramis’ account is largely shaped by Diodorus, Eusebius, Agathangelos and the Alexander Romance.318 Moses’ account of Semiramis is also largely negative, with the queen’s engineering feats fitting within this characterization found in Herodotus and Diodorus Siculus. In the work, the Queen is constantly enamoured by beauty and luxury, both materialistically and in regards to people. On the plain where the Queen defeated the Armenian King Ara the Beautiful who rejected her advances, it recorded that Semiramis was enamoured by the plain’s flowering meadows, cascading hills, and flowing streams. Semiramis’ first response to this natural splendour was to completely despoil it to build a summer palace.319 By providing a detailed account on the natural beauty of the site subsequently followed by details on Semiramis’ destruction of it, the Queen is presented as destroying Moses’, and the audience’s, homeland. This is recounted on a tyrannical scale. The ‘resolute and lascivious’ Queen is said to have ordered forty-two thousand skilled workers and six-thousand craftsmen to start construction of the palace at that location. With this huge, subservient workforce the task was completed in a couple of years. The end result is an awe-inspiring city said to be the most majestic out of all the

315 Diod. Sic. 2.13. 316 Diod. Sic. 2.13. 317 Darling Young 2018. 318 Thomson 1980: 20-61. 319 Mos. Khor. 2.16. 58 royal sites.320 Adding to the beautification of the palace were exotic gardens, symbolising her wanton luxury;

She diverted part of the river through the city to severe every necessity and for the irrigation of the parks and flower gardens. The rest she made run along the edge of the lake to the right and left, to water the city and all the surrounding area. All the regions in the east, north, and south of the city she adorned with villas and with lefty trees that produced varied fruit and foliage. There she planted many fruitful vineyards.321

Once again, Semiramis’ motivation for taking the necessary steps to bring irrigation to a site was to grow gardens. However, Moses clarifies that the aqueduct she implemented in order to do this denigrated into hideouts for thieves.322 As such, Moses’ account demonstrates that gardens, like the palaces, were viewed as a purely superfluous, exotic project. Moreover, in this case the superfluousness of the garden is exaggerated even further due to the pre-existing natural splendour of the site. Once more we see this behaviour aligning with the concept of Oriental decadence and despotism typified by the queen’s lavish constructions.

iv. Temples After building herself two elaborate palaces securely enclosed within impenetrable walls, the queen diverted her attention to the heavens. An ornate temple to the Babylonian god Bel or Belus is erected in the centre of the city.323 The temple described follows the outline of a ziggurat, a rectangular stepped tower. According to cuneiform and archaeological evidence a ziggurat referred to as Etemenanki, known as the Tower of Babel in the Bible, is said to have stood in ancient Babylon.324 The original Etemenanki, of unknown date was destroyed by Sennacherib in his razing of the city in 689 BCE. It was then rebuilt by Nebuchadnezzar II, reaching 91 meters with a temple situated at the top.325 In the Bibliotheca Historicia the temple is described as being adorned with ‘silver, gold, other metals, stone, enamelled bricks, fir, pine, and copper bricks’.326 There is some historical truth to this. The temple was indeed subjected to lavish attention of Neo-Babylonian kings after its reconstruction.327 However, this is greatly embellished in Diodorus’ account who states that the queen, sparing no expense, built the exceedingly high structure

320 Mos. Khor.2.16. The city has been identified as the Armenian city of Van, which in the Middle Ages was called Shamiramagerd or the “created by Semiramis” in the local dialect. (Salvini 1992: 67-80) 321 Mos. Khor. 2.16. 322 Mos. Khor. 2.16. 323 Diod. Sic. 2.9.4. 324 MET 86.11.284. 325 MET 86.11.284. 326 Diod. Sic. 2.9.4. 327 The top of the temple was clad in blue tiles. (VAB Nebuch. 14.i.42.) 59 with baked brick and bitumen. In addition, it was adorned with three golden statues of Zeus, Hera, and Rhea. Each of the statues dimensions and weight are given, all of them being extravagant and costly.328 In front of the gods was a golden table with drinking cups, censors and bowls in the same metal. Herodotus also mentions a golden statue of Bel sitting on a throne with a table in the lower temple of the complex.329 Statues of this description have not survived, however fragments of their adornment—lapis lazuli, shell and onyx inlays as well as traces of a throne made from wood and gold—have been identified by Koldewey.330 In both accounts, the allure of the gold proved to be too tempting to the Persians. Herodotus mentions two occasions in which the Persians endeavoured to plunder the temple. The first was Darius, who attempted to take a golden statue of Bel but was unsuccessful because his courage failed him. However, later in revolt of 482 BCE, Xerxes successfully removed the statue, slaughtering a priest who got in his way.331 On the other hand, Diodorus states that at some point all of these items were taken as none were said to have survived the Persian invasion.332 The timeline of this behaviour is particularly important in the sources as it demonstrates the corrupting nature of the Assyrians, initiated by Semiramis. This extravagant behaviour is seen to intensify over time, reaching its pinnacle with the last Assyrian monarch Sardanapalus, and is finally inherited by the successors to the Assyrian Empire, the Achaemenids.333

From the examples discussed it is apparent that the constructions of Semiramis conform to the typical tropes associated with despotic Eastern rulers in our sources. They are monumental, ornate, costly, and done quickly with a large work force under slavish conditions. As such, Semiramis is not particularly different from other barbaric figures found in the Histories or the Bibliotheca Historica. Herodotus’ account is littered with these barbaric figures, in particular the Persian kings—Cyrus, Darius, Xerxes, Cambyses—who on multiple occasions were seen to embody the τρυφή of their Assyrian precursors. Likewise, in the first two books of Bibliotheca Historica pertaining to the region of the Near East, barbarian sovereigns such as the Egyptian king, Sesostris, the last Assyrian king, Sardanapalus, and of course Ninus, Semiramis’ husband and predecessor, also exhibited the same barbaric behaviour as the Queen. In consequence, Semiramis is seen to add to the representation of these Near Eastern regions as being “soft” cultures ruled by despots.

328 Diod. Sic. 2.9.7. 329 Hdt. 1.183. 330 Koldewey 1914: 222. 331 Hdt. 1.183. 332 See the acquisition of the “Semiramis vase” by Cyrus. (Plin. HN. 33.15.) 333 Muntz 2017: 162. 60

Controlling Nature: Hydraulics and Masonry

In our sources, another main theme apparent in Semiramis’ constructions is the controlling of nature. This is evident on numerous occasions. The most prolific occurrence is the manipulation of water, particularly in the Histories. In the Bibliotheca Historica exploitation of nature through masonry is also added to the endeavours of the queen. Normally these types of activities are reserved for mythical heroes, like Heracles who rerouted the Alpheus and Peneus Rivers to cleanse the Augean stables. As such, by controlling nature, the mortal Queen is seen to be acting like a mythical hero. Thus, in both of these accounts these actions are cast as negative and are intrinsically linked to hubris.

i. Hydraulics and the Manipulation of Water The hydraulic systems implemented by Semiramis are complex in both their mechanics as well as their literary representations. In Book One, Herodotus attributes hydraulics to the two Babylonian queens that will be amalgamated under the name of Semiramis. The earlier queen, Semiramis, is credited with building dykes outside of Babylon to control flooding deemed by Herodotus as being ἀξιοθέητα, a notable work.334 The other queen Nitokris is preoccupied with manipulating the water flow to defend Babylon from the approaching Medes, who had already taken Nineveh, and to stop them mixing with her people. By increasing the height of the canals she was able to add bends to the straight river and change its course. As such, one could pass the city of Ardericca thrice on the route to Babylon. She also accredited with embanking the river which Herodotus calls ‘marvellous for its greatness and height’ (ἄξιον θώματος μέγαθος καὶ ὕψος).335 In order to do this, the earth was repurposed from the digging of a basin. The basin itself had a circumference of 420 furlongs and slowed the current of the river. When Herodotus outlines the remarkable feats (ἀξιοθέατος) of the two Babylonian queens his attitude seems to be positive.336 However, Gould and Hartog have shown that these manipulations of nature were often seen as transgressions and ambiguous achievements.337 The problem with these actions was that they were easy to portray as acts of hubris that were typical of despotes.338 As such, these two instances of hydraulic

334 Hdt. 1.184. 335 Hdt. 1.185. 336 Similar terminology is also used to describe the building of a Temple of Hephaestus on reclaimed land of the Nile (Hdt. 2.99), the pyramids (Hdt 2.101) and three works of the Samians; tunnel, artificial harbour, and the biggest temple in Greece (Hdt. 3.60). 337 Gould 1989: 106-109. 338 Hartog 1988: 330-339. 61 engineering in Babylon, particularly by Nitokris, contributes to the wider purpose of the ethnography of Babylon and the empires of the East, especially Persia.

Transgressions of nature by Persian kings are apparent on numerous occasions throughout the Histories, often triggering subsequent disasters.339 For example, Cyrus reduced the Gyndes to a weak stream after his sacred white horse was swept away by the current.340 He did this in a similar fashion to Nitokris by dividing the river into eighty channels. Later, when Cyrus builds another bridge to cross the Araxes to attack the Massagetae, he gets his just desserts and is killed by their queen, Tomyris.341 In comparison, Nitokris’ tampering with the Euphrates was a defensive act to protect Babylon from the Medes. In this sense, Nitokris’ actions were justified in comparison with the purely selfish and hubristic actions of the Persian king. Nevertheless, Nitokris’ actions were still a transgression and so retribution for her actions followed. This came in the form of Cyrus’ capture of Babylon, marking the end of Babylonian sovereignty. However, this occurs after Semiramis’ death and is inflicted upon the Babylonian citizens and her son, Labynetus. To add further insult to injury, it is through Nitokris’ engineering that the city was captured.342 While the Babylonians were preoccupied with the festivities of the New Year, Cyrus drained the Euphrates into Nitokris’ basin and entered the city via the riverbed.343 S. Saïd suggests that this was undertaken by Cyrus to demonstrate the vanity of precautions taken by Nitokris to protect the city.344 Thus, in this way, Nitokris’ transgressions are eventually punished, as seen with similar hubristic acts by Persian kings.

Another instance of Nitokris’ transgressions against nature in the Histories is the construction of a bridge across the Euphrates. According to Herodotus, previous Babylonian rulers had to cross the Euphrates by boat, this was importune for the queen, and thus a bridge was commissioned to ease her commute.345 Building bridges over water are a material sign of transgressions of natural limits in the Histories.346 Like other hubristic actions, this was often followed by the demise of the transgressor. Again, this hubristic behaviour is demonstrated with the Persian despots. For example; Cyrus is decapitated by Queen Tomyris after building a bridge to cross the Araxes to attack the Massagetae; Xerxes’ bridge over the

339 Gould 1989: 107. 340 Hdt 1.189. 341 Hdt. 1.205. 342 Hdt. 1.191.3. 343 Frontinus mentions that this was done by Semiramis when the city was rebelling, and that Alexander entered the city in a similar way. (Frontin. Str. 3.7) 344 Saïd 1980: 120. 345 Hdt. 1.186. 346 Hartog 1988: 331; Gould 1989: 107. 62

Hellespont is destroyed by storm; and Darius crosses the Bosporus and the Ister and is defeated in Europe.347 However, in the case of Nitokris, the bridge was temporary, consisting of removable planks of timber. Due to this, the transgression is not as severe as the previous examples. In fact, the story seems to play more into the character of Nitokris as a trickster rather than hubris. Herodotus records that the purpose of the removable planks, that were taken away each night, was to prevent Babylonians from crossing the bridge and stealing from one another.348 This preoccupation of theft is a common theme for the queen running throughout Herodotus’ account.349 As such, it foreshadows the concluding tale of the queen: the story of her tomb.350 In this moralizing tale Nitokris entices Darius to open her tomb only to reprimand his greed. Herodotus states that this trick (ἀπάτην), gives an insight into the character of the Babylonian queen, conforming to the common trope of the “clever, vengeful queen” found throughout the Histories. As the name suggests, women involved in this trope exhibit intelligence, perceptiveness, self-control, and calculation with (varied) success in contrast to the folly and impetuosity of the male figures in the story.351 Thus, we see another vengeful queen associated with using hydraulics as a weapon in 2.100 of the Histories. This woman was the Egyptian queen of the same name, Nitokris, who avenged the death of her brother by flooding an underground chamber with the Nile whilst the responsible culprits feasted. The similarities between these two women are purposeful, creating a metanarrative gloss with the Babylonian Nitokris. Whilst the Egyptian Nitokris seeks revenge for the death of her brother, the Babylonian Nitokris gets the last laugh on Darius who she tricks into opening her tomb.

In the Bibliotheca Historica, Diodorus provides an alternative account and motivation for the construction of the bridge. Like other Babylonian monuments, the bridge and accompanying quays were exceptionally large and expensive.352 The bridge is said to have spanned five stades with the piers being sunk into the riverbed twelve feet apart.353 Once more, Diodorus provides great detail on how Semiramis’ skilful engineering is used to achieve this feat. The stones were set together with lead—the same technology as in the Classical period—and had tapered cutwaters to soften the flow of water.354 Isolated, this demonstrates the queen’s intelligence, however, it later becomes apparent that the Queen’s motives

347 Hdt. 1.205, 7.34, 4.85-90. 348 Hdt. 1.186. 349 Gera 1997: 111-112. 350 Hdt. 1.187. 351 Flory 1987: 42; Dillery 1992: 30-38. 352 Diod. Sic. 2.8.; Hdt. 1.180. 353 Diod. Sic. 2.8. 354 Oldfather 1933: 375 n18. 63 for this were purely selfish. This is evident in Semiramis’ other hydraulic projects that are discussed in the proceeding passages of the Bibliotheca Historica.

Later in the narrative, Diodorus reveals that the main purpose of Semiramis’ hydraulic system was to build a private passageway between her two palaces. In order to do this, the entire Euphrates needed to be diverted into a square reservoir so construction could begin. In this sense, Semiramis’ previous hydraulic works, that are initially seen to be beneficial to the Babylonian people, enables the construction of the passageway that only benefited the queen.355 After diverting the river the queen was able to construct the passageway that was twenty bricks thick and twelve feet high with barrel vaulted ceilings.356 At the end of the passageway were bronze gates that were said to have stood until the time of Persian rule. This construction was finished within seven days and the river was released back to its original course, completely covering the passageway.357 The superfluous nature of underwater walkway is highlighted in Diodorus’ account because of the bridge that connected the two halves of the city had already been mentioned. Thus, by creating this passageway Semiramis was able to move from palace to the other without having to interact with any of her subjects. Thus, the characterisation of the queen as evasive, detached from her subjects, and content within the walls of her palace becomes fully realised.

ii. Monumental Earthworks As previously stated, Semiramis is associated with tampering with the natural order of things. This is demonstrated on numerous occasions with hydraulics and bodies of water. Another example evident throughout the Bibliotheca Historica is the interference with mountains. These instances of earthworks occur outside of Babylon when the queen was on campaign. In most of these situations the mountains are obstacles that impede the Queen in some way. The way in which she overcomes these physical obstacles are hubristic in the Greco-Roman tradition, going against the natural order.

The first occurrence of masonry occurred in Babylon with the Queen quarrying monolithic stones from the mountains of Armenia to the city to erect an obelisk. This obelisk was judged to be marvellous enough by Diodorus Siculus to be labelled as one of the Seven Wonders of the World.358 Like many of its fellow

355 Muntz 2017: 161. 356 Diod. Sic. 2.9. 357 In the second and fourth-centuries CE the tunnel is attributed to an unnamed woman. See Philostr. VA.1.25; Julian. Or. 3.127. 358 Diod. Sic. 2.11.4-5. 64 structures on the list, it was impressively large. As such, Diodorus Siculus describes the great proportions of the monument and the great lengths the Queen went to create it to justify his selection;

Semiramis quarried out stone from the mountains of Armenia which was one hundred and thirty feet long and twenty-five feet wide and thick; and this he hauled by means of many multitudes of yokes of mules and oxen to the river and there loaded it on a raft, on which she brought it down the stream to Babylonia; she then set it up beside the famous street, an astonishing sight to all who pass by. And this stone is called by some an obelisk from its shape, and they number it among the Seven Wonders of the World.359

Despite this effort, the obelisk failed to make it onto the canonical list of Wonders and is only mentioned in the Bibliotheca Historica. In fact, the existence of this monument is dubious as there are no cuneiform references to a monument matching this description. In addition, whilst there were obelisks in Babylon and Assyria, they were more common in Egypt.360 Thus, Diodorus may have been conflating some aspects of Egyptian and Babylonian architecture. Furthermore, on four separate occasions Diodorus relates that Semiramis defaced mountains either for irrigation, to create obelisks such as this, and even to memorialise herself with images and inscriptions. Thus, the frequent association with the Queen and monumental stonework may have been a contributing factor to its inclusion. Nevertheless, the inclusion of such an object in his description of Semiramis’ Babylon reveals strong connotations of Oriental exoticism of excessively large monuments as well as her hubristic interference with nature to carry out these feats. In fact, Semiramis’ obelisk foreshadows other instances of stonework throughout her reign, and like other constructions we have seen, the pomp and grandeur of these feats crescendo over time.

One such instance is Semiramis’ actions at Bagistanus. Diodorus records that when the Queen arrived at the mountain which was sacred to Zeus and seventeen stades high, she engraved an image of herself with a hundred of her spearmen into it.361 This was clearly a sacrilegious act from a Greek perspective.362 To make this even more blasphemous, she included an inscription which read; ‘Semiramis, with the pack- saddles of the beasts of burden in her army, built up a mound from the plain and hereby climbed this precipice, even to this very ridge’.363 This anecdote has been transmitted into the Bibliotheca Historica from Ctesias, who travelled through the Near East as the personal physician to the Artaxerxes, and saw many monuments and infrastructure, such as this, that he ascribed to Semiramis. However, the actual

359 Diod. Sic. 2.11. 360 See BM 118898; BM 118885; BM 118807; BM 118800. 361 Diod. Sic. 2.13.2. 362 See Plut. Mor. De Alex. Fort. 2.2-3. 363 Diod. Sic. 2.13.2. 65

monument was in fact the Behistun Inscription of Darius the Great which was located on the mountain of the same name in western Iran between Babylon and Ecbatana (Figure 11).364 The multilingual inscription details how Darius the Great assumed the role of king and lists his subsequent military achievements, especially the subjugation of rebellions and conspirators.365 Accompanying this inscription is a life-sized image of the king stepping on a man, thought to be the pretender Gaumata. Personifications of the subdued nations are also present with their hands bound together and a rope around their necks. Accordingly, Diodorus’ description was somewhat similar to the genuine version but with details changed or misconstrued to suit the Queen. Nevertheless, this monument demonstrates that some deeds by Persian kings in the Near East became amalgamated under the name of Semiramis over time due to proximity.

Figure 11. Left: Behistun Inscription, relief with inscription, Right: close-up of the relief.

In the next two instances Semiramis’ behaviour escalates and her motives become more arrogant and egocentric. For example, at Mount Zarcaeus, the Zagros Mountains spanning the western border of Iran, Semiramis cuts through the mountains to create a shorter path because she was frustrated by the length of the range. Diodorus also mentions an ulterior motive for this, that she ‘became ambitious to leave an immortal monument of herself’, and as such was still focused on self-aggrandizement.366 Moreover, as previously mentioned, the Queen tunnelled through Mount Orontes ‘with much hardship and expense’ to bring water to Ecbatana. The mountain is described as being unusual for its ‘ruggedness’ and

364 Oldfather 393 n.1. This has been questioned by Philips (1968) who finds other reliefs of Ishtar and other goddesses in Iran that may have inspired Ctesias’ account. 365 Cf. Polyaenus, Strat. 8.26. 366 Diod. Sic. 2.13.5. Cf. Diod. Sic. 1.56 on the Egyptian king Sesoösis. 66

‘enormous height’ of twenty-five stades, making it the biggest mountain encountered on her journey.367 As with Semiramis’ other constructions her greed and daring are seen to increase and not be satiated throughout her reign. In fact, after this her obsession reaches its pinnacle—visiting Persis and all of the other countries in her empire, cutting through mountains and cliffs without a second thought to clear paths for ‘expensive roads’.368 This lack of restraint indicates the ultimate descent into luxury.

The Legacy of Semiramis

Evidence of Semiramis’ fame as a builder of works can be found in the myth that attends to the “Mounds of Semiramis” or “Works of Semiramis”. These mounds were tells or kurds, the accumulation of debris from human habitation, that are distinctive parts of the Near East landscape.369 However in the imagination of our sources they become echoes of the queen’s sojourns across the region.370 To Diodorus they were the plains on which the queen camped, the tombs for her generals, and the locations in which she founded cities.371 To the Byzantine chronicler Syncellus they were the tombs of her lovers, adding tangible evidence to the pre-existing mythology of Semiramis as an insatiably lustful woman unable to control her bodily desires.372 This was perpetuated by Sir James Frazer’s The Golden Bough at the turn of the twentieth-century, which drew upon ancient sources such as Dio Chrysostom, to explain the mounds as the graves of the scapegoat king from the yearly Sacaea festival.373

Another instance that echoes our sources is the explanation given by Michael the Great, the twelfth- century patriarch of the Syriac Orthodox Church. In this work, Michael intended to refute the polemical attacks of Greek Orthodox Church against the Syriac Orthodoxy by ‘removing the poisonous, inaccurate, and irrelevant material - the darkness of ignorance… with the breath of the Holy Spirit’.374 As such, Michael was attempting to create a canonical tradition of historical and theological concepts of the Syriac Orthodox Church. This was achieved by equating the Greek Orthodox Church with the history of the vain and prideful Greeks, and the Syriac Orthodox with the powerful and older empires of the Near East accounted for in written records and the Holy Scriptures. However, it is apparent that the tradition he had

367 Diod. Sic. 2.13.7. 368 Diod. Sic. 2.14.1. 369 Eilers 1971: 22-3; Oldfather 1933: 397: n36. 370 Many authors claim these mounds could still be seen during their own time. (Strab. 3.155, 16.1.2; Diod. Sic. 2.14.1.) 371 Diod. Sic. 2.14.1. Similar conjecture is made by Strabo, claiming that the cities of Tyana and Zela were built upon these mounds and fortified with walls. (Strab. 12.2.) 372 Syncell. Chron, p 119, 11 = Ctes. Pers. F. Ii. 373 Frazer 2009: 644-651. 374 Michael Syrus. Chron. 1. 67 access to for Semiramis was the Armenian version, as recorded by Moses Khorenats‘i.375 This Semiramis, known as Shamiram, was inherently evil and lustful. Thus, he describes the mounds in the following way in his ecclesiastical history;

She fashioned earthen mounds, called tils as a precaution against [flooding caused by] rain, and for defence. However, we have discovered another explanation for these tils. It is said that when idol-worship had increased throughout the world, god became furious with the demons and caused hurricanes which shook the earth to its foundations, and demolished cities and homes. Here and there the storms buried the idols and the demons under these earthen mounds. The demons dwell in them, being tormented to this day. And we hear that witches practice their arts especially near these mounds, and that the thunderous sounds of the demons arise therefrom.376

Here, the Classical echoes of the Queen as a builder of hydraulic systems are being rejected in favour of a Biblical explanation. Moreover, there are also allusions to the Armenian version in which Semiramis, dabbling in witchcraft, attempted to resurrect the dead king, Ara, but was unsuccessful.377 In this sense, Semiramis’ status as a lustful Queen is irreconcilably different to the history of Near Eastern dominance that Michael is trying to promote. Thus, even though Semiramis was an Assyrian her deeds are rationalized by other methods, the Holy Scriptures, with alternative histories discredited. Nevertheless, the sheer range in the theories of these mounds overtime reflects how ingrained Semiramis was in Greco- Roman sources as a builder of monumental proportions.

Conclusion The monumental constructions of Semiramis were more than just physical remnants from her reign. In a number of our ancient sources, primarily Herodotus’ Histories and Diodorus Siculus’ Bibliotheca Historica, these monuments were the actions of an Oriental despot. They were excessively large, extravagant, costly, superfluous, self-serving, and bordered on the grotesque in relation to the more modest works of others. Furthermore, in order to build many of these constructions the Babylonian queen often transgressed boundaries of nature, the tell-tale faux pas of a Herodotean despotes. In our sources, a general trend that arises is the corrupting nature of Semiramis’ luxury that originates from her building programme and is particularly germane in the case study of this theme: the tomb of Semiramis.

375 Indicated by her Armenian name and similarities to the narrative of Moses Khorenats‘i. 376 Michael Syrus. Chron. 16. 377 Mos. Khor. 1.15. 68

Part Two: The Tomb of Semiramis

Figure 12. Maarten van Heemskerck, 1572, engraving by Philips Galle, ‘The Walls of Babylon’ in the series ‘The Eight Wonders of the Ancient World’, engraving, Amsterdam, Staatliche Kunstsammlungen Dresden. 5601.101:7.

In late sixteenth-century, the Dutch artist Maarten van Heemskerck produced a series of illustrations titled The Eight Wonders of the Ancient World. Ever since Antiquity, such lists of wonders have been in Figure 13. A close up of the statue of Semiramis in front of the tomb. Philips Galle, 1572, Maerten circulation.van378 Heemskerck, This series ‘The by vanWalls Heems of Babylon’kerck in capitalizes the series ‘The on Eightthis interestWonders. ofHis the list Ancient is slightly World’, unusual in engraving, Amsterdam, Staatliche Kunstsammlungen Dresden. 5601.101:7.Figure 12. Maarten van that usuallyHeemskerck, there were 1572, only engraving seven wonders by Philips listed, Galle, and, ‘The reflecting Walls of Babylon’ the biases in the of series their ‘TheGreek Eight origins, the Wonders of the Ancient World’, engraving, Amsterdam, 379 Staatliche Kunstsammlungen Dresden. traditional560 lists1.101:7. did not include any Roman monuments. In contrast, van Heemskerck’s list included the Colosseum (possibly a reflection of the time the artist spent in Rome), along with the Colossus of Rhodes, the Lighthouse of Alexandria, the Mausoleum of Halicarnassus, the Statue of Zeus at Olympia, the TempleFigure of Diana 13. A atclose Ephesus, up of the t hestatue Egyptian of Semiramis Pyramids in front, andof the the tomb. Walls Philips of Babylon.Galle, 1572, While Maerten immensely van Heemskerck, ‘The Walls of Babylon’ in the series ‘The Eight Wonders of the Ancient World’, popular inengraving, their own Amsterdam, period, modern Staatliche critics Kunstsammlungen have not been Dresden. kind 5601.101:7. to van Heemsker ck’s illustrations. They

378 Anth. Pal . 9. 58; Diod. Sic. 2.11.5; Hyg. Fab. 223. 379 Clayton and Price 1988: 5-12; Jordan 2002: 4-6. Figure 15. Nine Worthies depicted on the west to north walls of the sala baronale at the Castello della 69 Manta, Manta, Italy.Figure 13. A close up of the statue of Semiramis in front of the tomb. Philips Galle, 1572, Maerten van Heemskerck, ‘The Walls of Babylon’ in the series ‘The Eight Wonders of the Ancient World’, engraving, Amsterdam, Staatliche Kunstsammlungen Dresden. 5601.101:7.Figure 12. Maarten van Heemskerck, 1572, engraving by Philips Galle, ‘The Walls of Babylon’ in the series ‘The Eight Wonders of the Ancient World’, engraving, Amsterdam, Staatliche have censured their artificiality and describe them as ‘pretty fanciful creations of which it may be said not one of them bears any resemblance at all to what the real Wonders could have been’.380 What today’s critics fail to realise is that while these works may not depict monuments as they existed, they are nevertheless products of deep learning. As a humanist, van Heemskerck drew upon the rich history of ancient texts, as well as the sights and statues that he encountered during his visit to Rome in the mid- sixteenth-century.381 The Rome that he encountered had been dilapidated, war-torn, and plundered, by the mutinous troops of Charles V in 1527. Despite this, van Heemskerck wished to depict the glory, wealth and ambition of an ancient pagan culture. We see this clearly in his depiction of Ancient Babylon.

The illustration of the wondrous city walls depicts the Babylonian cityscape peopled with recognizable figures and buildings described by Classical and Medieval authors. Situated in the middle of the illustration is one of the two Babylonian palaces mentioned in our sources. The building is surrounded by the huge, decorative walls covered with wild animals and hunting scenes mentioned by Ctesias, and later Diodorus Siculus and Aelian.382 In the foreground, one of these scenes is being acted out: a mounted Semiramis is posed in mid-action, just before she releases an arrow targeted at a nearby lion. In the top right corner are the Hanging Gardens of Babylon, which were often featured as an ancient wonder on its own.383 The bridge that connected the two halves of the city as described by Herodotus, Propertius, and Quintus Curtius, sits below this.384 Rising up on the right is the spiralled Temple of Bel, which is described by Herodotus and also features as the backdrop for the Biblical story of Daniel and the Dragon in the extended Book of Daniel.385 Lastly, in the bottom left corner is the tomb of Semiramis labelled “Sepulchrum Semiramidis”. Conforming to Herodotus’ account, the tomb is situated on top of a city gate, under which two figures walk. In particular, the tomb demonstrates humanist learning by drawing upon a variety of stylistic components from Greco-Roman, Mesopotamian, and contemporary society. The tomb is a hybrid of a Greco-Roman sarcophagus base with an obelisk on top. In front, the tomb bears a nude Semiramis with a cloak draped around her shoulders, holding a sceptre and a bird in the other. Her nudity and pose are classically inspired, and the bird is from Babylonian folklore.386 At some point

380 Jordan 2002: 153. 381 See Bangs 1977: 9. 382 FGrH 688 F1b 8.6; Ael. VH. 12.39; Diod. Sic. 2.8. 383 BNJ 688 F 1.4-20; Curt. 5.1.24-35; Plin. NH. 19.19. 384 Hdt. 1.186; Prop. 3.11; Curt. 5.1.24-35. 385 Hdt. 1.181; Dan. 14. 386 Diodorus records that Semiramis was reared by doves and after her death she transformed into a dove. (Diod. Sic. 2.4, 2.20; Hyg. Fab. 197; Xen. An. 1.4; Luc. Syr. D. 14,33.) See Lightfoot 2003: 351-355. 70 throughout history, all of the structures illustrated in the Babylonian cityscape by van Heemskerck have been attributed to the Assyrian queen. It is clear that this is Semiramis’ Babylon.

Figure 13. A close up of the statue of Semiramis in front of the tomb. Philips Galle, 1572, Maerten van Heemskerck, ‘The Walls of Babylon’ in the series ‘The Eight Wonders of the Ancient World’, engraving, Amsterdam, Staatliche Kunstsammlungen Dresden. 5601.101:7.

This chapter focuses on an identifiable element of the topography of Semiramis’ Babylon, the tomb of the Queen. The earliest description of the tomb is found in Herodotus and in the later account by Plutarch. Through the story of the tomb, authors are able to discuss issues of virtuous behaviour regarding decision making and treatment of the dead. The works that employ this story are often didactic, particularly for political leaders with Semiramis as a positive exemplum. It shall be argued that in the works of Plutarch and Herodotus the Queen conforms to topoi that involve women being used to demonstrate the failures of Persian men. She is thus interchangeable, we see this occurring in the shift from the story being attributed to Nitokris in Herodotus to Semiramis in Plutarch.

Herodotus on the Tomb of Nitokris The earliest description of the monument that will become known as Semiramis’ tomb is found in Herodotus. In his Histories, the tomb is attributed to Nitokris, one of the two Assyrian queens that feature in the account. Herodotus attributes many acts to the Queen, among which is the building of her own monumental tomb situated above a busy city gate in Babylon. It is said that upon the exterior of the tomb is engraved the following inscription; 71

If any king of Babylon who comes after me needs money, let him open this tomb and take as much money as he wants. Let him not, however, open it unless he is truly in need. If he opens it for any other reason it will not go well with him.387

According to Herodotus, the only ruler whoever took up the invitation on the tomb was Darius. Upon entering, he found nothing except a corpse and another inscription;

You would not open up the graves of the dead if you were not so insatiate and shamefully greedy.388

Here, Herodotus uses the story of the tomb to comment on Darius’ lack of respect for nomoi, or cultural boundaries. It forms part of a much larger project in Herodotus, namely the delineation of Darius’ character and an exploration of the rules that govern society.

Throughout his history, Herodotus is fascinated by the idea of tomb robbing and the violation of burial protocols. This is most clearly demonstrated in Book Three where Darius conducts his famous investigation of burial customs in his empire. The story goes as follows; Darius summons Indians from the eastern fringes of his empire and Greeks from the west; he asks the Greeks if they would eat their dead fathers, and the Indians if they would burn them, and both react to the questions with equal horror.389 So, says Herodotus, Pindar was right, nomos is king of all. Here Herodotus establishes that the burial rites are the definitive state of nomoi, or ‘arbitrary rules of culture common to all men’.390 Therefore, an act such as tomb violation equated to the disregard of nomoi. For Herodotus, the mistreatment of bodies and burials is typical of the most heinous act, often associated with insanity or barbarity. In these circumstances, the persons who forgot or transgressed these nomoi, or normal barriers of society, are punished.391 Herodotus’ text is littered with examples of men who violate these principles.

For Cambyses, his disregard for burial nomoi proved that he was insane. Included in his long list of transgressions was Cambyses’ disregard of Egyptian burial practices in Memphis.392 Here the king ordered the opening of ancient tombs so he could examine the bodies inside.393 Earlier in the book,

387 Hdt. 1.187. 388 Hdt. 1.187. 389 Hdt. 3.38. 390 Humphreys 1987: 211-220. 391 Humphreys 1987: 214; Hartog 1988; 110, 158, 337. 392 See Hdt. 3.30, 32, 27,29, 37. 393 Hdt. 3.37. 72

Herodotus reveals that the king not only opened the tombs for curiosity’s sake, but he also tampered with the bodies that lay within. In revenge for deceiving the Persian king, it is stated that Cambyses had the body of Amasis, the former king of Egypt, taken from its tomb. He then ordered his servants to ‘whip the corpse, prick it with goads, pluck out its hair, and inflict every other indignity upon it’.394 To add further insult, the corpse was then burnt, violating Cambyses’ own religion, as well as the beliefs of the Egyptians. To Herodotus, these actions proved that Cambyses’ was mad; ‘else he would never have set himself to deride religion and custom’.395 In consequence for his cultural transgressions, Cambyses’ death mirrors another sacrilegious act he committed: the killing of the sacred Apis calf.396 Particularly for Cambyses, the act of violation of burial customs was an indicator of madness used to reflect on the Persian king’s character.397

The theme of burial violation was also associated with barbarity. Hartog explains that the mutilation of a corpse by decapitation was a mark of aristeia for the Scythians, used as a trophy for their achievement in battle. This sharply contrasts with the strict regulations behind the proclamations of aristeia in fifth- century Athenian society where prizes were awarded by vote.398 Therefore, the Scythians, being the antithesis of Greek culture in Herodotus, were quintessentially barbarous in their treatment of the dead. However, this barbaric act is not restricted to the Scythians. The Persian Xerxes has the head of the Spartan king Leonidas cut off and impaled. This is evidence for Herodotus that the Persian king ‘was more angry with him than with any other man; for otherwise he would never have departed from custom about the corpse’.399 When the Leonidas’ brother seeks revenge, he stays true to Greek social boundaries and refuses to commit the same barbarous act as Xerxes as he believed ‘such things befit barbarians rather than Greeks’.400 Consequentially, it is evident that throughout the Histories, Herodotus is fascinated by the idea of tomb robbing and the violation of burial protocols and often uses this theme to reflect on the character of an individual as either insane or barbarous if they partake in this sacrilegious act.

394 Hdt. 3.1, 16. 395 Hdt. 3.38. 396 Hdt. 3.64. 397 Avery 1972: 529-546. 398 Hartog 1988: 162-165. 399 Hdt 7.238. 400 Hdt 9.79. 73

The importance of tomb robbing and burial violation is stressed by Herodotus by the positioning of these stories within the Histories. In fact, the tomb story of Nitokris and Darius is the first instance of burial violation that arises within the text.401 Since this story is the first account, it establishes a precedent for the immorality of burial violation that is carried throughout the Histories. The trap that Nitokris lays is successful in testing Darius. When he fails this test, he is met with a chastising remark. From here on it is made clear that under no circumstances should burials be tampered with. This then progresses in later examples, as demonstrated with the Scythians and Cambyses, to show that people who willingly commit this crime are either a barbarian or insane. The importance of the recurrent theme of tomb and burial violation is further indicated with the selection of a thrilling tomb story for the conclusion of The Histories. In the climax, Herodotus recounts the fate of the clever, but corrupt Artaÿctes, who committed numerous sacrilegious crimes. Among these crimes was the robbing the tomb of Protesilaus, son of Iphiculus and hero of the Iliad.402 In revenge for this heinous act, Artaÿctes was crucified. Moreover, his son was stoned to death before his own eyes by the Elaesians who he had transgressed.403 This last instance, before the conclusion of the work, hammers home the seriousness and graphic fate awaiting anyone who dares to commit this crime.

In addition to the violation of nomos, Darius’ crimes were particularly abhorrent because they were seemingly unnecessary. Throughout his account, Herodotus stresses the wealth of Babylon. Preceding the tomb story, the wealth of Babylon is alluded to in the description of the city. According to the Chaldeans, a statue of Zeus Belos alone was said to have amounted to eight-hundred talents of gold.404 Moreover, in his description of the city, Herodotus also describes the pomp and grandeur of the Babylonian festivals and sacrifices, which involved an annual burning of a thousand talents worth of frankincense.405 Darius’ conquest of the city, and his opening of Nitokris’ tomb followed this description of Babylon’s wealth. As previously stated, the first inscription on the exterior of the tomb specifies that the opener of the grave should be in need of wealth.406 It is evident that Darius does not fall into this category. This juxtaposition is demonstrated further after the tomb story. When discussing the functions

401 Before this, there are two instances of interference with human remains. However, in both occasions, the perpetrators were abiding by the word of the gods and gave the bodies a proper burial. The first is carried out by the sons of the Athenians, held hostage by the tyrant Pisistratus who ‘cleansed’ the island of Delos following the instructions of an oracle. (Hdt. 1.66) In the second case, the Spartans, under the instruction of a disciple of the gods, were promised victory if they brought home the bones of Agamemnon’s son, Orestes. 402 Hdt. 9.16. 403 Hdt. 9.120-121. 404 Hdt. 1. 181-183, 1.192. 405 Hdt 1.183. 406 Hdt. 1.187. 74 of satrapies, Herodotus divulges that Babylon provides Persia with a third of the resources of Asia, singularly supporting the army for four months.407 By placing this information surrounding the tomb story, Darius’ actions are highlighted as superfluous.408 Moreover, it is stressed by Herodotus that the tomb of Semiramis had not been opened by a previous king.409 This means that an equally pressed Cyrus had made the judgment to not open the tomb during this occupation of the city. Therefore, it seems that it is the fault of the judgment of Darius that he opted to violate the tomb. This reflection on the progression of greed of Persian kings fits into a larger theme throughout the Histories where the vices of luxury and greed directly correlate to weakness and the decline of the Persians.410

Throughout the Histories, Herodotus is able to explore the theme of tomb robbing and the violation of burial protocols. The theme is often associated with insanity or barbarity, due to the lack of respect for cultural customs, or nomoi, needed to commit this act. This misconduct is essential in contributing to a larger project in Herodotus, the delineation of the Darius’ character, as well as the exploration of the rules that govern society. In this circumstance, Nitokris is constructed as the vengeful queen who catalyses this series of events.411 Therefore, the tomb story of Nitokris was far more important for the overall progression of The Histories rather than the figure of the Babylonian queen herself.

The Legacy of Herodotus’ Tomb Story While it is clear that the tomb story is important to advancing Herodotus’ characterisation of Darius, the later reception of the story tends to focus on the ingenuity of the Queen rather than the questionable morals of the Persians. We see this in an anonymous work thought to be dated to the second-century BCE, Tractatus De Mulieribus Claris In Bello.412 The work consists of fourteen short biographies on extraordinary women, often martial rulers.413 A number of motives have been proposed for the purpose of the work. One argument is that this work was produced as a series of exempla for contemporary Hellenistic queens i.e. Eurydice, Berenice II, and Cleopatra, who actively participated in governing or took to the battlefield.414 At the very least this catalogue demonstrates the capabilities of women. As such, we see the genre and audience of the texts being influential in the way the narratives within can be

407 Hdt.1.192. 408 Hart 1982: 114-115. 409 Hdt. 1.87. 410 Gammie 1986: 183; Hall 1989: 80. 411 Flory 1987: 42-44; Dillery 1992: 30-38; Gray 1995: 185-210. 412 Ehlers 1966: 30. 413 Semiramis also appears in this work. However, the bibliographic information is sourced from Ctesias. 414 See Gera 1997: 32-61. 75 used. This is particularly apparent with Nitokris, whose biography is summarised from the Histories. In this isolated context, her feats, including the tomb story, are viewed as positive deeds of a ruler. This is in contrast to the Histories that sees the tomb story as purely serving the purpose of delineating Persian decline in morals and increase of greed.

We see a similar instance in our next source, Plutarch’s Moralia in the essay on the ‘Sayings of King and Commanders’. Despite writing approximately five centuries after Herodotus, the Greek biographer and essayist largely stays true to Herodotus’ account, as seen below;

Semiramis caused a great tomb to be prepared for herself, and on it this inscription: “Whatsoever king finds himself in need of money may break into this monument and take as much as he wishes.” Darius accordingly broke into it, but found no money; he did, however, come upon another inscription reading as follows: “If you were not a wicked man with an insatiate greed for money, you would not be disturbing the places where the dead are laid.” 415

In Plutarch, Semiramis is used for the same moralizing purpose as Herodotus but within a different socio- political climate. This text is more explicitly educative and didactic for the intended audience.

The marked difference between the account of the tomb story in Plutarch compared to Herodotus is the name given to the Assyrian Queen. As shown in the previous chapter, the works of Nitokris and Semiramis, the only two Assyrian queens in the Histories, are very similar. So much so that by the first-century Diodorus Siculus amalgamates the two under the name of Semiramis in his Bibliotheca Historica. Momigliano and Kuhrt theorise that these two women were in fact the same woman.416 Similarly, Dalley argues that the name ‘Semiramis’ became an archetype for extraordinary Babylonian queens that originated from the historical figure of Sammu-ramat.417 To fulfil this Assyrian archetype of queenship, later rulers such as Naqi’a (the Herodotean Nitokris) and Satronice emulated the memorable queen.418 Consequently, a variety of legends are attached to the name ‘Semiramis’ in Classical sources, and the use of the name for more than one woman can be explained by this tradition.

Other than the differences in the name of the Assyrian queen, the tomb story is similarly used as a moralizing text as discussed by Herodotus. However, in Plutarch’s account, the moralistic theme

415 Plut. Mor. 173. 416 Momigliano 1969: 183-186; Kuhrt 1987: 543. 417 Dalley 2005: 11-22; Dalley 2013a: 107-126; 418 Dalley 2013b: 120-126. 76 becomes more explicitly educative and didactic to suit his agenda. In Plutarch’s Moralia, the tomb story of Semiramis features in the ethical essay on ‘Sayings of Kings and Commanders’. This essay consists of brief biographical anecdotes to reflect on the character of prominent Greek and Persian figures. The Moralia were written, in great part, before the Lives, but the two works have much in common. Both works intended to reflect, understand, and judge the character of the subject by the recounting of the deeds and anecdotes of the individual to improve the morals of the reader.419 However the structure of the Moralia greatly differed from the biography of the Lives. The Moralia were produced in a more accessible, condensed format in the form of dialogues, letters, and lectures in which concrete stories were used to discuss reactions to ethical situations.420 For the ‘Sayings of Kings and Commanders’ the content has been produced in a summarized format suited for the intended audience. This purpose is revealed in the dedicatory letter to Trajan, preceding the catalogue of axioms. The language used in this dedicatory letter, previously thought to be a forgery, explicitly urges the Emperor to read his abridged version of the Lives.421

In the Lives the pronouncements of the men have the story of the men’s actions adjoined in the same pages, and so must wait for the time when one has the desire to read in a leisurely way; but here the remarks, made into a separate collection quite by themselves, serving, so to speak, as samples and primal elements of the men’s lives, will not, I think, be any serious tax on your time, and you will get in brief compass an opportunity to pass in review many men who have proved themselves worthy of being remembered. 422

From this dedicatory letter, it is evident that Plutarch intended to help guide the emperor’s moral compass when he is faced with difficult moral and ethical situations. Consequently, these sayings educate the emperor and other readers on the correct, virtuous reactions for different ethical circumstances that are to be emulated, as well as incorrect, immoral reactions that are to be avoided. In particular, these precedents of warring kings and commanders would be especially applicable to the soldier-emperor during his campaigns against Dacia and the Parthian Empire to expand the Roman Empire. By urging Trajan to read and comprehend the Sayings of Kings and Commanders, Plutarch urges the emperor to learn from the famous rulers of the past, including figures such as Semiramis.423

419 Duff 1999: 5. 420 Babbitt 1927: xii. 421 Volkmann 1869: 215; Paribeni 1926: 19; Rawson 1989: 251. 422 Plut. Mor. 173. 423 Stadter 2013: 20. 77

Due to the passages’ origins in Herodotus, the same moralizing message of self-control and moderation is present in the text of Plutarch, but for a predominantly Imperial Roman audience. As previously stated, Plutarch was concerned with commenting on contemporary Roman society by analyzing the past. Thus, even though Semiramis is not Roman, her actions are examined within the context of Roman societal norms.424 Like most societies, respect for the dead, especially family members and ancestors, was integral to Roman society and the mos maiorum. It was essential that this duty towards ancestors, pietas, was maintained.425 The correct procedure of dealing with the dead started as soon as the soul left the body with the last breath, and included numerous steps to correctly prepare and purify the body before cremation.426 For the elite, elaborate processions (pompa funebris) then occurred followed by the eulogy (laudatio funebris) as well as sacrifice or libation.427 This practice of respect for the dead then continued after the body was buried. In the annual death festivals Parentalia and Feralia, meals and wine were offered to the deceased in the location of internment.428 Patricians were also constantly reminded of their ancestors by portrait busts of family members, the images, were displayed in the atria, or courtyard, of the home.429 These portraits were also brought out in other ritualistic settings. Similarly, tombs were intended as a permanent commemoration and place of rest of the dead whilst also demonstrating the wealth of the deceased. These tombs were vital indicators of family identity that simultaneously obeyed the proper burial rituals of the dead whilst providing a location for rituals to honour the dead and the gods.430 Therefore, the desecration of burials and tombs were viewed as great insults to the deceased and their families.431 Even those who lacked support of a family to carry out these burial practices could have a proper funeral if they were a member of guilds or collegia. The punishment for tampering with bodies and graves was severe, including the death penalty, or sentencing to the mines.432 Therefore, it is unsurprising that cases of tomb violation and mistreatment of corpses in the Roman world were met with disdain.

424 Tombs of non-Romans did not hold any cultural significance. Therefore, if Semiramis was being viewed as a non-Roman the desecration would be warranted. (See Dig. 47.12.4.) 425 Heid 2007: 408. 426 Corbeill 2004: 90-91. 427 Suter 2008: 258; Scheid 2007: 264, 270. 428 Gee 2008: 62. 429 Walker and Burnett 1981: 9. 430 Gee 2008: 59; Tulloch 2010: 544. 431 Hope 2000: 114. 432 Dig. 47.12.3.7, 47.12.11. 78

One such example is the dictator Sulla, who infamously destroyed the tomb of Marius to exert his power over his deceased enemy.433 Fearing the repercussions of his actions, Sulla left strict instructions regarding his own cremation and burial to avoid the same fate that he had inflicted upon his rival. In the later imperial period, Suetonius records Caligula broke into the tomb of Alexander the Great to steal a breast plate.434 There are also countless examples of Roman emperors denying the burial rights of their victims. This included the method to which they were killed, such as crucifixion, burning alive, and being thrown to the beasts, and mutilation after death via exposure, dragging, and decapitation.435 The strict rituals concerning the dead makes it apparent that burial rites was just as important, if not more, in Roman society. Therefore, the idea of Semiramis’ tomb being desecrated is likewise an abhorrent and shocking act.

This tradition of using tomb stories as moralizing exempla continued into the later empire. Under the Severan dynasty in the second- to third- centuries, the Roman author Aelian recorded a story that paralleled the events that occurred with Semiramis’ tomb. This story of tomb violation and retribution was included in Aelian’s Varia Historia. On the surface, this work seems to be a jumbled composition of anecdotes, biographies, and other types of miscellaneous information with no overall theme. However, on closer inspection it is this variation of material which is most telling. The common theme which draws the work together is the assortment of ethical messages and moral conclusions.436 In this work, there is a striking resemblance with Darius’ violation of Semiramis’ tomb and the actions of Xerxes in the Temple of Belus in Babylon. Aelian records that the Persian king, Xerxes purposefully went out of his way to break into the giant pyramid of the Babylonian god. When he entered the tomb, he found a body encased in a glass sarcophagus filled almost to the rim with olive oil. Similarly, with Semiramis, the inscription associated with the tomb tempted and welcomed interaction with the reader. The inscription nearby the body in the Temple of Bel read; ‘“For the man who opens the tomb and does not fill the sarcophagus things will not improve.”’437 According to Aelian, this frightened Xerxes, so the Persian king attempted to fill the sarcophagus but the levels of oil remained the same. Defeated, Xerxes gave up on trying to follow the commands of the inscription. The story concludes with the statement that Xerxes did in fact meet the very worst end, as the inscription had warned, and he was murdered in his bed by his son. Stamm has argued the moralizing tone of the Varia Historia reflects Aelian’s perception, as well as contemporary authors,

433 Plin. NH. 7.1.87; Cic. Leg. 2.22.56-7. 434 Suet. Aug. 18; Suet. Cal. 52. 435 Hope 200: 112-127. 436 Johnson 1997: 212. 437 Ael. VH. 13.3. 79 that luxuria had reached its peak in Rome during the reign of Elagabalus.438 Therefore, it would seem that this story was included in the collection as a negative exempla intended to steer the ostentatious Romans, and their emperor, from the greed that was causing the decline of the empire. Moreover, the long tradition of tomb stories as negative exempla for Roman emperors starting from the time of Plutarch in the first- century to Aelian, indicates that this topic was important and something that the emperors need to be attuned to.

The tomb story of Plutarch participates in a wider debate about the circumstances in which overriding the rules is justifiable. It was questioned if all laws sacrosanct in every circumstance, did the ends always justify the means? Therefore, the primary intention of the tomb story in the ‘Sayings of Kings and Commanders’ is to test what is acceptable or unacceptable in an extreme crisis, the moment when you most need to rely on your moral compass. In this circumstance, Darius finds himself in an ethical predicament. It is clear from the inscription that Semiramis explicitly invited a future ruler to open her tomb if he was in need of money. This inscription calls upon the Persian king to make a judgment on whether gain of wealth is an acceptable reason to break the rules. The second inscription, discovered upon entering the tomb, demonstrates that ‘an insatiate greed for money’ is not a reasonable excuse to desecrate a burial.439 Therefore, the self-control of Darius as well as his ethical judgment is under scrutiny in this passage and Semiramis is applauded for exposing the greedy actions of the Persian king. Therefore, the text provides both a positive example of a virtuous ruler, Semiramis, whilst also condemning negative behaviours of the tomb robber, Darius. It was intended by Plutarch that the emperor Trajan should learn from these moralizing examples. The didactic purpose of this anecdote is for the emperor to understand what rules can be broken when he finds himself in moments of crisis. It was to be understood by the emperor that some prohibitions are so important that no matter the circumstances that they should be respected. Therefore, under no circumstances or moments of crisis is it is justifiable to ignore innate social customs such as respecting the dead. Tomb violation was to be avoided under any circumstance.

Conclusion As we have seen, in Antiquity the tomb of Semiramis is only mentioned by Herodotus and Plutarch. The story is not found in any Late Antique or Medieval texts.440 In comparison with other narratives associated with the Queen the tomb story of Semiramis does not have a very diverse and long history.

438 Stamm 2003: 36-42. 439 Plut. Mor. 173. 440 For a summary of Persians in the Medieval Period see Cary 1956. 80

The first time we encounter the tomb story is in Herodotus’ Histories. In this account, it is used to delineate the character of Darius. It also added to a larger project in the work, the decline of the Persians. This was achieved by using the theme of burial and corpse interference. Throughout the Histories, burial and corpse interference were clear markers of the breaching of nomoi. Therefore, Darius’ actions were understood to be immoral and more importantly, un-Greek. Dillery has convincingly argued that the story was a fabrication constructed by Herodotus in which the literary trope of the vengeful queen was used to catalyse the storyline of the Histories.441 As such, it is apparent that Semiramis was a means to an end in the story of tomb violation. She could have easily been swapped out for any other vengeful queen and the story would have still achieved its goal in the overall progression of the Histories. Nevertheless, in later sources the tomb story continues to be attached to the Assyrian queen, Semiramis.

The next instances in which the story reappears is in the anonymous Tractatus De Mulieribus Claris and Plutarch’s Sayings of Kings and Commanders. In contrast with Herodotus, this text was purely didactic that reflects the change in the intended audience. For the anonymous work this audience can only be speculated. However, for Plutarch it is much clearer. The main objective for the Moralia was to guide the moral compass of the Roman emperor, Trajan. In this period, the beliefs concerning burial customs were still relevant, if not more relevant, than in fifth-century Greece. The act of burial violation itself became the main concern of the passage. Semiramis is used as a voice of reason, chastising the immoral actions of the greedy Darius. This can be seen to reflect the views of Plutarch, as well as Roman imperial ideologies on the topic of the sanctity of burial rites. It was to be understood, that under no circumstances, even in times of war and need, should burials be interfered with. Again, in this instance, Semiramis was not the primary feature of the story. Instead, she acted as the catalyst for the chain of events.

In summary, in both of the sources examined, the primary purpose of these strong, Oriental women was to demonstrate the weakness of Persian men that are outsmarted by women. In this way, Nitokris and Semiramis are seen to conform to a trope within Greek literature of women whose purpose is to illustrate the flaws and failures of Persian rulers.442 As such, these women are not the focus of this anecdote, and are interchangeable. Thus, we see a shift from Nitokris in Herodotus to Semiramis in Plutarch. After this the anecdote disappears from the Semiramis narrative, but we continue to see a similar story in Aelian’s Historical Miscellany. Since the tomb story of Semiramis does not have a diverse history it is evident

441 Dillery 1992: 30-38. 442 Brosius 1996: 195-198. 81 that it did not significantly contribute to Semiramis’ reputation as a builder of monumental architecture, nor did it add to other popular conceptions of the Queen that promoted Orientalist discourse. It is due to these reasons that we see this narrative become detached from the Queen and fall out of use.

82

CHAPTER THREE Part One: Military Exploits

Lo here Semiramys Queene of great Babylon Most generous gem and floure of lonely favour Whose excellent power fro Mede unto septentrion Flourished in her regally as mighty conqueror Subdued al Barbary: and Zorast that king of honor She skue in Ethiop, and conquered Armony in Inde, In which non entred but Alexaner and she I finde.443

In this quote we see the prolific balladeer, Eustache Deschamps, describing Semiramis as a mighty conqueror. Deschamps’ work The ix. Ladies worthie written in the late fourteenth-century, represents an important stage of Semiramis’ representation. It was inspired by the querelle de femmes, or the woman question—a debate on the moral, social, and intellectual capabilities and character of women in comparison to men that occurred throughout the fourteenth- to the seventh-centuries.444 In this poem Deschamps selected and grouped together nine pagan women—Semiramis, Tomyris, Teuta, Penthesilea, Hippolyte, Lampedo, Sinope, Deiphile, and Etiope—and termed them the Female Worthies, Neuf Preuse, or Femmes Fortes. This group was introduced to complement the pre-existing Nine (male) Worthies or Les Neuf Preux that first appeared in Jacques de Longuyon’s Vows of the Peacock (1312).445 The nine men traditionally included three sets of pagan, Jewish and Christian figures; Hector, Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, Joshua, David, Judas Maccabeus, King Arthur, Charlemagne, and Godfrey of Bouillon, who were seen to personify the chivalrous moral virtues of courage and generalship. Like their male counterparts, the Female Worthies were Amazons or women that embodied masculine qualities. Like the male Worthies before her, the militaristic Semiramis was someone for rulers to emulate in this setting, especially women in positions of power that needed to display traditionally masculine attributes.446

This chapter will examine how the tradition that Deschamps engages with develops over time. It will be demonstrated that Semiramis, comparable to Alexander the Great in military success and ability, is a product of post-Hellenistic sources such as Diodorus Siculus’ Bibliotheca Historica. However, in this

443 Desch. 403. 444 Dropick 2010: 468-469. 445 Desch. 403. 446 See Vasselin 1994. A similar positive shift in Semiramis’ military achievements occurs in the late fifteenth-century genre of the grands rhétoriqueurs—a political and didactic writing in French-speaking regions. As demonstrated by Armstrong (2004), this genre tended to foreground her public achievements, particularly military prowess, and underplay or completely omit any element of sexual depravity. 83 source she continues to be associated with despotism, manifesting in her ambition and greed in warfare. In the Late Antique to the Medieval period, Semiramis’ martial ambition transitions into a thirst for blood and sexual promiscuity. However, this drastically shifts to an overwhelmingly positive attitude in the works of Boccaccio and de Pizan. Moreover, by providing this overview of Semiramis as a warrior- queen, it provides context for the case study for this chapter—Semiramis’ actions upon receiving word of a rebellion—which engages heavily with the querelle des femmes mentioned above.

The Sources: Cleitarchus and Diodorus

Aforementioned in Chapter Two, Diodorus Siculus’ Bibliotheca Historica is the most extant version of the Semiramis legend in the ancient literary tradition. Diodorus compiled his history in the first-century BCE, most likely between 60 to 30 BCE. The purpose of his Bibliotheca Historica was to explore the moral nature of humankind. Recent scholarship, such as Charles E. Muntz’ Diodorus Siculus and the World of the Late Roman Republic and Iris Sulimani’s Diodorus’ Mythistory and the Pagan Mission, have demonstrated that Diodorus did not just stick to one source or indolently copy texts.447 Instead, he selected and manipulated a variety of texts to fit his moral discourse. This is evident in his version of Semiramis. Ctesias of Cnidus, the Greek physician to the Achaemenids, was the primary source that was consulted for Semiramis’ deeds in construction. However, Diodorus Siculus can be seen to diverge from the Vulgate of Assyrian history, recorded by Ctesias, for Semiramis’ military deeds.448 Instead, for this, he consults one of the Alexander historians, Cleitarchus.

Information about Cleitarchus is scarce and largely speculative.449 What is known is that he was the son of Dinon of Colophon—the author of a fragmentary history of Persia. Like Ctesias, Cleitarchus’ work on the History of Alexander is fragmentary. He is believed to have written his work in consulation with the accounts of Callisthenes, Onesicritus, Nearchus, and Aristobulus in the fist third or half of the third- cenutry BCE.450 Cleitarchus is the main source of the Vulgate on Alexander’s life and is transmitted through the works of Quintus Curtius Rufus, Diodorus Siculus, Justin, the Metz Epitome and, in part, Plutarch. Despite the lack of remaining fragments of his work, Cleitarchus was a well-known author, particularly to Roman authors such as Cicero and Quintilian. However, their opinion of him was not

447 Llewellyn-Jones and Robson 2009: 38; Sulimani 2011: 21-162; Muntz 2017. 448 Pearson 1983: 217; Gardiner-Garden 1987: 4-9; Stronk 2007: 32-33; Llewellyn-Jones and Robson 2009: 38-39; Parker 2009: 28-55; Waters 2017: 45. 449 See Baynham 1998: 78-80. 450 Refer to Parker 2009: 28-55. 84 particularly flattering, deeming him as an untrustworthy author of Alexander’s life.451 The Greek writers were even more critical of his work. For instance, Demetrius describes his writing style as ‘repulsive and frigid’.452 These criticisms were not without cause as it is apparent that he was prone to romanticising events.453 Thus, it not surprising that Cleitarchus had a notorious reputation among ancient scholars for the accuracy of his history, and yet achieved great popularity with the literary public for these entertaining accounts.

As previously stated, despite its popularity, Cleitarchus’ work is fragmentary and survives to some extent in Diodorus Siculus, and in particular the account of Semiramis. It has been established by modern scholars that elements of Cleitarchus’ account of Alexander the Great’s campaigns in the East served as inspiration for the military deeds of Semiramis in Diodorus.454 This will be discussed in greater depth later in this chapter. But before the military figures of Semiramis and Alexander can be compared and discussed, it is necessary to provide a brief overview of Semiramis’ military deeds in Diodorus Siculus’ Bibliotheca Historica.

The Narrative of Diodorus Siculus

Diodorus starts the history of Asia with the first notable king, Ninus. Ninus conquers many lands and eventually weds Semiramis after she captures his attention while on campaign in Bactria. During the siege of Bactra, Semiramis leads a small force of rock climbers up to the acropolis of the town and captures the city.455 It is during this event where we are first introduced to Semiramis as well as her military ingenuity. After the death of Ninus, Semiramis ascends and follows in the footsteps of her late husband. She visits Media, Ecbatana, Persis, and Egypt, and adds Libya and Ethiopia to the empire, and sets her eyes on India as her next conquest. To combat the large Indian army led by king Stabrobates, Semiramis amasses an excessively large army, including stuffed elephant puppets. After being initially successful in a naval battle, the Assyrians are lured into making a pontoon bridge to cross the Indus River. Again, the troops are initially successful in combat, but then the battle takes a turn for the worst. The elephant puppets fail, and her army is forced to retreat across the river. Many casualties of Assyrian

451 Quintil. Inst. Or. 10.1.74; Cic. De Legg. 1.7. 452 Demetr. 304. 453 Cf. Diod. Sic. 17.77; Plut. Alex. 46. 454 Pearson 1983: 217; Gardiner-Garden 1987: 4-9; Comploi 2000: 223-44; Stronk 2007: 32-33; Llewellyn-Jones and Robson 2009: 38-39; Waters 2017: 45. 455 Diod. Sic. 2.6. 85 troops result from the bottle-necking of the large force on the bridge.456 This defeat marks the end of Semiramis’ military career and she returns to Bactra.

Within this narrative, distinct themes arise. These themes change over time according to the motivations of the authors and will be outlined in the proceeding sections.

Semiramis’ Ambition and Greed

In the Classical period, there is a strong association of ambition and greed as Semiramis’ primary motivation for war.457 This is established by the Queen’s husband, King Ninus, who as seen as her precursor. According to Diodorus, King Ninus was the first Assyrian ruler of noteworthiness. During his twelve-year reign, he subdued a number of territories, creating an Assyrian empire that spanned from Egypt to the Caspian Gates.458 After the death of Ninus, his successor Semiramis was described as one who was ‘ambitious by nature and eager to surpass’ the reputation and deeds of her late husband.459 Semiramis, like her husband, had a desire to add unconquered regions to the Assyrian empire. As queen and commander of the Assyrian army, Semiramis ‘trampled on’ Libya and Ethiopia, adding them to her territory.460 For a number of sources, these conquests are a significant achievement. One such source is Pliny, who places Semiramis equal to Hercules, Dionysus, Cyrus, and Alexander, in regards to expansion.461 However, these successes did not seem to be enough to satisfy the Assyrian queen, and so she decided to make war on India.

It is in the account of the campaign against India in which the warrior-queen’s ambition and greed come to the fore. Gera states that Diodorus presents the campaign in moralistic terms where ‘the hubristic, overly successful leader finally meets her match.’462 According to Diodorus, Semiramis was motivated to attack India due to her φιλοτίμως or ambitious nature, as well as the inactivity of her army caused by the peace of her empire. Therefore, ‘she was keen to achieve some remarkable exploit in the field of

456 Diod Sic. 2.16-19. 457 Baynham (1998: 166) has noted that Alexander is similarly motivated by ambitio in Quintus Curtius. See “Semiramis and Alexander” in this chapter. 458 Diod. Sic. 2.1.4-2.4; Euseb. Chron. 53-65. 459 Diod. Sic. 2.7.2. 460 Diod. Sic. 2.14.3-4; Just. Epit. 1.2. 461 Plin. HN. 6.18. 462 Gera 1997: 81. 86 war’.463 It is only after learning that ‘the Indians were the largest race in the inhabited world and that they lived in the largest and most beautiful land’ that it is decided by Semiramis to lead an expedition against them.464 Furthermore, the reader is again reminded of the warrior-Queen’s motivations in the correspondence between Semiramis and the Indian king Stabrobates. In a letter from the Indian king, Semiramis is accused of starting the war without provocation and Stabrobates threatens to crucify her once he is victorious. Nevertheless, Semiramis ignored these warnings.465 It is her ambition and greed which motivates Semiramis to make war on India. Diodorus presents this stance as an immoral one, and Semiramis is thus established as the progenitor of the Assyrian decline into luxury and indulgence. In this account, Semiramis begins a trend that will climax with Sardanapalus whose corrupt and decadent lifestyle causes the downfall of the Assyrian Empire.

In later texts, the ambition of Semiramis transitions into demonstrating the excess of the Orient in both war and sex. In the epitome of Augustan historian Pompeius Trogus, produced by Justin, it is stated that it was the custom of kings to defend, rather than to expand, their empire. Ninus, and later Semiramis, were the first rulers to break from this tradition and instead selfishly imposed ‘an extravagant desire of ruling’.466 Then in the Late Antique period, this pairing takes on a treacherous gothic quality. In the fifth- century CE, St Augustine, in The City of God Against the Pagans, identifies these two rulers as the exemplars of bad faith.467 According to the Christian authors St Augustine and Orosius, Semiramis, having ‘her husband’s spirit’, is viewed as succumbing to her pagan ways, and is said by these authors to have not only conquered Ethiopia but ‘crushed’ it and ‘drenched it in blood’.468 This excess is also associated with sexual excess, with charges of incest and the slaughter of her sexual partners appearing alongside her insatiable bloodlust.469

These ideologies are promulgated in the fourteenth-century by the Renaissance humanist, Giovanni Boccaccio (1313-1375), who builds upon his sources, Justin and Orosius. Boccaccio primarily composed poetry, however, in the later stages of his life he shifted his focus to writing compendiums of Classical encyclopaedias and biographies in Latin. This was undoubtedly influenced by Petrarch, often considered

463 Diod. Sic. 2.16.1. Semiramis’ motive in Diodorus’ account can be likened to the Egyptian king, Sesostris, as discussed by Muntz. However, in Semiramis’ case it is stressed that the campaign was unprovoked. (Muntz 2017: 1) 464 Diod. Sic. 2.16.2. 465 Diod. Sic. 2.18.2. 466 Just. Epit. 1.1. 467 August. De civitate Dei. 18.2. 468 Oros. 1.4. 469 Oros. 1.4; St Aug. 18.2; Just. 1.2. 87 the founder of humanism, whom Boccaccio regarded as a model writer and scholar.470 This is typified in Boccaccio’s modelling of a catalogue of the deeds of famous pagan women, De mulieribus claris (1361-1362), to Petrarch’s catalogue on famous men, De viris illustribus. Boccaccio used the works of the Church Fathers, such as Justin and Orosius, to create a chronology of these pagan individuals within a Christian context. Even though he was using mostly pagan women as exempla, the work reinforced Christian morals, with women presented on a spectrum. As such, Boccaccio selected both “good” and “bad” women for his catalogue and explains his reasoning in the Preface;

I have decided to insert at various places in these stories some pleasant exhortations to virtue and to add incentives for avoiding and detesting wickedness. Thus holy profit will mix with entertainment and so steal insensibly into my readers’ minds.471

Boccaccio claims that the purpose of the work was to be didactic with the behaviour of the assembled women intending to spur on virtue and curb vice. Migiel explains that women were considered most worthy by Boccaccio when they exhibited traditionally masculine behaviour (primarily military and political prowess) and denied their sexuality. Thus, when they exhibited behaviour contrary to this standard they were denigrated.472 Nonetheless, this standard of exemplary behaviour put the women in a “double bind” as it both raised them above their sex and constituted a threat to men. This form of contradictory or a “double bind” account was a common method used by Boccaccio throughout his work.473 In these accounts the narrative of an individual was often at first framed in a positive light, this was then followed by an account of their failing, often caused by their own hand. This “double bind” is evident in the narrative of Semiramis.

Following the aforementioned template, Boccaccio describes Semiramis in a positive light. The Florentine writer gives Semiramis the highest accolade that he can give a woman—equalling or surpassing the achievements of men—recounting that the Assyrian Queen took up arms with a ‘manly spirit’ to expand the empire while casting aside ‘her womanly pursuits’.474 This masculine terminology is also used to describe her other examples of military prowess and political aptitude.475 However, this praise quickly turns to the chastisement of the queen’s sexual licentiousness. By ending on this negative

470 Kolsky 2004: 39. 471 Bocc. FW. Preface. 7. 472 Migiel 2015: 180. 473 Migiel 2015: 173. 474 Bocc. FW. 2.8-10; Brown 2011: xix. 475 Simms Holderness 2004: 97, 101. 88 aspect, the reputation of the queen and the audiences’ perception of her is essentially tainted and overall persona of the queen is negative.476

Engaging in the querelle des femmes nearly a century later, Christine de Pizan (1364-1430?) rebuked the many negative allegations against women written by Jean de Meun in Roman de la Rose (c.1275), Mathéolus’ Lamentations, and Giovanni Boccaccio’s Famous Women, with The Book of the City of the Ladies (1405). It was argued by de Pizan that women were valued participants in society who should be properly educated. To elucidate this thesis, de Pizan, incited by personified Reason, Rectitude, and Justice, built an allegorical city made from famous women throughout history to protect womenkind of the past, present, and future, from the misogyny of men. In this allegorical city, famous women throughout history formed the building blocks. The first woman mentioned, functioning as the foundation of the city, was Semiramis. De Pizan’s version of the Assyrian Queen was overtly positive, branding her as a brave widow who surpassed all men in vigour and strength.477 The opening line of the biography places the Assyrian queen within this militaristic context which is then continued throughout the account. It is stated that Semiramis had extraordinary military strength and courage on both land and sea. This is substantiated by de Pizan who states that the pagans attributed this military aptitude to her Olympian ancestry as a daughter of Jupiter. Following this, it is stated that Semiramis ruled and conquered alongside her husband Ninus. Subsequently, after his death, she continued to take up arms ‘with greater courage than before’ and maintained power over the empire and added new territories to it.478 In contrast to previous sources, de Pizan greatly exaggerates the areas conquered by Semiramis, allocating the subjugation of the entire Orient to the warrior-Queen. Moreover, the order of events in the biography is unusual in comparison to other traditions. According to de Pizan, once these conquests were made Semiramis turned her attention to building projects within the empire. In most of the preceding sources, Semiramis’ building achievements in Babylon, such as the city walls, are mentioned before her conquests outside of the empire, rather than after the military deeds as described by de Pizan. Thus, this area of achievement is de-emphasized in comparison to other sources that have been discussed in Chapter Two. From this it is clear that Christine de Pizan’s Semiramis was a militaristic queen, whose courage was drawn upon to forge the foundations of the utopian city being created.

476 Migiel 2015: 181. 477 Throughout the biographical entry, the adjective of courage is continuously repeated. (Simms Holderness 2004: 101.) 478 De Piz. Le Livre. 1.15.1. 89

Military Skills of Semiramis

It takes more than ambition to achieve military success, and in addition to her unwomanly desire for conquest, authors have also marvelled at the military skills of the queen. An early example of this involves the account of Semiramis’ scaling of the acropolis at Bactra. This was a significant achievement as Semiramis’ first husband Onnes had failed to seize the city on numerous occasions. According to Diodorus, Semiramis’ success was the product of ‘intelligence, daring and all the other qualities which make a person exceptional’.479

After this, as Semiramis became the sole ruler of Assyria and commander of the army, giving her more opportunities to display her ingenuity in war. This is demonstrated with the Assyrian queen’s elephant puppets during her campaign against the Indian king Stabrobates. In an attempt to level the playing field and strike fear into the Indian king, Semiramis was motivated to give the illusion of having elephants, as Stabrobates himself had many elephants and believed that none existed outside of India. These mock elephants were created from the hides of 300,000 black cows that were shaped and stuffed with straw.480 The elephants were then controlled from the inside by a man and carried by a camel. Moreover, further measures were made to ensure success by training the horses to get used to the smell of the foreign camels so that they would not spook in battle. According to Diodorus, this was later replicated by Perseus, the Macedonian king in the Third Macedonian War, 171-167 B.C, against the Romans. Polyaenus and Zonaras describe these elephants as wooden dummies, smeared with an ointment ‘to the give a dreadful odour’, and that a man within them imitated their trumpeting.481 The horses of the Macedonians were also accustomed to the smell, sound and appearance of these dummies.

It is stressed by Diodorus that Semiramis went to great length to keep this cunning plan a secret. The elephants were pieced together by craftsmen in a walled enclosure and the gates of the enclosure were diligently watched to ensure that no craftsmen left, or anyone prohibited entered.482 However, this plan went awry when a number of troops neglected their guard duty, and fearing their punishment, defected to the Indians. Upon learning of the mock elephants, Stabrobates charged relentlessly at the elephants on the front line and forced the Assyrians to retreat. However, it is implied by Diodorus that Semiramis’

479 Diod. Sic. 2.6.5. 480 Diod. Sic. 2.16.9. Stoneman (2008: 141) comments that Semiramis elephant dummies recall Alexander’s stratagem of using red-hot dummies to fight elephants. 481 Poly. Strat. 4.21; Zonaras 9.22. 482 Diod. Sic. 2.16.10. 90 plan would have worked if the enemy had not been told of their forgery as the Indian army had been tricked by the life-like elephants and were perplexed by the vast number of them.483 Thus, the version of Semiramis we have here establishes her as a prominent military leader with ingenuity and skill in war.

Semiramis and Alexander

The final important theme that will be noted in the representation of Semiramis as a military commander is her role as a forerunner to Alexander. Quintus Curtius states that Alexander believed that ‘there were no other of those nations whom he admired more than [Cyrus] and Semiramis, who he believed had far excelled all others in the greatness of their courage and the glory of their deeds’.484 According to Arrian, Strabo, and Megasthenes, Alexander’s admiration for Semiramis, also motivated him to invade India to surpass her failed attempt.485 However, these sentiments seem to be a product of Hellenistic and Roman authors writing after the death of Alexander. These authors constructed Semiramis as a precursor to Alexander providing material for him to emulate and surpass. Consequently, these similarities between the two are only apparent in the accounts of Semiramis’ myth written after the death of Alexander. Diodorus Siculus, Nicolaus of Damascus and Pompeius Trogus, show visible traces of Alexander but are absent in the works prior to Alexander i.e. Herodotus and Deinon.486

Since Semiramis was seen as a precursor to Alexander, it is apparent that the Assyrian queen was an appealing model for the king. But what made her a viable option over others? It is unlikely that Semiramis’ reputation as a warrior queen was the cause for this connection as our current sources indicate that this aspect of her legend was only developed in the early Hellenistic period. However, as outlined in Chapter Two, the Assyrian queen was inextricably tied to the East in the same regions Alexander was attempting to conquer. Moreover, Semiramis was synonymous with the city of Babylon, and Babylon too held particular importance to Alexander. Sources speculate that Alexander intended the city to be the new capital of his empire, and more famously Babylon was the place of the king’s death.487 Therefore, it was her association with the same geographical area in which Alexander campaigned that can be seen to be the primary motivation of this pairing.488 This is evident in many sources. For example, Semiramis is

483 Diod. Sic. 2.17. 484 Curt. 7.6.20. 485 Arr. Anab. 6.24.2; Strab. 15.1.5. 486 Hdt. 1.184; FGrH IIIC 690 F7. 487 Curt. 10.2.7; Strab. 15.3.8-10. 488 Sulimani 2005: 62-63. 91 specifically evoked by Curtius in a speech by Alexander to his close friends in India after he was wounded in battle;

I pray you, think that you have come to lands in which the name of a woman is renowned because of her valour. What cities did Semiramis build! What nations did she reduce to submission! What great works did she accomplish! We have not yet equalled a woman in glory.489

In this passage, Semiramis is specifically associated with India, and Alexander is eager to surpass her deeds.

The first similarity that arises in the Bibliotheca Historica between the two figures is the siege of a Bactrian city. In Diodorus’ account, Semiramis captures Bactra with a small force of men by climbing the Acropolis of the city to seize the citadel, and in the process proves herself a capable military leader. This military success is clearly predicated on and mimics the success of Alexander’s siege of the Sogdian rock or Ariamazes’ Rock.490 In the account of Curtius, Baynham argues that this tale similarly emphasises Alexander’s ambitio.491 According to our sources, a rocky outcrop in the region of Sogdiana was being held by rebellious enemy troops. This stronghold was believed to be impenetrable due to its great height and dangerous terrain. Curtius wrote that Alexander, after seeing the unnavigable terrain of the rock, was ‘overcome by a desire to bring even nature to her knees’.492 When Alexander asked the defenders to surrender, they refused, telling him that he would need “men with wings” to capture it.493 By bribing his troops, Alexander urged his “flying troops” to climb to the top of the outcrop using iron pegs and ropes. Using this arduous method, they scaled the rocky terrain and were able to overcome the rebels and signal Macedonian victory.494 We see the same rhetoric colouring the account of Semiramis’ siege. Diodorus recounts that Semiramis likewise led a small assault on Bactra, south of Sogdia, by climbing up the steep slope of the acropolis in the same manner and then subsequently signalling her conquest.495

489 Curt. 9.6.23. 490 Alexander is also associated with numerous sieges of rocks where similar tactics are used in the Bactrian region: Sogdian Rock, Rock of Chorienes (Arr. 21.1,6-10), Rock of Arimazes (Curt. 7.11.1-19; Metz Epit. 15-18; Polyaen. 4.3.29; Diod. Sic. 17; Starb. 11.11.4) and the Rock of Sisimithres (Curt. 8.2.19-33; Plut. Al 58.3; Strabo. 11.11.4). 491 Baynham 1998: 94. 492 Curt. 7.11.4. Quintus Curtius Rufus is deemed more reliable account for this event over Arrian. See Bosworth 1995:124- 130 and Baynham 1998: 92-95. 493 Curt. 7.11.6. 494 Curt. 7.11.7-21. 495 Diod. Sic. 2.6.1-10. 92

The next time we see similarities drawn between Semiramis and Alexander is in Diodorus’ description of Semiramis’ conquests as queen of Assyria. The cities that Semiramis is meant to have visited or subdued are seen to trace the routes taken by Persian kings, Seleucids, and above all, Alexander the Great in their campaigns into the East.496 These include Babylon, Ecbatana, Egypt, Libya, the oracle of Zeus Ammon, Bactra, and Ethiopia. Sulimani notes that there are also similarities between the language used to describe Semiramis’ travels, and that of Alexander.497 After Semiramis visited Persis she then is said to have travelled to ‘all the other land in Asia under her control’ (ἐπῆλθε … τὴν ἄλλην χώραν ἅπασαν ἧς ἐπῆρχε κατὰ τὴν Ἀσίαν).498 Significantly similar is the wording of Alexander’s visitation to much of Asia, ἐπῆλθε πολλήν χώραν.499 Sulimani proposes that these similarities were purposeful, and demonstrates that Diodorus had Alexander’s expeditions in mind as he was composing his mythical hero, Semiramis.500

This is then reinforced later in the narrative where Semiramis is seen to make mistakes that Alexander does not. In Diodorus’ account of the battle, Semiramis and her troops were initially victorious in battle, and many men were taken prisoner.501 However, after this, Stabrobates tactfully retreated into Indian territory to lure the Assyrian army across the river. In consequence, Semiramis had a ‘large and costly’ pontoon bridge constructed.502 After crossing they once more engaged in combat. Again Semiramis was able to gain the upper-hand with her mock puppets and the unfamiliar smell of the camels sent the Indian horses into disarray, but soon the favour shifted to Stabrobates with his real elephants, resulting in a considerable slaughter of Assyrian troops. As the Assyrians withdrew to the pontoon bridge, the troops bottle-necked as the huge army tried to cross the river. Semiramis and her troops met a disastrous fate and a large number of casualties ensued, many drowned or were trampled.503 Once they reached the other side, Semiramis cut the tethers of the bridge, killing Indians who pursued. After this defeat, Semiramis exchanged prisoners and returned to Bactra, having lost two-thirds of her force.504

496 See Sulimani 2005. 497 Sulimani 2005: 53. 498 Diod. Sic. 2.14.1. 499 Diod. Sic. 17.104.4. 500 Sulimani 2005: 53. 501 Diod. Sic. 2.18.5. 502 Diod. Sic. 2.18.6. 503 Diod. Sic. 2.19.9. As discussed in Chapter Two, the crossing and attempt to tame rivers equated to a transgression of nomos and a display of hubris, as well as the motif of Persian expansion of peaceful peoples. As such, the transgressor is punished. (Flory 1987: 54-61, 94-95.) See Hdt. 1.208,4.89,7.34,7.56. 504 Diod. Sic. 2.19.10. 93

This is seen to be the opposite of Alexander’s campaign in the same region. By using intelligence instead of brashness, Alexander was able to safely cross the river and engage the Indian army in battle. Arrian records that to cross the large and dangerous Hydaspes River, Alexander ordered his troops to find a safer route upstream. When this location was found the troops used floatation devices made from stuffed hide tents to get across.505 After this, Alexander created a decoy so that a smaller squadron could cross the river and make a surprise attack.506 Thus, in comparison, it was Alexander who the tricked the Indians to gain an upper hand, in contrast to Semiramis who fell victim to Stabrobates deception. Moreover, in Arrian’s account Alexander anticipated that the horses would spook from the unfamiliar elephants, thus he planned his assault around this.507 Instead, it is the Indians who were trampled by their own elephants in the confusion of battle when the elephants fled back into the ranks.508 Furthermore, in Curtius’ account, the Macedonians were able to overcome the war elephants with axes and sickle-like swords, driving them back into the Indian ranks.509 When these two campaigns are compared, it is clear that Alexander’s campaigns have been used as inspiration for the description of Semiramis’ campaign in the same region. Furthermore, it is apparent that Alexander succeeded in surpassing the military of deeds of Semiramis as he led a more successful campaign into India than her.

However, Alexander’s campagin in this region was not without complications. After his invasion of India, Arrian recounts the Macedonian king’s journey into the Gedrosian Desert—a expedition that was deemed harder than all of Alexander’s campaigns in the past ten years combined.510 Arrian describes in detail how Alexander’s men and animals were progressively lost to exhaustion, starvation, dehydration, and exposure to the elements over the sixty-day journey through the inhospitable terrain of the desert.511 According to Nearchus in the accounts of Arrian’s Anabasis and Strabo, Alexander was inspired to take this route because Semiramis (on her retreat from India) and Cyrus had been the only individuals to cross the desert.512 However, both of their armies had been decimated in the process with only twenty soldiers and seven soldiers surviving, respectively. Following the path of these rulers, Alexander is also recorded

505 Arr. Anab. 5.9.2. 506 Arr. Anab. 5.12.1-4. 507 Arr. Anab. 5.10.2. 508 Arr. Anab. 5.17.4-6. 509 Curt. 8.13.23-30. 510 Arr. Anab. 6.24.1; Arr. Ind. 26.1. For a summary of arguments to whether Aristobulus or Nearchus was the source for this episode in Arrian see Schepens 1989: 22-24. 511 Arr. Anab. 6.23.4-6. 512 Arr. Anab. 6.23.6; Strab 15.1.5, 15.2.5. However, in Arrian’s Indica, he adopts Megasthenes’ tradition in which Semiramis is said to have died before making the attempt to invade India. (Arr. Ind. 5.4-7.) 94 to have lost a devastingly large number of men and animals.513 However, unlike the accounts of Cyrus and Semiramis, within Arrian’s narrative Alexander displays behaviour that is deemed to be ‘a testament to his endurance and leadership’.514 Like his men, Alexander walks on foot instead of travelling by horse and even manages to navigate the army to the ocean and find water when the guides get lost.515 But most famously, Alexander refuses to drink water brought to him by soldiers, tipping it out in front his army, when there is not enough water for everyone.516 In the vulgate, this incident is said to have occurred in Sogdiana.517 As explained by Bayhnam, by inserting the story in the Gedrosian Desert crossing, Nearchus and Arrian ‘emphasize the heroic and quasi-divine aspects of Alexander’s leadership and emphasize the superiority of his achievement over the achievements of Cyrus and Semiramis.’518 As, such Alexander is seen to chose the route he did to prove his pre-eminence as a leader of armies and ‘final proof of his superiorty to mortal fraility’.519 However, as we have seen Alexander was only partially successful in doing so.520 Like Semiramis and Cyrus, Alexander suffered an unspecified number of casualties with the surviving men arriving in Pura worse for wear. However, they were soon rehabilitated and Alexander’s reign proceeded without any noticeable disruption. Similarly to his invasion into India, this episode demonstrates Alexander’s Homeric quest for glory and his claim of invincibility. Like Cyrus, Perseus, the Dioscuri, Heracles, and Dionysus, Semiramis was another name of the list of figures he sought to emulate and surpass.521

Conclusion

Semiramis is a renowned female, military leader, especially in the Near East. As we have seen, the use and reception of this facet of her identity changes over time, adapting to the needs of the author and time period. In the Greco-Roman tradition she is representative of a woman who embodies the qualities associated with manliness. This is evident in our most extant Classical source on this theme, Diodorus Siculus. In the Bibliotheca Historica comparisons to Alexander the Great start to appear and are promulgated by later sources. In the Late Antique to the Medieval period, Semiramis’ martial ambition

513 Eventhough this number is unspecified in the sources, modern scholars have made estimated calculations of casualities ranging from 45,000-50,000 out of 60,000-70,000 men, and even larger. See Engels 1978: 114-115; Strasburger 1982-1990: 479-480; Bosworth 1996: 169-170. 514 Arr. Anab. 6.26.3. 515 Arr. Anab. 6.26.4-5. 516 Arr. Anab. 6.26.1-3. 517 Curt. 7.4.9-12. 518 Baynham 1998: 82. Also see Bosworth 1996: 166-185. This is made clear in Strabo (15.1.5.). 519 Bosworth 1996: 183. 520 Bosworth 2000: 34-35. 521 Roisman 2003: 283-285. 95 transitions into a thirst for blood and sexual promiscuity. In the works of Boccaccio and de Pizan that engage with the querelle des femmes, Semiramis’ military deeds drastically shift to an overwhelmingly positive attitude. Nevertheless, it is apparent that Semiramis had a ceaseless appeal in the literary tradition concerning warfare, attracting numerous writers over thousands of years and provoking a variety of reactions. Keeping this history in mind, it is now possible to look at a specific example on this military theme: the revolt story.

96

Part Two: The Revolt Story

Figure 14. Manta, castle, sala baronale, north wall the Nine Worthies and Female Worthies (photo: Fratelli Alinari, Florence)

In the late fourteenth-century in the northern region of Italy, the people of the Piedmont and the House of Savoy were at war. While in the neighbouring comune of Monasterolo the Marquess of Suluzzo, Thomas III, was captured and imprisoned by the nearby troops allied to Amédée VIII of Savoy. During his time of imprisonment between 1394 and 1396, the marquess wrote Le Chevalier errant or The Wandering Knight.522 Conforming to, and promoting, widely accepted contemporary generic conventions, The Wandering Knight recounts the tale of a fictitious knight who journeys around the world under the instruction of Lady Cognoissance.523 On his journey, he endures pain in order to attain honour and salvation. As well as being an important text on medieval chivalry, it also held political significance to the del Vasto family to which the marquess belonged. In the novel, Thomas draws comparisons in the work to the Nine Worthies (preux) and Lady Worthies (preuses).524 By doing this, Thomas authenticated and increased the prestige of the family whilst they were vying for the position of marquess of northern Italy. However, this never came to fruition as he was made to swear loyalty to Amédée VIII of Savoy in 1413 and all claims to the land were severed. Despite this, in 1417, Valeriano—the illegitimate but beloved son of Thomas III of Suluzzo—inherited the family estate of Castello della Manta and continued

522 Bouchet 2009: 120. 523 Enderlein 2013: 250. 524 Refer to Bouchet 2009: 127-128. 97

his fathers’ strategy path of familial aggrandizement.525 In the 1420s, Valeriano commissioned the baronial hall or sala to be decorated with frescoes of the nine preux and preuses by the so-called “Master of Manta”.526 These eighteen figures dominate the long walls of this significant room. The selection of this iconography was a deliberate display of power, wealth, and knowledge, as well as an attempt for Valeriano to connect himself to his father by alluding to his famous piece of literature, The Wandering Knight.527

Figure 15. Nine Worthies depicted on the west to north walls of the sala baronale at the Castello della Manta, Manta, Italy.

Figure 16. Female Worthies depicted on the north to east walls of the sala baronale at the Castello della Manta, Manta, Italy.

525 Bouchet 2009: 127. 526 For other artistic depictions of this motif across Europe see Cassagnes-Brouquet 2004: 171-179. 527 Enderlein 2013: 244. 98

In the room, the male Worthies are ordered into their tripartite categories to symbolize a new age. The first are earliest individuals, Hector and the other pagan heroes, this is then followed by the Jewish group and the three Christian men. The Worthies are depicted in a fertile garden, elegantly spaced by fruit- bearing trees symbolizing nobilitas and good leadership.528 To fit this vast array of figures into the space the two remaining figures of the preux and preuses continues onto the connecting walls.

In depicting the preux, the “Master of Manta” modelled his subjects on the Marquess of Saluzzo; Manfred I becomes Godfrey de Bouillon, Thomas I is depicted as King Arthur, Manfred IV as Judas Maccabeus, Thomas III as Alexander the Great, and Valeriano himself is transfigured into the figure of Hector, situated in the focal point of the room.529 In contrast, the models for the preuses are less clear. Only one figure is believed to have been modelled after a family member of the del Vasto family. This is Penthesilea who is depicted as Valeriano's wife, Mentia.530 Indeed, it has been argued by Enderlein that the female Worthies were an afterthought to the males.531 Since the women were all pagan they did not develop the ideas of human age and history that the male figures achieved, Enderlein argues that they were included for symmetry and to complement the room’s theme of erotic passion manifested in the Fountain of Youth fresco on the opposing wall.532

As the male figures wrap around to the adjoining wall the figures transition into the nine women. The preuses, who are exclusively pagan in this early stage, are not ordered in any perceivable chronology. As discussed in the previous chapter, all the Lady Worthies were seen to embody the manly traits associated with medieval knights and kings. But since these women all shared very similar attributes, and could individually be put under the bracket of an “Amazonesque woman”, how do we tell one militaristic woman from another? This question does not become any clearer when looking at the imagery of the women in the fresco. All nine of the female figures are dressed in contemporary, fifteenth-century attire consisting of a headdress (either a crown, wreath or hennin), cloak and dress. However, it is the extra objects that each of the women carry which enables the audience to identify who’s who.

528 Enderlein 2013: 244. 529 Anderson 2005: 233; Bouchet 2009: 128; Johnston 2011: 433. 530 Enderlein 2013: 247. 531 Enderlein 2013: 246. 532 Enderlein 2013: 246. 99

Figure 17. Semiramis depicted on the north wall of the sala baronale at the Castello della Manta, Manta, Italy.

For example, we see Tomyris, the famed leader of the Massagetae, brandishing an executioner’s axe that she used to decapitate Cyrus the Great. Likewise, Teuta, the Queen of Illyria and invader of Rome, holds a feather to allude to her ancestry from the Ardean kingdom (derived from the Latin for heron, ardea).533 When it comes to Semiramis, her identifying features is her hair. As depicted in this fresco, one half of her hair is braided, and the other half is free-flowing. This unfinished half is being combed by the queen as she looks suspiciously to her left. The iconography evokes one of the most famous stories told about the Queen, namely that upon hearing of a revolt during her toilette, the Queen immediately left to

533 See McMillan 1979: 116-118 on the identification of these women. 100 suppress the rebellion with her hair in this half-finished style. With her hair half-braided she marched upon her enemies. It is a story of valour, not vanity. And it is these characteristics taken from the revolt story that act as visual cues and make Semiramis an easily identifiable figure out of the eight other militaristic queens depicted.

It is this story, the rebellion, that will be the focus of the case study for the militaristic facet of Semiramis’ identity. By looking at the literary sources that precede visual representations of the queen, like the fresco in the Castello de Manta, the development of the story into the present version will be traced. It will be demonstrated that the story has an extremely rich and diverse history and is used in a variety of ways. It can be used to bring her gender to the fore, or to denigrate her Oriental origins. On the other hand, the revolt story can be viewed positively as an exemplum of good leadership during times of crisis, with her gender and nationality being largely unimportant. This is a particularly popular representation that is used during times of political contention. Thus, it is apparent from the vast number of differing sources throughout our timespan that the story could be adapted and manipulated to appeal to a number of audiences and situations.

Rhodogyne and Semiramis

The image of the woman thrust from domesticity into battle seems to have been a popular one in Antiquity. We find a thematically similar depiction described by the second-century travel writer, Pausanias. In the Guide to Greece, Pausanias describes a stone relief of the poetess Telesilla in front of the sanctuary of Aphrodite in Corinth. According to Pausanias, in the relief Telesilla is captured in mid- action with her books, that she was reading only a moment before, now thrown to the side at her feet. Abandoning this domestic pursuit, she now gazes at a helmet in her hands which she is about to put on.534 The battle that she is about to enter is against the Spartans, led by Cleomenes, who has killed and entrapped many of her fellow Argives. The moment captured in the relief is when she receives word of the approach of the enemy, and orders for all house slaves, old men, boys, and women to take up arms to defend the city. As such, the relief neatly captures the dualities of the moment (feminine domesticity opposed to masculine militarism, intellect to brawn) by juxtaposing the books and helmet. It is this duality which will see not only represented in descriptions of her commemorative statue, detailed in the anonymous Tractatus De Mulieribus Claris In Bello and Polyaenus’ Strategmata, but also in her physical

534 Paus. 2.20.7. 101 description, as vividly detailed in Philostratus’ Imagines. However, with Semiramis, this duality is apparent with her feminine beautification during her toilette, and masculine militarism when she receives word of revolt.

Our earliest accounts of the revolt story do not associate it with Semiramis, but rather with a largely unknown figure, Rhodogyne. References to Rhodogyne are scant in the Classical tradition, thus little is known about her or the historicity behind her character. However, Rhodogyne seems to be a popular name within the Persian royal family as numerous sources list her as a daughter or wife of a prominent Persian.535 A short biography of Rhodogyne features in an anonymous work thought to be dated to the second-century BCE, Tractatus De Mulieribus Claris In Bello.536 The text features fourteen short biographies on extraordinary women, often martial rulers, including Rhodogyne.537 The short biography of Rhodogyne reads as follows:

Rhodogyne, queen of the Persians, as Aeschines the philosopher says, made the Persian kingdom most powerful. For she was, he says, so brave in her deeds and so frightening that once, while in the midst of arranging her hair, she heard that several tribes had rebelled. She left her hair semi-braided and did not braid it until she had captured and subdued the aforementioned tribes. That is why a golden statue of her was dedicated, with half her hair braided round her head and the other half flowing loose.538

This account stresses the militarism of Rhodogyne. It is through her military prowess, epitomized by the revolt story, that Rhodogyne was able to strengthen the political position of the Persian Empire. According to the anonymous author, the Persian queen drops everything she is doing, even her womanly pursuits, and dons a peculiar hairstyle and bravely charges into battle. These deeds were deemed to be particularly praiseworthy enough that she was commemorated with a lasting monument, a bronze statue.

The source cited for this biography is Aeschines of Sphettos, the orator and student of Socrates. Rhodogyne is referenced in his dialogue on Aspasia, a fragmentary dialogue on the famous partner of Perikles that was composed in 393-384 BCE. The dialogue discusses the merits of Aspasia outside of motherhood and her relationship with Perikles that was the subject of comedies. Henry argues that

535 See Ctesias, Persica = FGrH 688 F13 24; Plut. Vit. Artax. 27.6-9; Xen. An. 2.4.1-2; Jer. Adv. Iovinian. 1.45; App. Syr. 67 f; Just. Epit. 38.9; AR. 2.12, 22. Rhodogyne also features as a beautiful Persian in the fragmentary Hellenistic romance novel, Chaereas and Callirhoe, by Chariton which dates to the first-century BCE. In this novel she loses to Callirhoe in a beauty contest. See Moyer 2010: 601-620; Llewellyn-Jones 2013a. However, in these sources Rhodogyne is a passive figure who is detached from her militaristic persona. 536 Ehlers 1966: 30. 537 Semiramis, sourced from Ctesias, appears in this work. However, the revolt story is only attributed to Rhodogyne. 538 ADM.8. 102

Aeschines is the first ancient writer to create an overall positive Aspasia ‘in whom eros and the search for arete are fused’.539 The dialogue is populated by powerful and sexual women that reflect Aspasia’s nature. To demonstrate this point Rhodogyne is mentioned alongside Thargelia of Miletus, the hetaera. Both these figures demonstrate political aptitude as well as extremes of eros. Rhodogyne, as a Persian queen eschews eros and instead focuses solely on her position. This differs from Thargelia who uses eros to gain political power by supposedly persuading many Greeks to ally themselves with Xerxes, and in turn, was given a part of Thessaly to rule.540 Both women are used to explore different facets of Aspasia, whether positively or negatively is unknown due to the fragmentary nature of the text.541

Thereafter, the revolt story is used interchangeably between Rhodogyne or Semiramis. This interchangeability is understandable, and we see it in all different texts. Rhodogyne and Semiramis share many similarities. Both women originate from the Eastern regions associated with the Other, Persia and Babylon respectively. Both women are associated with great military deeds and aggressive expansion of these empires. Finally, both women display ambivalent attitudes toward men and have anomalous sex lives—Rhodogyne, the man-hating virgin has no interest in men at all, and Semiramis, the lustful widow is highly sexual. Thus, it is unsurprising that these two women are paired and conflated in our sources. In Valerius Maximus the revolt story is attributed to Semiramis, Poleyaenus in his Strategmata attributes it to both women, then in Philostratus’ Imagines the story is attributed to Rhodogyne.

In the Classical period, there is only one source that associates Semiramis, individually, with the revolt story. This reference is in Valerius Maximus’ Memorable Sayings and Doings. This extant work was written under the reign of Tiberius in the first-century and consists of historical anecdotes categorized into topical essays. These essays ranged from very broad topics and concepts such as “Dreams”, “Courage”, and “Gratitude”, to more specific instances such as “Electoral Defeats” and “Famous Men who indulged in more Freedom of Dress or Appearance than was Traditionally Acceptable”. In the past, scholars have dismissed these essays as an insignificant compendium of sources that were designed to be plundered by rhetors and students.542 However, in more recent revisionist scholarship, it has been argued that the work is far more nuanced. For instance, Skidmore and Mueller have proposed that the anecdotes in the work formed a paradigm for moral guidance, the elementa virtutis.543 As such, a

539 Henry 1995: 41. 540 Plut. Vit. Per. 24. 541 See Dittmar 1912 and Ehlers 1966. 542 Howatson 1989; Bloomer 1992; Vessey 2008. 543 Val. Max. 3. praef; Mueller 2012. 103 continuous historical narrative was not of primary importance. Instead, there was a focus on cherry- picking specific anecdotes about individuals that could be interpreted to suit the moralistic theme of each essay.544 Within these essays, Roman examples (domestica) were discussed followed by a brief account of non-Roman examples (externa) which were primarily Greek. In the collection, attention is given to both positive as well as negative exempla. In most cases, the negative exempla refer to past, violent dangers, external or internal, and are used to create a historical backdrop of instability and disorder preceding the principate. By doing this, Valerius conveys the transition to the princeps as a positive shift in Rome’s history.545 Moreover, the exempla are used as a reminder of the possible challenges that Tiberius may face during his reign and thus was intended to be a didactic guide to a successful principate.546 In Antiquity, Valerius had what Shackleton Bailey describes as a ‘modest vogue’, increasing in popularity in the Medieval period.547 This is demonstrated in the thirty surviving manuscripts dating up until the twelfth-century with more produced in the late fifteenth-century onwards, provideing easily digestible information about episodes and customs in the Classical world.548 As such, we see Valerius Maximus becoming an increasingly important source on Semiramis in works from these periods.

The first eight books of the work recount examples of virtuous behaviour (virtus). Throughout these chapters, moral behaviour is rewarded with public approval and spectacle, laus, typical of Roman society.549 In contrast, in situations where the immoral actions of an individual threaten the very fabric of society, they are met with reprehensio or criticism.550 This is the main focus of the final book that recounts examples of vice (vitia). Therefore, by presenting instances of vice linked with negative consequences the book aims to encourage readers to repent and mend their ways.551 Thus, examples of vice are just as important as examples of good moral behaviour. This is evident with the essay from Book Nine, “On Anger and Hatred”, containing the revolt story attributed to Semiramis.

Like most of the other essays, “On Anger and Hatred” starts with a preface that introduces the topic and the moral message. In this section, Valerius exclaims: ‘How often anger has been victorious over

544 Maslakov 1984: 446. 545 Maslakov 1984: 438-9. 546 Maslakov 1984: 438-9, 451-452. 547 Berlincourt 1972: 361-387; Shackleton Bailey 2000: 4. 548 Briscoe 1993: 395. 549 Skidmore 1997: 56. 550 Skidmore 1997: 57. 551 Val. Max. 9.1. praef; Maslakov 1984: 446. 104 victory’.552 Here it is implied that the success of the Roman Empire has been achieved in times of levelheadedness and moderation as opposed to the irrationality caused by anger and hatred. This moral message is then reinforced throughout the essay through the evocation of exempla. In the externa section Valerius recounts non-Roman examples of instances in which anger and hatred have led to the demise of certain individuals. The first is Alexander, whose irascible slaughter of Lysimachus, Clitus and Callisthenes is said to have ‘almost snatched him from heaven’ and turned ‘three great victories into defeats’.553 Valerius also explains that Hannibal Barca’s personal vendetta against Rome was ingrained in him by his father, Hamilcar, and caused the destruction of Carthage and the downfall of the Empire. In these two circumstances, both Alexander and Hannibal were acting on their own accord for personal gain to the detriment of their society. This does not fit in with Valerius’ code of moral conduct. Thus, they equate to negative exemplum.

However, this is not the case with Semiramis, the next exempla ending the externa passage and chapter. At the outset, Semiramis is used to exemplify that anger can overcome women as well as men. Linking the two examples together is the following passage: ‘such was the force of hate in a boy’s heart, but in a woman’s too it was no less potent.’554 However, after this, the similarities deviate. In contrast to the two other men, Semiramis’ actions seem to have no immediate negative consequences. In fact, the opposite occurs, and her deeds are commemorated with a statue:

Samiramis, queen of Assyria, was busy doing her hair when news came that Babylon had revolted. Leaving one half of it loose, she immediately ran to storm the city and did not restore her coiffure to a seemly order before she brought it back into her power. For that reason, her statue was set up in Babylon showing her as she moved in precipitate haste to take her vengeance.555

In this circumstance, Semiramis was motivated by rage to subdue the rebellious peoples and re-establish the status quo in the empire and her actions are perceived as positive, aligning with the moral conduct of Valerius Maximus by restoring the fabric of society. In consequence, Semiramis receives a commemorative statue, an example of laus. Semiramis’ positive exemplum concludes the essay after numerous negative exempla, both domestica and externa, that are used to dissuade angry and hateful

552 Val. Max. 9.3.5. 553 Val. Max. 9.3.ext.2. 554 Val. Max. 9.3.ext.4. 555 Val. Max. 9.3.ext.4. 105 behaviour. As such, the audience is left with an example of what constitutes the appropriate situations and use of these emotions: Semiramis’ vengeance to protect the equilibrium of society.

This is further reinforced with the terminology used to describe Semiramis’ actions in contrast to the other exempla in the essay. In other instances of the essay the term used to describe the emotion behind an individual’s actions are derived from the words odi, hate, and ira, anger. However, in the case of Semiramis the term ultio, revenge, is used. Broadly speaking, this term has the meaning of taking action after being wronged.556 However, during the early imperial period, the term holds a more specific meaning. The term is used extensively in Seneca the Elder’s Declamations or Controversiae, a work discussing seventy-four thematic and imaginary legal cases that was contemporary to Valerius Maximus’ own time. In this work, ultio was strongly associated with women exacting vengeance as well as reestablishment of peace after civil strife.557 Therefore, ultio is an apt term to describe Semiramis subduing a rebellion as it carries connotations of civil unrest whilst also demarcating her gender. By deviating from the vocabulary used elsewhere in the essay, a clear divide is established between the positive representation of Semiramis and the negative exemplum.

Moreover, the term ultio is particularly loaded in the early principate. Under Augustus, the new emperor was required to act as ultor, avenger, after the death of his adoptive father, Julius Caesar.558 Succeeding Augustus, Tiberius too promoted ultio in a similar way. Tiberius had to step into the shoes of ultor in two instances during his reign. The first internal threat during the reign of Tiberius was Gnaius Calpurnius Piso who was placed on trial for poisoning the heir to Augustus, Germanicus.559 Moreover, in 31CE Sejanus, the ambitious soldier and right-hand man to the emperor, was condemned to death after overstepping his boundaries and threatening the position of the principate. Strict measures were put in place to quell anyone who had a hand in the affair. Cassius Dio uses the term τιμωρίας (retribution or vengeance) to describe the vengeful actions undertaken by Tiberius.560 This involved the Senate condemning Sejanus to death by strangulation and his body unceremoniously cast onto the Gemonian stairs where ‘the rabble [is said to have] abused it for three whole days and afterwards threw it into the river’.561 Following this, riots

556 OLD s.v. ‘ultio’ a. 557 Refer to the following for other instances in the work where the term is used in regards to civil strife (Sen. Controv. 3.8; 7.12; 10.8.) and for associated with females (Sen. Controv.1.6; 1.7; 2.18; 9.6.18). 558 See Aug. RG. 21. 559 Tac. Ann. 2.71; Dowling 2006: 170. 560 Cass. Dio. 58.12. 561 Cass. Dio. 58.11. 106 ensued, in which crowds hunted and killed anyone they could link to Sejanus. The Senate also issued the execution of Sejanus’ children and Livillia as well as damnatio memoriae against his name.562 This extreme action was necessary in order to restore balance and power to the empire and serve as a warning to any other future usurpers. Thus, by utilising ultio, Tiberius eliminated potential threats to his position on two separate occasions. This is the same message that was promoted by Valerius Maximus. The exempla of Semiramis, the Assyrian queen, also restored equilibrium to society through an act of vengeance. As such, in Valerius Maximus, Semiramis’ gender is not particularly essential to the story. Instead, Semiramis is portrayed as an authoritative figure who restores order to society.

In contrast, other sources use the tale to reflect on the Oriental femininity associated with hair and beautification. This is evident with the use of Rhodogyne by Dio Chrysostom, the first-century Greek orator, in his essay On Beauty as a part of the Discourses—a compilation of essays on political, moral, and philosophical subjects. On Beauty discusses Dio’s thoughts on beauty and his belief that the beautiful depiction of men declined after the Classical period due to a variety of reasons including the lack of skill of sculptures, the decline in character of their subjects being depicted, as well as a general underappreciation for beauty.563 As a result of this, Dio argues that the beauty of women increased and that the Greeks were starting to adopt Persian ideologies of feminine beauty for males. Here Persian men were so extreme that men were being castrated to reach feminine appeal. Discussion on the Persians and their practice of castration then lead Dio to speak of Nero and his sexual deviancy, especially his castration of a young boy and his adoption of feminine attire and a female name. The interlocutor he is having the discussion with asks for the name of Nero’s eunuch, to which Dio replies;

What concern of yours is that? At any rate she was not called Rhodogyne. But that youth of Nero’s actually wore his hair parted, young women attended him whenever he went for a walk, he wore women’s clothes, and was forced to do everything else a woman does in the same way.564

By describing the eunuch’s appearance as having his hair parted like Rhodogyne in the rebellion story, clear connections are made with Oriental decadence and femininity. This version of Rhodogyne starkly contrasts to her representation elsewhere in Dio Chyrsostom’s work where she is noted as a great warrior. In another work by Dio, On Fortune 2, Rhodogyne and Semiramis are linked together as women of distinction; Rhodogyne as a warrior (Ῥοδογούνην πολεμικήν) and Semiramis as a queen (Σεμίραμιν

562 Tac. Ann. 6.2. 563 Dio Chry. Or. 21. 564 Dio Chrys. Or. 21.7. 107

βασιλικήν).565 Other women that feature in this list include Sappho for her poetry, Timandra for her beauty, and Demonassa for her statesmanship and law-giving.566 Two different versions of Rhodogyne are apparent in Dio Chrysostom’s work, one connected to Oriental decadence and femininity, and the other noted for military prowess which is typically ascribed as a masculine deed.

The rebellion story is purely associated with military skill in the next source, Polyaenus’ Strategmata. Polyaenus was a Macedonian rhetor writing in the second century CE. The Strategmata is one of the two surviving stratagem collections from the Hellenistic to Roman periods, along with Frontinus.567 The underlying theme of this work was didactic, presenting examples of military deeds from a wide range of peoples and time periods.568 The exempla include gods, heroes, and famous men and women, grouped together ethnographically and prosopographically. In the work, Polyaenus writes of Semiramis and Rhodogyne in two individual, successive passages, and attributes the rebellion story to both of them. The accounts of the two warrior-queens are especially interesting because the two separate accounts are virtually the same.

Listed first in Book 8 are the military achievements of Semiramis. The revolt story is condensed to one line of the entry. The passage goes as follows: ‘While taking a bath, Semiramis heard of the Siracians’ revolt and immediately, barefoot and without even braiding her hair, went out for war.’569 After this summary of the revolt story, Polyaenus recalls the inscription of her stele commemorating her many deeds throughout her reign. Immediately following this is another rendition of the revolt story, but this time attributed to Rhodogyne. In contrast, this version is considerably more elaborate and detailed than the preceding version. The complete section on Rhodogyne goes as follows;

Rhodogyne was washing her hair while taking a bath. Someone came with a report that “a subject nation has revolted”. Without completing her shampoo but tying her hair up just as it was, she mounted her horse, led out an army, and swore not to wash her hair before she mastered the rebels. And so she prevailed in a long campaign. After the victory she bathed and thoroughly washed her hair. The Persian kings have as their royal seal an image of Rhodogyne with her hair tied up.570

565 Dio Chrys. Or. 64.2. Julian, too, groups these two together along with Tomyris and Nitokris as famed builders. (Julian. Or. 3. 127.) 566 Dio Chrys. Or. 64.2. 567 Krentz and Wheeler 1994: viii; Hanson 2007: 1. 568 Roberts 2007. 569 Poly. Strat. 8.26. 570 Poly. Strat. 8.27. 108

The resemblance between these two passages is obvious, especially considering the immediate proximity of the sections. However, there are also differing aspects that may indicate varying oral traditions.571 One notable variation is the way in which the Queen’s deeds were commemorated by her fellow Persians. In the earlier tradition, the Queen receives a bronze statue displaying her quick actions, which depicts her hair half-completed. In Rhodogyne’s mythology, Polynaeus states that she is commemorated with her hair tied up on a royal seal that is used by the Persian kings. Whilst seals could be owned by elite women, they did not often feature imagery of royalty. Instead, imagery of lions, lion-griffons, religious rituals, and heroic hunting scenes were utilised to denoted Persian royalty and prowess.572 Nevertheless, both the seal and the statue of the Queen that are mentioned in our sources promulgate the same message, her military prowess and the temporary abnegation of femininity. Other differences in Polyaenus’ tradition include the identification of the rebellious nation as the Siracians in Semiramis’ account, while those rebelling against Rhodogyne are unnamed. Moreover, Semiramis went into battle with her hair unbraided, while Rhodogyne’s hair was wet, soapy and hurriedly tied up. In this sense, the two stories presented in the Strategmata are a division of the half-braided version of Aeschines where each half of the hair is represented with a story, Semiramis’ hair is unbound, Rhodogyne’s is tied up. Therefore, it seems that Polyaenus has possibly separated the story to stretch it over the two females or was confused to whom the story was accredited to.

The discrepancies within the Strategmata itself can be explained by the methodology of Polyaenus. At the beginning of Book 8, Poleyaenus dedicated the treatise to the emperors Marcus Antonius and Lucius Verus stating that he hoped the treatise would be beneficial to the emperors, the Roman Empire, and the Greeks, in times of war and peace.573 The war that he is referring to can be identified as the Parthian campaign c. 162 CE. In the lead up to the war in 161, the Parthians had invaded Armenia and deposed the Roman nominee on the Armenian throne. In Cappadocia, the governor, M. Sedatius Severianus, had been ambushed and killed along with his whole legion at Armenian Elegeia, meaning that the Roman province of Syria was also threatened. The Eastern front, that had been pacified under Trajan, was now tumultuous and in need of military response. It was under this stress that proved to be the perfect opportunity for Polyaenus to dedicate his military treatise. Krentz and Wheeler propose that it was probable that the treatise had already been started by this point but needed to be completed before the emperors went on campaign. Moreover, it is speculated that if the first book appeared in mid or late

571 Gera 1997: 155. 572 Dusinberre 2010: 326. 573 Poly. Strat. 8. 109 autumn of 161, then Polyaenus produced six books, three-quarters of the entire work, in nine months.574 Under this high-pressure deadline, it is reasonable that Polyaenus might have conflated the entries on Rhodogyne and Semiramis.575 Furthermore, it would have strengthened his work to include as many pertinent examples of military strategies from areas near the Parthian Empire, which bordered the Near East, where the emperors were campaigning. As such, Alexander the Great, the great strategist and conqueror of the East, is heavily featured in the work and his deeds are even improved in some areas to make a stratagem more effective or striking.576 Nevertheless, both Semiramis and Rhodogyne provide exempla of military prowess to be wary of while campaigning into the Eastern frontier.

Our next source in the Classical tradition is Philostratus’ Imagines in which the multi-faceted nature of Rhodogyne’s persona is brought to the fore through the revolt story. Philostratus was a writer of philosophic dialogues in the early third-century CE.577 Along with the Imagines, Philostratus has produced major works such as the Lives of the Sophists and the Life of Apollonius.578 He was a member of the intellectual and artistic circle of Julia Domna, the second wife of Septimius Severus and staunch patron of the arts in Rome.579 It was under these supportive conditions that intellectual works, such as Philostratus’ Imagines, flourished.

The Imagines are the most extant example of ekphrasis in Antiquity. Ekphrasis, literally meaning “speaking out”, is a process in which vivid verbal descriptions transform into an apparition in one’s mind, a form of seeing through hearing.580 The Imagines consist of forty-eight vivid descriptions of fictional mythological and epic scenes that were portrayed as paintings hung in the porticoes of a Neapolitan gallery, however they were purely fictional.581 These paintings are described by a narrator, understood by the audience to be a sophist, visiting the city who after being pestered by the youths of the city agrees to make a discourse, epideixis, for the young men so that ‘they may learn to interpret paintings and to appreciate what is esteemed in them’.582 A range of dramatic and rich visual scenes concerning love, war, death, birth, and education such as the death of Ajax, and the birth of Venus are described in the text. In

574 Krentz and Wheeler 1994: xi-xii. 575 Gera 1997: 155. 576 Hammond 1996: 23-53. 577 Suda, s.v. Φιλόστρατος 421-3. Refer to Bowie 2009: 19-32. 578 For a full list of works see Bowie 2009: 29-32. 579 Philostr. VA 1.3. Cassius Dio compares the Syrian born Julia Domna to Nitokris and Semiramis (Cass. Dio. 78.23.3) See Mallan 2013. 580 Hermog. Prog. 10.47; Squire 2013: 100. 581 Philostr. Imag. Proem 4; Lehmann-Hartleben 1941. 582 Philostr. Imag. Preface 3. 110 accordance with the aesthetic values of the Second Sophistic, the excellence of these pictures lay in their effectiveness to delineate character, in the pathos of the situation, or in the play of emotion they represented.583 As such, these fictional paintings were used to show art criticism, to demonstrate the proper way to view and interpret images, as well as to demonstrate how images can be used for sophistic declamations.584 This is apparent in the description of “Rhodogyne Victorious” in Book 2 of the Imagines.

The tone of the scene is immediately set in the opening line of the description of Rhodogyne. The landscape is described in a state of chaos; the battlefield is polluted with blood and fallen men, littered with bronze weapons, and horses fleeing from the scene—clearly establishing that a battle had occurred, whilst also piquing the interest of the young men.585 Next, the historical explanation of the scene is given. As seen in other passages within the book, the narrator uses literary texts to overcome thauma, the powerful aesthetic effect that paintings can have on viewers, so that the students can critically analyse and intellectually interact with the painting. In this circumstance, the immediate thauma of the scene are the graphic details of the scene that threatens to dominate the interest of the viewer. To overcome this, Philostratus draws upon and reinterprets past literary texts associated with the scene. By doing this he provided supplementary information to consider alongside the painting whilst also acting as a showpiece to reveal the author's intellectual credentials.586

Modern scholarship has ascertained that the Imagines was purely a rhetorical text, and therefore described fictional paintings by drawing upon fictional sources.587 The most frequently cited and alluded to authors found in the work are Homer, Euripides, and Pindar.588 Given the nature of the text, it is not clear what sources Philostratus is drawing upon for his scene of Rhodogyne. As the narrator explains, Rhodogyne’s exploits are celebrated ‘with the lyre and flutes wherever there are Greeks’, giving the illusion that the sources for this scene are from a form of epic poetry or the like.589 However, a genuine source that Philostratus could possibly be interacting with for this scene is Aeschines’ Aspasia. According to a letter to the empress, Julia Domna, Philostratus was acquainted with this work.590 Thus,

583 Fairbanks 1931: xviii. 584 Dubel 2009: 318; Newby 2009: 323. 585 Philostr. 2.5.1; Webb 2003: 125. 586 Newby 2009: 327. 587 Webb 2006: 113-133. 588 Newby 2009: 324. 589 Philostr. Imag. 2.5.9. 590 Philostratus, epist. 73 = Aeschines fr. 22 Dittmar. 111 it is not without reason to suggest that Aeschines may have been a source that was consulted. Moreover, this reiteration of the tale seems to build upon the pre-existing story found in Aeschines with slight variation. These similarities include her biographic information such as ethnicity, rank and name, and most notably the storyline of the half-braided hair. Moreover, there are many details in Philostratus’ description of the painting that are not mentioned in extant texts. Whether these are inventions of Philostratus or belong to an earlier tradition remains unclear. For example, Philostratus identifies the rebellious people as Armenians rebelling against the empire and consequently breaking the treaty that had been established between them.591 This is unique to this source. Nevertheless, literary sources played an essential part of the Imagines as a display of erudition as well as another verbal component to obtain “sight” of the scene.

After the scene has been described, the audience is introduced to Rhodogyne. Leading the Persian force, and in fact, the only Persian mentioned or described in the passage is Rhodogyne. After introducing the Oriental queen, her identifier is revealed: the one that ‘[having not] allowed herself to tarry long enough to fasten up the right side of her hair’.592 In this instance, Rhodogyne casts aside her femininity in a time of crisis where masculinity is needed. This is then reinforced and elaborated upon with the description of the Queen’s appearance and interaction within the scene in which her Orientalism is brought to the fore. This is first indicated by the description of the superfluous ornamentation and beauty of her warhorse. By placing this description before the one of the queen, it anticipates the elaborate Oriental features of the queen. When the narrator finally gets to describing the queen, only her attire is focused upon. Like the mare, Rhodogyne’s girdle, chiton and trousers are described in equal ornateness; they are patterned, made from expensive fabric, and bejewelled.593 The narrator makes a clear distinction that Rhodogyne’s short chiton should not be confused with the attire of Amazonian women.594 By deliberately bringing this similarity to the attention of the audience her liminality is highlighted. The chiton places her on the borderline between civilized and Amazon-like “otherness”.595 It is clear from these descriptive queues that we are dealing with an Oriental queen. The Oriental nature of the scene is unsurprising as it was a common cultural stereotyping of Persians found in Greek culture.596 As such, this description of

591 Philostr. Imag. 2.5.1. 592 Philostr. Imag. 2.5.1. 593 Philostr. Imag. 2.5.2. 594 On Amazonian dress see Veness 2002: 95-109. The short chiton could also be compared to a huntress’s outfit. See Parisinou 2002: 59-60. 595 Gera 1997: 153. 596 Tuplin 1996: 132-177. 112 the queen amplifies the dual nature of her character. She is simultaneously a fierce warrior ready for battle at a moment’s notice and a woman, but not just any woman. She is an Oriental queen, a race famed for their softness and effeminacy.

The queen’s Oriental “Otherness” is added upon by her actions within the scene. It is explained that the artist has drawn the Persian queen in the midst of prayer and pouring a libation for her victory over Armenia. It is conjectured by Dittmar that this deviation from our extant sources comes from Philostratus’ own imagination.597 In his exegesis, the narrator explains the significance of this act; ‘She prays to conquer me, even as she has now conquered them; for I do not think she loves to be loved.’598 Here love, desire, and conquest combine. It is a potent confection that blends eroticism with gender ambiguity—the war-loving, not-quite-Amazon, still partially dressed with her hair cascading down making a sacrifice to love and war surrounded by the dead bodies of men who have dared to rebel from under her rule.

Unlike the other sources, Philostratus engages with contemporary beliefs on hair that, among other parts of a female’s head (mouth, eyes, and ears), were perceived as potentially disruptive and dangerous areas of female contamination or miasma. The way a female had her hair—exposed or veiled, tied up or loose—reflected on her social status (e.g. wife, hetaira, prostitute), temporal status (e.g. bride, cult participant, festival goer) or location (e.g. home or in public).599 In the case of the Persian Queen, her hair is described in the following way; ‘The part of her hair that is fastened up is arranged with a modesty that tempers her high spirit, while that which hangs loose gives her vigour and the look of a bacchant.’600 The restrained hair connoted restraint in character and (to a certain extent) aidōs, whilst the unbound hair connoted her wild, untamed and dangerous feminine sexuality, like that of a Bacchae of Maenads who worshipped Dionysus by indulging in dancing and wine until they were in a state of ecstatic frenzy. This duality of character corresponding to differing physical attributes is also represented in the colours of her hair: ‘Yellow, even yellower than gold, is her disarranged hair; while the hair on the other side differs also somewhat in hue because of its orderly arrangement.’601

597 Dittmar 1912: 43. 598 Philostr. Imag. 2.5.4. 599 Llewellyn-Jones 2003: 262-265. 600 Philostr. Imag. 2.5.4. 601 Philostr. Imag. 2.5.4. 113

Such physical descriptions are particularly loaded in this text as Philostratus is clearly influenced by the contemporary discourse of physiognomics, the method of determining a person’s characteristics from their physical appearance. This pseudoscience especially garnered interest in the second-century when the sophist Polemo produced a treatise on physiognomics that focused on the study of eyes.602 In the Imagines, Philostratus himself suggests that the painter was familiar with physiognomy due to the treatment of the eyes in the paintings.603 This is the case for Rhodogyne whose eyes are described as varying from light blue to black, further expressing her multi-faceted nature. It also expresses her sexuality as women’s eyes, more specifically their gaze, were perceived to be erotically charged and threatening to men.604 If we are to use this form of interpretation, which the narrator and painter both want us to, we would come to the conclusion that the figure embodies two distinct characters; restrained and wild, masculine and feminine.

Philostratus more than any other source that we have seen so far is able to effectively and vividly explain the character of Rhodogyne through her appearance and actions. This is achieved through the contrasting nature apparent primarily in her hairstyle and other facial features, and to a lesser extent, her clothing and actions. These features add to the duality of Rhodogyne that is being promoted by the rebellion story, primarily her Oriental and female lavishness and vanity in contrast to the masculine, militaristic character. As we have seen with other examples from the Greco-Roman period, this duality is not always foregrounded in the sources but rather one facet is either promoted (e.g. military prowess) while the other (e.g. Oriental beautification) is dismissed to suit the agenda of the author.

Semiramis and the Revolt Story: Medieval Period

In the Medieval period, the revolt story gets taken up with renewed interest. For example, we see the rebellion story being alluded to in numerous works of Petrarch, though Rhodogyne has now been replaced by Semiramis. The most comprehensive being the De viris illustribus (c.1337-1374), a series of biographies on extraordinary men. Over the decades it took to compile this work, Petrarch changed the scope and subjects of the work four times, with each change reflecting the authors changing views on Antiquity.605 However, the work remained unfinished by the time of Petrarch’s death in 1374 and was

602 Barton 1994: 95-131, 102f. 603 Philostr. Imag. Proem 2. 604 See Llewellyn-Jones 2003: 263. 605 See Kohl 1974. 114 compiled by Lombardo della Seta in 1379 into the "secular-heroes plan", in which it remains today.606 This version of the work was divided into two books: the first included 36 moral biographies of Greeks and Romans, with an emphasis on Roman Republican figures from Romulus to Trajan.607 The second book, detailed twelve moral biographies of biblical and mythical figures. In this work, Semiramis is categorized alongside other notable biblical and pagan figures including Adam, Noah, Nimrod, Ninus, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, Jason and Hercules.

This selection of figures is quite different from the other versions. The preface of the Adam-Caesar version (1351-1353) elucidates upon Petrarch’s choice of biographies and demonstrates that it was inspired by Livy’s Ab Urbe Condita and Valerius Maximus that are echoed in the text.608 Here, Petrarch explains, identical to Livy, that he has selected ‘illustrious men who flourished with outstanding glory’.609 In Petrarch’s view, this is a stark contrast to the men of his own time. Petrarch harshly critiques his contemporary politician’s ineptitude stating that they ‘contribute material not for history but for satire’.610 These leaders were seen to be lacking in will and ability of greatness that constituted an “illustrious man”. In addition, Petrarch rationalizes their successes, explaining that any victory on the battlefield was attributed to luck or an inevitable result of the even greater incompetence of enemies. In particular, Petrarch had been disillusioned with politics, and republicanism in general, after the fall of Cola da Rienzo, a Roman politician who had attempted to unify Italy and create a new Roman Empire, but failed and was imprisoned and murdered by the mob.611 Therefore, Petrarch explains that he has selected ancient examples far removed from his own time. These ancient examples were deemed worthy of emulation and study because they achieved their greatness through action rather than fortune.612 In turn, these exempla were intended to provide examples of leadership for his Carrara patron, Francesco il Vecchio, and his fellow contemporaries.613

The unusual thing about this work is the inclusion of Semiramis, a woman, in a work centred on the deeds of men. In fact, Semiramis is the sole woman with a biography in the work and, along with Joseph

606 Kohl 1974: 133; Witt 2008: 108n37. 607 Witt 2008: 103-108. 608 cf. Livy, Epit. 10; Val. Max. 9. 609 Petr. De viris. Preface. 610 Petr. De viris. Preface. 611 Witt 2009: 110. 612 Kohl 1975: 136. 613 Kohl 1975: 137; Witt 2009: 104. 115 in the second book, has the longest biography.614 In order to justify selecting her for the catalogue Petrarch stresses the masculine traits of the Queen throughout her biography. These traits primarily include credence as a good sovereign and military leader, describing her as ‘woman certainly in the body, but a man in the soul’.615 This is then reinforced throughout the first half of the biography that narrates Semiramis’ rise to power after the death of Ninus (the previous subject) and then her deeds as queen, such as military skill and expansion of the empire.616 After this, her deeds achieved in peacetime are recounted. This includes the construction of the walls of Babylon and the revolt story. Petrarch’s account of the revolt story goes as follows;

Precisely here Semiramis gave a famous example of a certain value rather than feminine: while she was intent on styling her hair according to female customs, she was told that the Babylonians had revolted, and she, as she was, with half of her hair still untied, snatching out of the hands of the handmaidens and gripping the weapons she marched to assault the city of Babylon. So noble impetus remained worthy of success the disordered hair was not recomposed before the rebel city returned to obedience. A statue with the same shape, with its hair divided in half, was placed in memory of the fact in a very popular place in the place and offered a distinguished spectacle for many.617

This version of the biography is an embellished account of Valerius Maximus, demonstrating that he did not want to simply restate sources word for word but rephrase them and fill in gaps with others sources, creating one seamlessness and accurate biography.618 In this instance, he has made the tale, once brief, more lucid. As such, handmaidens have been added to the story, presumably overseeing her toilette as the queen herself is said to be doing her hair. Moreover, the rebelling city is named as Babylon, making it seem like a personal slight to the Queen. However, the primary purpose of this anecdote is to exemplify Semiramis’ ability to forego her own gender and adopt a masculine persona. Petrarch states that ‘precisely here Semiramis gave a famous example of a certain value rather than feminine’.619 Thus, the

614 Semiramis was chosen due to Petrarch’s exposure to her at the time of the composition. Petrarch had already written on her military feats in the Trionfi immediately preceding this work. Moreover, the figures selected in the second book of the work were notable for playing an important role in the foundation of western society. In this collection, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, and Moses are virtuous men sent by God, Nimrod is the architect, Ninus and Semiramis are seen as the early founders of civilization, and Jason and Hercules equated to the heroes of a virtue aimed at the civilization of humanity. (Malta 2008: XVI.) Valerius Maximus, a popular source in in the medieval period that was heavily relied on for the biography, contained the revolt story. (Berlincourt 1972: 361-387.) Due to this, Semiramis was a strong option of exemplum of an illustrious man. 615 Petr. De viris. 5.1-2. 616 Petr. De viris. 5. 1-27. 617 Petr. De viris. 5.33-40. 618 Petr. De viris. Preface; Malta 2008: CCX. 619 Petr. De viris. 5.32. 116 soldierly adeptness that is represented in this anecdote typifies the Queen’s nature which makes her eligible for this catalogue.

Semiramis also features in the fourth poem of the Trionfi, the Triumph of Fame that was written by Petrarch during the same period as the “ancient heroes” version of the De viris illustribus. This poem included Classical figures processing in Fame’s triumph, including eleven out of twelve of the biblical and mythological figures in the De viris illustribus including Semiramis. These figures were grouped into the following categories; Roman heroes down to Marcus Aurelius; Greek, Carthaginian and Persian heroes; biblical heroes; famous women; and ancient eastern and modern European kings. According to Martellotti, this indicates a widening of Petrarch’s research as well as an appreciation of history outside of Rome.620 All of the figures in the Triumph of Fame have obtained fame through valour and virtue.621 This includes a militaristic Semiramis who is alluded to in the following;

And even by her went that hardy Lady That halfe her fayre here bounde up curiously And let the tother for to hange beside Tyll she abatyd the Babilonicall pryde622

The reference being made is Semiramis’ quelling of the rebellion in Babylon. Moreover, it indicates that the rebellion story was an easily identifiable story, in which the queen’s name does not even need to be mentioned for the audience, albeit an erudite one, to understand the reference.

As previously stated, Giovanni Boccaccio modelled his De mulieribus claris on Petrarch’s De viris illustribus. One of the main sources used for each of these sources was Valerius Maximus’ Memorable Doings and Sayings. We see this manifest in their accounts of Semiramis, associating her with the revolt story that is used to promote her masculinity. As such, in the De mulieribus claris, like Petrarch’s De viris illustribus, the Queen is presented in a bipartite structure. The first half of the biography recounts Semiramis’ military and political deeds, followed by her sexual proclivities which are viewed as contamination of her reputation and a consequence of her pagan nature. The first half of the structure, centring around traditionally masculine activities such as war and politics, are perceived as positive, whereas the second half is negative, with sex and excess associated with femininity. The revolt story sits

620 Martellotti 1964. 621 Petr. TF. 1. 26. 622 Petr. TF. 2. 140-142. 117 in between these two halves and marks the transition of Semiramis’ character from the praiseworthy leader into the indulgent and erotically charged figure. Boccaccio’s version goes as follows;

Of Semiramis’ many deeds we shall single out the one most worthy of remembrance, and the following story is reported as fact. One day, when all was peaceful and she was enjoying a leisurely rest, she was combing hair with the dexterity of her sex. Surrounded by her maids, she was plaiting it into braids according to native custom. Her hair was not yet half finished when she was told that Babylon had defected to her stepson. So distressed was Semiramis by this news that she threw aside her comb and instantly rose in anger from her womanly pursuits, took up arms, and led her troops to a siege of the powerful city. She did not finish arranging her hair until she had forced the surrender of the mighty palace, weakened by a long blockade, and brought it back under her power by a force of arms. A huge bronze statue of a woman with her half braided on one side and loose on the other stood in Babylon for a long time as witness to this brave deed.623

Throughout this account, Boccaccio stresses the liminality of Semiramis’ gender to mark the transition between the first half of the biography that focuses on masculine activities, to the second half that deals with Semiramis’ feminine activities.624 For example, Boccaccio, following Petrarch’s suit, supplements Valerius’ account with the addition of handmaidens. Moreover, Boccaccio also emphasizes Semiramis’ dexterity in her ‘womanly pursuits’.625 As a result, the feminine nature of the scene is embellished and accentuated. However, this is contrasted with the presence of the militaristic features of the story and by Boccaccio labelling it as Semiramis’ ‘deed most worthy of remembrance’ as well as a ‘brave deed’.626 Thus, through the story Semiramis is presented as both masculine and feminine to mark the transition from the masculine to feminine halves of the biography.

Another change in the story from previous versions is the clarification that the rebellion had been led by Semiramis’ step-son. It is stated earlier in the biography that Semiramis only bore one son, Ninyas, with Ninus, meaning that the identity of this interloper must be from a previous marriage of the late king.627 This is used to reflect negatively on the character of Semiramis by playing into the stereotypes of step- mothers. Watson has demonstrated in Greco-Roman literature that stepchildren, and in particular step-

623 Bocc. FW. 2.9-11. 624 McLeod 1991: 66. 625 Bocc. FW. 2.9-11. 626 Bocc. FW. 2.9. 627 In the 1473 German translation of the text by Heinrich Steinhöwel the step-son is named Trebeta. (Steinhowel, Boccaccio de claris mulieribus, 27.) In Manfredi Carmina attributed to Bede, he is meant to have founded the city of Trèves. (Bedae opera. i. 449.) This was then perpetuated by medieval scholars. Refer to Barnouw 1935: 187-194 and Samuel 1944: 38-40. 118 sons, were often portrayed as the victims of villainous step-mothers.628 This stereotype particularly arose in situations of inheritance, such as this, in which the step-mother’s biological children were disadvantaged by children from a previous marriage. This culminated in a spectrum of reactions from the stepmother, from mild unpleasantness to murder or even sexual desire. In Boccaccio’s account, Semiramis reacts to her step-son leading the uprising by summoning an army to eliminate the threat to her (and consequently her son’s) power. This attitude persisted into Christian sources such as Jerome, a source which Boccaccio heavily drew upon.629 In these sources widows were discouraged to take a second husband, and a widow who did remarry was seen to be motivated by carnal pleasure or greed.630 As such, these negative connotations of step-mothers, especially the association with physical violence and incest, foreshadow the second half of Semiramis’ biography that focuses on her feminine downfalls, her insatiable lust. Thus, once again the rebellion story is used to demonstrate the liminal nature of Semiramis and to foreshadow proceeding facets of her character.

Almost half a century later, Christine de Pizan wrote The Book of the City of the Ladies (1405) to counter the misogyny in Boccaccio’s De mulieribus claris. Semiramis can be regarded as the most important figure in de Pizan’s work, as she was the foundational stone of the metaphorical city. As such, she needed to be strong and resilient to refute the previous misogyny perpetuated by past writers, such as Boccaccio. But, most of all, she needed to set a high standard for the ensuing women of the city. In order to do this, Semiramis is portrayed almost completely positively by transfixing on the theme of courage. In addition, Semiramis’ femininity, both physically and morally, is largely omitted rather than denigrated and only used grammatically.631 For example, her militaristic and political aptitude are brought to the fore and, as previously demonstrated, any negative aspects, such as the alleged incest with her son and other instances of sexual deviancy are rationalized or explained. This is typified in the revolt story.

Once, when Semiramis was in her chamber surrounded by her maidens who were braiding her hair, news came that one of her kingdoms had revolted against her. She stood up immediately and swore by her power that the other lock of her hair which remained to be braided would not be braided until she had avenged this injustice and brought this land back under her dominion. She had amassed troops quickly armed and advanced on the rebels and, thanks to great force and strength, brought them back under her authority. She so frightened these rebels and all her other subjects that ever after no one dared revolt. A large and richly gilt cast-bronze statue on a high pillar in Babylon which portrayed a princess holding a sword,

628 Watson 1995: 213. 629 McLeod 1991: 38-47; Watson 1995: 10-11. 630 See Jer. Ep. 54.15. 631 See Holderness 2004: 99-100. 119

with one side of her hair braided, the other not, bore witness to this noble and courageous deed for a long time.632

When arriving at the revolt story in the biography the anecdote almost seems out of place as it contains tangible features of Semiramis’ gender that have been omitted elsewhere in the narrative. As such, it is argued by Dulac that the revolt story provides an opportunity to discuss her physique due to the remaining female elements i.e. Semiramis’ braided hair.633 However, to fit in with Semiramis’ characterization as a suitable, strong ruler for the foundation stone of the city, the hair anecdote is de-feminised. There are a lack of maidens and her abilities in beautification are not commented on. Moreover, an oath is added to the story where she swears by her power that her hair would not be finished until the rebellion was quelled. By doing this, the role of Semiramis’ hair in de Pizan’s account is linked to political connotations—that the city will be restored to a stable political state. This is different to Boccaccio’s account in which Semiramis’ vanity and luxury are highlighted. Thus, the story is de-feminised as much as possible without noticeably omitting any key elements of the story. In consequence, the courageous Semiramis, who is promoted throughout de Pizan’s narrative, is maintained.

Similar to Semiramis in the revolt story, Christine de Pizan was an upholder of monarchy. This is emphasised by de Pizan through the Queen’s courageous actions. According to de Pizan, Semiramis did such a good job quashing the revolt that none of her other subjects ever rebelled again. As such, the revolt story demonstrates that Semiramis, in fact, exceeded what she first set out to achieve. Carr has argued that this was a slight to Semiramis’ character as emphasis is placed on the fear evoked in her subjects that subsequently highlighted her ‘totalitarian tendencies’.634 However, this is contradicted by the historical context of the text. In fact, the assertive Semiramis seems to be a prime exemplum of the type of ruler that Christine desired with France on the brink of civil war issuing from King Charles VI’s incapability to rule during his frequent bouts of madness.635 Like Semiramis, Isabeau of Bavaria (wife of the mad king) acted as regent to her young son, Louis, during these times.636 This granted her exceptional power for a queen. Despite this, Louis of Orléans and John of Burgundy vied for regency and power, eventually descending into the Armagnac–Burgundian Civil War (1407-1435). As such, the contemporary works of Christine de Pizan, such as The Book of the City of Ladies, acted as a “mirror” for the Queen in this time of crisis.

632 De Piz. Le Livre. 1.15.1. 633 Dulac 1978: 324. 634 Carr 2017: 70-71. 635 Adams 2014: 1-6. 636 Adams and Rechtschaffen 2013: 119-120. 120

As a “mirror”, the work contained exempla of female leadership and virtue relatable to the Queen’s situation. The beginning of the work is littered with women who have ruled in their husband’s stead including pertinent examples from France: Fredegunde, Blanche of Castile, Jeanne d’Evreux, Blanche of Orleans, Bonne of Luxembourg (wife of Jean le Bon), Marie of Blois (Countess of Anjou), and Catherine (Countess of La Marche and Vendôme). After this, similar women continue to be employed as building blocks of the city: Semiramis, Zenobia, Artemisia, Lilia, Berenice, Dido, Opis, and Lavinia. Accordingly, the inclusion of these figures that promoted female regency urged Isabeau to figuratively take a page from the book and assert herself in the volatile political situation. Thus, it is fitting that in 1414 the illuminated collection of Christine’s works, concluding with The Book of the City of Ladies, was presented to the queen when her chancellor, Robert le Maçon, was arguing in the royal council that Isabeau should lead the government.637

Moreover, de Pizan herself was particularly aware of the dangers of rebellions which are echoed in the biography of Semiramis. In France, radical depopulation and famine occurred due to the Black Death, political tensions with England culminated in the Hundred Years War, and the ruling elite, especially Charles VI, were seen to be self-indulgent to the detriment of the country’s economy.638 In consequence, there were several nationwide revolutions concerning economic matters by the growing bourgeoisie class—the Jacquerie uprising of 1358, Maillotin insurrection of 1382, the Tuchin revolt from 1383-1834, and the Parisian Cabochien revolution of 1413 that was witnessed by de Pizan herself.639 Once championed as the “proto-feminist” of this period, Christine was on the conservative side of this social change favouring feudalism and monarchy.640 These challenges to the crown were seen as heretical by de Pizan and dominance over the rebels necessary. Consequently, a figure like Semiramis who acted as regent for her son after the death of her husband and not only quelled a rebellion but stopped rebellion from ever occurring again was a fitting model of good governance in the eyes of Christine de Pizan.641

637 Broad and Green 2009: 29. 638 Harley MS 4431 in the British Library; Cardini 2012: 257-263. 639 Delany 1987:184-185. 640 De Piz. Paix. 2.1; Delany 1987: 187-194. These ideologies were a consequence of her beneficial relationship with the French court and patronage from the Queen, especially after the death of her husband. For example, the Chateau de Mémorant was given to Christine’s father by Charles V; her son was a companion to the Henry IV, the young English prince; and Christine herself often retreated with the queen to her farm estate, Hostel des Bergeries. (Delany 1987: 195-196.) Moreover, it seems that the Queen was grateful for de Pizan’s works (possibly including the City of the Ladies) as in October of 1404, she was presented with a hennap, a chalice of gold, in return for a manuscript. (Adams 2010: 191.) 641 McLeod 1991: 124-125. 121

Figure 18. ‘Queen Semiramis with Attendants’. Tapestry. Flemish, Tournai c. 1480. Figure 195. A close-up of the details of Wool, silk; tapestry weave. Honolulu Museum of Art. Semiramis’ face and hair.

During this time of political contention, the French royalty of the fourteenth-century, and in particular the Burgundian dukes, had a predilection for opulent tapestries. King Charles V alone had acquired more than two hundred tapestries before his death in 1380.642 A popular theme for these tapestries were the preux and preuse. Philip the Bold, Duke of Burgundy and bother to Louis I, is recorded to have owned two sets of these tapestries, the latter of which was sold for two-thousand francs.643 The collection of Charles VI, husband to Isabeau of Bavaria with whom we are already acquainted, also included a wall hanging of this kind, probably inherited from Jean de Berry, the bother of Louis I and Philip the Bold.644 There is one surviving tapestry of Semiramis that dates to the fifteenth-century and is thought to have belonged to a set of Lady Worthies.645 This tapestry captures the moments before Semiramis hears and subsequently reacts to the news of the rebellion and depicts the queen eschewing her femininity in favour

642 Brosens 2013: 298; O’Hear and O’Hear 2015: 33. 643 Lestocquoy 1978: 34, 37. 644 Cassagnes-Brouquet 2004: 169. 645 Comstock 1946: 179-180; Souchal 1974: 90-91; Cassagnes-Brouquet 2004: 169-171. 122 of virile militarism. Semiramis, dressed in a brocaded surcoat with an ornate breastplate and armour, brushes her hair and turns from a mirror held by a handmaiden towards another baring news of rebellion and a large spear. At the top of the scene is an Alexandrine verse which also alludes to the rebellion story; ‘I was Semiramis, Queen of Babylon. I conquered barbarian Indians and Syrians. I went up into the North and set my throne there, and slew the king of the Ethiopians’. Tapestries, like this one of Semiramis, were sought after in times of political instability, particularly during the civil war in France. In these circumstances, imagery of the preux and preuse were adduced to endorse the legitimacy and capability of the Burgundian contenders to rule in place of the mad king.646 Thus, the Worthies were also a form of visual exempla to the monarchs not unlike Semiramis who was an exemplum for Queen Isabeau in Christine de Pizan’s The Book of the City of the Ladies.

Conclusion

This case study has demonstrated that the rebellion story can be expressed in a number of ways through a number of media. Either through prose, as seen with the anonymous work, Tractatus de mulieribus in bello, through a description of an image like Philostratus’ Imagines, and through visual representations, such as the woodcut accompanying Giovanni Boccaccio’s De mulieribus claris and the fresco at the Castello della Manta. Despite these differences, all these sources share one thing. They demonstrate the liminality of the Queen. This comes to the fore in the revolt story which expresses many polarizing dichotomies of the queen. These include; masculinity and femininity, militarism and Orientalism, good political leadership and tyranny. She can embody all these attributes or only some of these attributes simultaneously. As such, these dualities can be censored or promoted, approved or denigrated. It is due to the Queen’s liminality that makes her especially adaptable and relevant, especially during times of political contention. We see this time and time again with our sources from Valerius Maximus and Polyaenus in Antiquity, to Petrarch and de Pizan in the Renaissance. Moreover, it is during this period that we see a substantial increase in females in the political sphere and, in consequence, Semiramis inducted as Lady Worthy.

646 See Cassagnes-Brouquet 2004: 175-177 for the use of the Worthies during the civil war in France. 123

CONCLUSION This thesis has examined representations of the Babylonian Queen Semiramis from Antiquity to the fifteenth-century in both literary and visual sources. It has also explored the role of the East in the Western imaginary, the function of female rulers in the discourse of rulership and kingship, and how exemplary individuals contribute to moral discourse. Conclusions have been made which add to our understanding of Semiramis.

Chapter One on sex established that there is a long tradition of the Western imaginary associating the Oriental East with sexual promiscuity. While such a view may receive some support from the image of Mesopotamian sexuality that emerges from our Near Eastern sourses, it owes far more to the projected desires of later authors than it does to any ‘historical’ reality. This is an important theme in the representation of Semiramis and we should handle it with nuance and critical distance. Scholars have been ready to accept and perpetuate—particularly through the citation of Irene Samuel’s outdated work— that a sexualised Semiramis originated from the Late Antique and Medieval periods, and was the conception of the Queen. However, this thesis has shown that we actually see her sexual excess manifesting in early Greco-Roman traditions tied to her persona as an Oriental despot. This can be found in one of our earliest sources on Semiramis, Diodorus Siculus’ reworking of Ctesias in his Bibliotheca Historica. We should also observe the type of intellectual work that this representation does. A good example is provided by the story of Semiramis’ incest with her son, Ninyas.

Whilst the story of incest stems from Justin in his Epitome of Pompeius Trogus’ Philippic Histories, it has been argued that the sexual allegation was used to demonstrate Semiramis’ lust for power rather than a monstrous lust for her son. This shifts with later, especially Christian sources where the story is combined with elements of cruelty and immorality to help elucidate theological aspects relating to operation of sin and carnal desire. This is seen in the famous discussions of the story by St Augustine, Orosius, Dante, Boccaccio, and Chaucer.

Chapter Two demonstrates that Semiramis was consistently renowned for her feats of monumental construction. In our sources, in particular Diodorus Siculus’ Bibliotheca Historica and Herodotus’ Histories, they are described as hubristic, excessively large, extravagant, costly, largely self-serving and superfluous. These descriptions are a gross exaggeration of reality. To build many of these constructions, the Babylonian queen often transgressed boundaries of nature, the tell-tale faux pas of a Herodotean

124 despotes. We also see the trope of the corrupting nature of Semiramis’ luxury that originates from her building programme being promoted in our sources. This disconnection from reality and use of tropes highlights how the antique world viewed Eastern culture through an Oriental lens, casting Semiramis as the despotes figure. For all their revulsion, authors nevertheless took a continued interest in Semiramis as a monumental builder, especially the Walls of Babylon that were categorised as one of the Seven Wonders of the World by Antipater of Sidon. Semiramis continues to be associated with the Walls in later sources such as Ammianus Marcellinus, Paulus Silentarius, and the Armenian tradition of the Alexander Romance. In the Medieval period we see a drastic change in the receptions of these deeds in Giovanni Boccaccio’s De Mulieribus Claris and Christine de Pizan’s Book of the City of Ladies. In these works, the deeds are no longer seen as the actions of an Oriental despot but rather as a positive element of her sovereignty that reflected the changing socio-political climate during this period which saw females increasingly being involved in traditionally masculine spheres of society.

The case study on the tomb story elaborates on how monumental constructions pertain to the trope of Persian denigration of morals. What is interesting about this narrative is that it only manifests in Herodotus’ Histories and Plutarch’s Moralia. After this, the story disappears from Greco-Roman, Late Antique and Medieval texts. It is explained that the lack of longevity of this narrative is due to the ancillary nature of Semiramis/Nitokris within the tale. In both the sources examined, the primary purpose of the strong, Oriental women was to demonstrate the weakness of Persian men. In this way, Nitokris and Semiramis were seen to conform to a trope within Greek literature of women whose purpose was to illustrate the flaws and failures of Persian rulers. As such, these women were not the focus of this anecdote, and are interchangeable. This explains the shift we see from Nitokris in Herodotus to Semiramis in Plutarch.

Chapter Three of this thesis examined Semiramis’ military representations. The ways in which Semiramis is represented in this theme is highly variable. When mentioned in relation to Alexander the Great she is often a triumphant expansionist, someone that the Macedonian king strives to emulate and surpass. Whilst other sources, such as Diodorus Siculus, use it as evidence of her despotism, her overly ambitious and hubristic nature leading to her defeat in India. In Late Antique and Medieval sources these themes were exacerbated by Paulus Orosius who depicts the Queen as a bloodthirsty woman. Again, in the later sources of Giovanni Boccaccio and Christine de Pizan that engage with the querelle des femmes, we see these ideologies shifting in a more positive direction, and it becomes a characteristic of masculine

125 strength and good sovereignty. This is particularly evident in the rebellion story that is examined as the case study for this chapter.

The rebellion story was a particularly popular narrative associated with Semiramis. It is apparent from the vast number of differing sources throughout our timespan that it could be adapted and manipulated to appeal to a number of audiences and situations. This is because the story demonstrated a number of dichotomies: masculinity and femininity, militarism and Orientalism, good political leadership and tyranny. Certain traits could either be censored or promoted in order to approve or denigrate her actions. We see the story being especially relevant during times of political contention, so Valerius Maximus and Polyaenus recount it in Antiquity, as well as Petrarch and de Pizan in the Renaissance. In these sources Semiramis is a positive exemplum, someone that rulers should emulate. In this sense, this facet of her representation is quite different to others, as it is an overwhelming positive reflection of the Queen’s political and military prowess. We see this story being embraced for females who were becoming more frequent in the Medieval period and is clearly reflected in Semiramis induction as Lady Worthy, and in the use of this motif throughout the Medieval period.

By examining sources on Semiramis from Antiquity to the fifteenth-century, this thesis has brought to light a variety of refracted representations of the Queen. By looking at Semiramis as more than a sexual figure we see other complex versions of the Queen emerging from the shadows. Most prominently, we see Oriental discourse deeply imbedded throughout these many refractions—as a monumental builder, a military commander, and a sexual being. Whilst these associations most often reflect badly on the Queen, we also see positive representations in our sources. In the tomb story and the rebellion story in particular, we see Semiramis functioning as an exemplum of moralistic virtue that is completely detached from these discourses. Here, her nationality and gender are not of prime importance. These representations of Semiramis not only reflect the changes in the debates on woman, power, and female sexuality, but also academic Zeitgeist.

126

Bibliography Ancient Sources Aelian (trans. N.G. Wilson). 1997. Historical Miscellany, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Ammianus Marcellinus (trans. J. C. Rolfe.) 1950. History, Volume I: Books 14-19, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Antipater (trans. W.R. Paton) 1917. The Greek Anthology, Volume III: Book 9: The Declamatory Epigrams, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Arrian (trans. M. Hammond) 2013. Alexander the Great, The Anabasis and the Indica, London: Oxford University Press. Athenaeus (trans. S. D. Olson) 2007. The Learned Banqueters, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Augustine (trans. E.M. Sanford and W.M. Green) 1965. City of God, Volume VI: Books 16-18.35, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Blossius Aemilius Dracontius (trans. Claude Moussy) 1988. Dracontius Oeuvres, Tome II, Paris: Belles lettres. Brayford, S. ed. 2007. Genesis, Leiden: Brill. Cicero (trans. C.L. Keyes) 1928. On the Republic. On the Laws, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Claudian (trans. M. Platnauer) 1922. Panegyric on Probinus and Olybrius. Against Rufinus 1 and 2. War against Gildo. Against Eutropius 1 and 2. Fescennine Verses on the Marriage of Honorius. Epithalamium of Honorius and Maria. Panegyrics on the Third and Fourth Consulships of Honorius, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Constantine Manasses (trans. L. Yuretich) 2018. The Chronicle of Constantine Manasses, Liverpool: Liverpool University Press. Digest of Justinian (trans. C.F. Kolbert) 1979. The digest of Roman Law: theft, rapine, damage and insult, Harmondsworth: Penguin. Dio Chrysostom (trans. J.W. Cohoon) 1932. Discourses 1-11, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Diodorus Siculus (trans. C. H. Oldfather). 1933. Library of History, Volume 2, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Doctorow. E.L. ed. 1982. The book of Daniel, London: Pan Books. Frontinus (trans. C. E. Bennett) 1925. Stratagems, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Herodotus (trans. A. L. Purvis) 2007. The Landmark Herodotus, New York: Parthenon Books. Hesiod (trans. G.W. Most) 2018. Theogony. Works and Days. Testimonia, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Hyginus (trans. S. M. Trzakoma) 2007. Apollodorus’ Library and Hyginus’ Fabulae: Two Handbooks of Greek Mythology, Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, Inc. Jerome (trans. F.A. Wright) 1933. Select Letters, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. John Malalas (trans. E. Jeffrey’s, M. Jeffrey’s and R. Scott) 1986. The Chronicle of John Malalas, Melbourne: Australian Association for Byzantine Studies. Josephus (trans. H. St. J. Thackeray) 1926. The Life. Against Apion. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Julian (trans. W.C. Wright) 1913. Julian, Volume I: Orations 1-5, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Justinus (trans. J.C. Yardley) 1994. Epitome of Pompeius Trogus' Philippic Histories, Atlanta, GA: Scholars Press. Lucas, P.J. ed. 1977. Exodus, London: Methuen. 127

Lucian (trans. H.W. Attridge and R.A. Oden) 1976. De Dea Syria, Missoula, Montana: Scholars Press. Martial (trans. D.R. Shackleton Bailey) 1993. Epigrams, Volume II: Books 6-10, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Michael the Great (trans. R. Bedrosian) Sources of the Armenian Tradition, Long Branch, NJ. Moses Khorenats`i (trans. R. W. Thomson). 1980. The History of the Armenians, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Orosius (trans. A. T. Fear) 2010. Seven Books of History against the Pagans, Liverpool: Liverpool University Press. Pausanias (trans. W.H.S. Jones) 1918. Description of Greece, Volume I, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Philostratus (trans. P. Christopher Jones) 2005. Apollonius of Tyana, Volume I: Life of Apollonius of Tyana, Books 1-4, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Philostratus the Elder, Philostratus the Younger, Callistratus (trans. A. Fairbanks). 1931. Philostratus the Elder, Imagines. Philostratus the Younger, Imagines. Callistratus, Descriptions, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Pliny the Elder (trans. H. Rackham) 1938. The Natural History, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Plutarch (trans. F. C. Babbitt) 1931. Moralia, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Polyaenus (trans. P. Krentz and E. L. Wheeler) 1994. Stratagems of War, Volume II, Chicago: Ares Publishers Incorporated. Propertius (trans. G. P. Goold) 1990. Elegies, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Quintilian (trans. D.A. Russell) 2002. The Orator’s Education, Volume IV: Books 9-10, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Quintus Curtius (trans. J. C. Rolfe) 1946. The History of Alexander, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Seneca the Elder (trans. M. Winterbottom) 1974. Declamations, Volume I: Controversiae, Books 1-6, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Strabo (trans. G.P. Goold) 1944. The Geography of Strabo, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Suetonius (trans. J.C. Rolfe) 1914. Lives of the Caesars, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Tacitus (trans. J. Jackson) 1937. Annals: Books 4-6,11-12, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Thompson, D. A. ed. 2014. Deuteronomy, Louisville, Kentucky: Westminster John Knox Press. Valerius Maximus (trans. D.R. Shackleton Bailey) 2000. Memorable Doings and Sayings, Volume II: Books 6-9, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Vitruvius (trans. F. Granger) 1934. On Architecture, Volume II: Books 6-10, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Xenophon (trans. C. L. Brownson) 1922. Xenophon in Seven Volumes, 3, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press and London: William Heinemann. Xenophon (trans. W. Miller) 1914. Cyropaedia, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

128

Medieval Sources Boccaccio, Giovanni. 1938. Teseida, Firenze: G.C. Sansoni. Boccaccio, Giovanni. 1962. De Casibus Illustrium Virorum, Gainesville, FL: Scholars’ Facisimles and Reprints. Boccaccio, Giovanni (trans. V. Brown) 2001. Famous Women, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Chaucer, Geoffrey. 1530. The assemblie of foules Here foloweth the assemble of foules veray pleasaunt and compendyous to rede or here compyled by the preclared and famous clerke Geffray Chaucer, Henry E. Huntington Library and Art Gallery. Dante (trans. R. Kirkpatrick) 2006. Inferno, London: Penguin Books. De Pizan, Christine (trans. Earl J. Richards) 1983. The Book of the City of the Ladies, London: Pan Books. De Premierfait, Laurent. 1968. Des cas des nobles hommes et femmes, Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press. Deschamps, Eustache (trans. D. Curzon and J. Fiskin) 2003. Selected Poems, New York and London: Routledge. Petrarca, Francesco (trans. E. H. Wilkins) 1958. Petrarch at Vaucluse: Letters in Verse and Prose, Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Petrarca, Francesco (trans. G. Martellotti) 1964. De viris illustribis, Firenze: Sansoni. Petrarca, Francesco (trans. D.D. Carnicelli) 1971. Lord Morley’s Tryumphes of Fraunces Petrarcke: The First English Translation of the Trionfi, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Petrarca, Francesco (trans. C. Malta) 2008. Francesco Petrarca, De Viris Illustribus. Adam – Hercules, Messina: Università degli studi, Centro interdipartimentale di studi umanistic.

129

Modern Works Adams, T. 2010. The Life and Afterlife of Isabeau of Bavaria, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. Adams, T. 2014. Christine de Pizan and the fight for France, University Park: The Pennsylvania State University Press. Adams, T. and Rechtschaffen, G. 2013. ‘Isabeau of Bavaria, Anne of France, and the History of Female Regency in France,’ Early Modern Women 8: 119-147. Anderson, G. 1984. Ancient Fiction: The Novel in the Graeco-Roman World, London: Croom Helm. Anderson, M. J. 2008. ‘The Silence of Semiramis: Shame and Desire in the Ninus Romance and Other Greek Novels,’ Ancient Narrative 7: 1–27. Andrae, W. 1935. Die Jüngeren Ischtar-Tempel in Assur, Wissenschaftliche Veröffenlichung der Deutschen Orient Gesellschaft 58, Leipzig: Hinrichs'sche Buchhandlung. Archibald, E. 1999. ‘“The Appalling Dangers of Family Life” Incest in Medieval Literature,’ in C. J. Itnyre eds. Medieval Family Roles: A Book of Essays, New York and London: Garland Publishing, 157-171. Archibald, E. 2001a. ‘Sex and Power in Thebes and Babylon: Oedipus and Semiramis in Classical and Medieval Texts,’ The Journal of Medieval Latin 11, 27-49. Archibald, E. 2001b. Incest and the Medieval Imagination, Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press. Armstrong, R. 2006. Cretan women Pasiphae, Ariadne, and Phaedra in Latin poetry, New York: Oxford University Press. Arweiler, A. 2007. ‘Interpreting Cultural Change: Semiotics and Exegesis in Dracontius’ De Laudibus Dei’ in W. Otten and K. Pollmann eds Poetry and Exegesis in Premodern Latin Christianity: The Encounter between Classical and Christian Strategies of Interpretation, Boston: Brill. Asher-Greve, J. M and Westenholz, J. G. 2013. Goddesses in Context: On Divine Powers, Roles, Relationships and Gender in Mesopotamian Textual and Visual Sources, Fribourg and Göttingen: Academic Press and Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. Ashrafian, H. 2005. ‘Familial proptosis and obesity in the Ptolemies,’ Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine 98: 85– 6. Assante, J. 2003. ‘From Whores to Hierodules. The Historiographic Invention of Mesopotamian Female Sex Professionals,’ in A.A. Donohue and M.D. Fullerton eds. Ancient art and its historiography, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 13-47. Assante, J. 2006. ‘Undressing the Nude: Problems in Analyzing Nudity in Ancient Art, With an Old Babylonian Case Study,’ in S. Schroer eds. Images and gender: contributions to the hermeneutics of reading ancient art, Fribourg and Göttingen: Academic Press and Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 177-207. Asser, J. 2002. The medieval life of King Alfred the Great (trans. Alfred P. Smyth) Hampshire and New York: Palgrave. Avery, H.C. 1972. ‘Herodotus’ Picture of Cyrus,’ The American Journal of Philology 94.4: 529-546. Bahrani, Z. 1996. ‘The Hellenization of Ishtar: Nudity, Fetishism, and the Production of Cultural Differentiation in Ancient Art,’ Oxford Art Journal 19.2: 3-16. Bahrani, Z. 2001 Women of Babylon: Gender and Representation in Mesopotamia. London and New York: Routledge. Bangs, J. D. 1977. ‘Maerten van Heemskerck's Bel and the Dragon and Iconoclasm,’ Renaissance Quarterly 30: 8-11. Barnouw, A.J. 1935. ‘Semiramis in Treves,’ Germanic Review 10: 187-194.

130

Bartel, H. and Simon, A. eds. 2010. Unbinding Medea: interdisciplinary approaches to a classical myth from antiquity to the 21st century, London: Legenda. Barton, A. 1981. ‘Harking Back to Elizabeth: Ben Jonson and Caroline Nostalgia,’ ELH 48.4: 706-731. Barton, T.S. 1994. Power and Knowledge. Astrology, Physiognomics and Medicine Under the Roman Empire. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Bately, J.M. 2015. ‘The Old English Orosius,’ in N.G. Discenza and P.E. Szarmach eds. Brill’s Companions to the Christian Tradition, A Companion to Alfred the Great, Leiden: Brill, 297-343. Baumgartner, W. 1950. ‘Herodots Babylonische und Assyrische Nachrichten,’ Archív Orientální 18: 69- 106. Baynham, E. 1998. Alexander the Great: The Unique History of Quintus Curtius, Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press. Baynham, E. 2001. ‘Alexander and the Amazons,’ Classical Quarterly 51.1: 115-126. Beard. M. 2006. ‘It’s A Wonderful World,’ History Today 56, 6: 70. Beck, M. 2002. ‘Plutarch to Trajan: The Dedicatory Letter and the Apophthegmata Collection,’ in P.A Stadter and L. Van der Stockt eds. Sage and Emperor, Leuven: Leuven University Press, 163– 173. Bekker-Nielsen, T. 2008. Urban life and local politics in Roman Bithynia. Aarhus and Oakville, CT: Aarhus University Press. Beringer, A. L. 2016a. The Sight of Semiramis: Medieval and Early Modern Narratives of the Babylonian Queen, Temple, Arizona: Arizona Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies. Beringer, A. 2016b. ‘Language as Mirror: Semiramis and Alexander in a Late Byzantine Romance,’ in N. M. Frelick eds. The Mirror in Medieval and Early Modern: Culture Specular Reflections, Turnhout: Brepols, 131-147. Berlincourt, M.A. 1972. ‘The Relationship of Some Fourteenth-Century Commentaries on Valerius Maximus,’ Mediaeval Studies 34: 361-87. Bernado, A.S. 2016. ‘Petrarch, Dante and the Medieval Tradition,’ in A Rabil, Jr eds. Renaissance Humanism: Foundations, Forms, and Legacy, Philadelphia, Pa.: University of Pennsylvania Press. Bidmead, J. 2002. ‘The akitu festival: religious continuity and royal legitimation in Mesopotamia.’ PhD Thesis, Nashville Tennessee: Vanderbit University (ProQuest Dissertations Publishing). Bigwood, J.M. 2009. ‘Incestuous Marriage in Achaemenid Iran: Myth and Realities,’ KLIO 91, 311-341. Bittles, A.H. 2012. Consanguinity in context, Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press. Bloomer, W.M. 1992. Valerius Maximus and the Rhetoric of New Nobility, London: The University of North Carolina Press. Bof, R. and Leyser, C. 2016. ‘Divorce and remarriage between late antiquity and the early middle ages: canon law and conflict resolution’ in K. Cooper and C. Leyser eds. Making Early Medieval Societies: Conflict and Belonging in the Latin West, 300-1200, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Boffey, J. 2001. ‘“Twenty Thousand More”: Some Fifteenth- and Sixteenth-Century Responses to The Legend Of Good Women’, in A. J. Minnis eds. English Poetry: Texts and Traditions: Essays in Honour of Derek Pearsall, York Medieval Press: Woodbridge: 279-297. Boncquet, J. 1987. Diodorus Siculus (II, 1–34) over Mesopotamië: Een historische kommentaar, Brussels: Palais des Académies. Bosworth, A. B. 1995. A Historical Commentary om Arrian’s History of Alexander, Oxford: Clarendon Press. Bosworth, A.B. 1998. Alexander and the East, Oxford: Claredon Press.

131

Bosworth, A.B. 2000. ‘Cortés and Alexander,’ in A.B. Bosworth and E.J. Baynham eds. Alexander the Great in Fact and Fiction, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 23-49. Bouchet, F. 2009. ‘Héroïnes et mémoire familiale dans le Chevalier errant de Thomas de Saluces,’ Clio 30: 119-136. Bowie, E. 2002. ‘The Chronology of the Earlier Greek Novels since B. E. Perry: Revisions and Precisions,’ AN 2: 47–63. Bowie, E. 2009. ‘Philostratus: the life of a sophist’, in E. Bowie and J. Elsner eds. Philostratus, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Braun, M. 1938. History and Romance in Graeco-Oriental Literature, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Briant, P. 1989. ‘Histoire et idéologie: Les grecs et la “décadence perse”,’ in M. Mactoux and E. Geny eds., Mélanges Pierre Levêque, ii. Anthropologie et société, Paris: Les belles lettres, 33-47. Brinkman, J. A. 1973. ‘Sennacherib’s Babylonian Problem: An Interpretation,’ Journal of Cuneiform Studies 25.2, 89-95. Briscoe, J. 1993. 'Some notes on Valerius Maximus', Sileno 19, 398-402. Broad, J. and Green, K. 2009. A History of Women’s Political Thought in Europe, 1400-1700, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Brosens, K. 2013. ‘Tapestry: Luxurious Art, Collaborative Industry,’ in B. Bohn and J. M. Saslow eds. A Companion to Renaissance and Baroque Art, Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. Brosius, M. 1996. Women in Ancient Persia (559-331 BC), Oxford: Clarendon Press. Brumble, H.D. 1998. Classical Myths and Legends in the Middle Ages and Renaissance: A Dictionary of Allegorical Meanings, London: Fitzroy Dearborn. Buitelaar, M. 1995. ‘Widow’s Worlds: Representation and realities,’ in Bremmer, J., & Bosch, L. V. D. eds. Between Poverty And The Pyre. Moments In The History Of Widowhood, New York: Routledge. Bull, M. 2005. The Mirror of the Gods, How Renaissance Artists Rediscovered the Pagan Gods, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Bush, A. C. and J. McHugh. 1975. ‘Patterns of Roman Marriage,’ Ethnology 14: 25-45. Butler, K. 2012. ‘“By Instruments her Powers Appeare”: Music and Authority in the Reign of Queen Elizabeth I,’ Renaissance Quarterly 65.2: 353-384. Camden, C. 1975. The Elizabethan Woman, Mamaroneck, New York: Paul P. Appel. Campbell Thompson, R. 1937. ‘Assyrian Parallel to an Incident in the Story of Semiramis, Fragments of Stone Reliefs and Inscriptions found at Nineveh,’ Iraq 4: 35-46. Cardini, F. 2012. The Companion to Medieval Society, (translated by Corrado Federici) London and Ithaca: McGill-Queen’s University Press. Carr, A. 2017. Story and Philosophy for Social Change in Medieval and Postmodern Writing: Reading for Change, Palgrave Macmillan. Cassagnes-Brouquet, S. 2004. ‘Penthésilée reine des Amazones et Preuse, une image de la femme guerrière à la fin du Moyen Âge,’ CLIO 20: 169-179. Casteen, E. 2011. ‘Sex and Politics in Naples: The Regnant Queenship of Johanna I,’ Journal of the Historical Society 11.2, 183-210. Casteen, E. 2015. From She-Wolf to Martyr: The Reign and Disputed Reputation of Johanna I of Naples, Ithaca, N.Y: Cornell University Press. Classen, A. 2007: The Medieval Chastity Belt A Myth-Making Process, New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Clayton, P.A. and Price, M.J. 1988. The Seven Wonders of the Ancient World, London and New York: Routledge. Comploi, S. 2000. ‘Die Darstellung der Semiramis Bei Diodorus Siculus,’ in R. Rollinger and C. Ulf eds. Geschlechterrollen und Frauenbild in der Perspektive antiker Autoren, Innusbruck: Studien Verlag, 223-44. 132

Compoli, S. 2002. ‘Die Darstellung der Semiramis bei Diodorus Siculus’, in R. Rollinger and C. Ulf eds. Geschlechterrollen und Frauenbild in der Persektive antiken Autoren, Innsbruck: Steinder Verlag, 223– 271. Comstock, H. 1946. ‘Semiramis. A gothic Floral Tapestry in the Honolulu Academy of Arts,’ The Art Quarterly: 179-181. Corbeill, A. 2004. Nature Embodied: Gesture in Ancient Rome, Princeton: Princeton University Press. Cornog, M and Perper, T. 1994. ‘Bestiality,’ in Human Sexuality: An Encyclopaedia, eds. V. L Bullough and B. Bullough, New York and London: Garland Publishing. Curtis, J. and Collon, D. 1996. ‘Ladies of Easy Virtue,’ in H. Gasche and B. Hrouda eds. Collectanea Orientalia-- Histoire, arts de l’espace et industrie de la terre. Études offertes en homage à Agnès Spycket. Paris: Recherche et Publications, 89-95. Dalley, S. 2005. ‘Semiramis in History and Legend’, in E. Gruen eds. Cultural Borrowing and Ethnic Appropriation in Antiquity, Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag, 11-22. Dalley, S. 2013a. The Mystery of the Hanging Garden of Babylon, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Dalley. S. 2013b. ‘The Greek novel Ninus and Semiramis,’ in T.T.S. Whitmarsh eds. The Romance between Greece and the East, New York: Cambridge University Press, 117-126. Darling Young, R. 2018. ‘Armenian,’ in eds. S. McGill and E. J. Watts A Companion to Late Antique Literature, Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 75-85. de Jong, M. 1989. ‘To the limits of kinship: anti-incest legislation in the early medieval west (500-900),’ in J. Bremmer eds. From Sappho to De Sade: moments in the history of sexuality, London and New York: Routledge, 36-59. de Nolhac, P. 1891. ‘Storiografia del Petrarca’ Scritti petrachesch: 482-83. de Nolhac, P. 1907. Petrarque et l'humanisme, Paris: H. Champion. Delany, S. 1987. ‘“Mother’s to Think Back Through”: Who are They? The Ambiguous Example of Christine de Pizan,’ in L.A. Finke, and M.B. Shictman eds. Medieval Texts and Contemporary Readers, Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 177-197. Develin, R. 1994. Justin Epitome of Philippic History of Pompeius Trogus Atlanta, GA: Scholars Press. Dillery, J. 1992. ‘Darius and the Tomb of Nitocris,’ Classical Philology 87: 30-38. Dittmar, H. 1912. Aischines von Sphettos: Studien zur Literaturgeschichte der Sokratiker, Berlin: Weidmann. Dixon, S. 1992. The Roman family, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. Drews, R. 1965. ‘Assyria in Classical Universal Histories,’ Historia: Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte 14.2, 129-142. Drews, R. 1974. ‘Sargon, Cyrus and Mesopotamian Folk History,’ JNES 33, 387-393. Dronke, P. 1970. Poetic Individuality in the Middle Ages, Oxford: Clarendon Press. Dropick, A.M. 2010. ‘Querelles des femmes,’ in E. Kowaleski-Wallace eds. An Encyclopaedia of Feminist Literary Theory, London and New York: Routledge. Dubel, S. 2009. ‘Colour in Philostratus’ Imagines,’ in Bowie, E. and Elsner, J. eds. Philostratus, Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, 309-321. Duby, G. (trans. E. Forster) 1978. “Two Models of Marriage: The Aristocratic and the Ecclesiastical,” in Medieval Marriage. Two Models from Twelfth-Century France, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 1-22. Duff, T.E. 1999. Plutarch’s Lives: Exploring Virtue and Vice, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Dulac, L. 1978. ‘Unmythe didactique chez Christine de Pizan: Sémiramis ou la Veuv héroïque,’ Mélanges de philologie romane offerts à Charles Camproux. Montpellier: Centre d’Estudis Occitans, 317-343

133

Dusinberre, E. R. M. 2010. ‘Anatolian Crossroads: Achaemenid Seals from Sardis and Gordion,’ in J. Curtis and S. Simpson eds. The World of Achaemenid Persia: History, Art and Society in Iran and the Ancient near East, London: I.B.Tauris, 323-335. Ehlers, B. 1966. Eine vorplatonische Deutung des sokratischen Eros / Der Dialog Aspasia des Sokratikers Aischines, München: C. H. Beck. Eilers, W. 1971. Semiramis: Entstehung und Nachhall einer altorientalischer Sage, Vienna: Böhlau. Enderlein, L. 2011. ‘The Wandering Mind: Concepts of Late Medieval Allegory in the Painted Chamber of the La Manta Castle,’ in N. Zchomelidse and G. Freni eds.. Meaning in Motion: The Semantics of Movement in Medieval Art, Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. Engels, D.W. 1978. Alexander the Great and the Logistics of the Macedonian Army, Berkeley: University of California Press. Esteves, C. 1985. ‘The Dramatic Portrayal of Semiramis in Virues, Calderon and Voltaire,’ PhD Thesis, New York New York: City University of New York (ProQuest Dissertations Publishing). Fagan, B. M. 2007. Return to Babylon, Boulder: University of Colorado Press. Ferrante, J. ‘A poetics of chaos and harmony’, in R. Jacoff eds. The Cambridge companion to Dante: Second edition, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 181-200. Finkel, I.L. and Seymour, M.J. eds. 2008. Babylon: Myth and Reality, London: The British Museum Press. Fletcher, B. Y. 1978. ‘Printer’s Cop for Stow’s Chaucer’, Studies in Bibliography 31: 184-201. Flew, A. 2010. ‘The Presumption of Atheism,’ in C. Taliaferro, P. Draper, and P.L. Quinn eds. A Companion to the Philosophy of Religion, Singapore: Blackwell Publishing, 451-457. Flory, S. 1987. The Archaic Smile of Herodotus, Detroit: Wayne State University Press. Forker, C.R. 1989. ‘“A Little More Than Kin, and Less Than Kind”: Incest, Intimacy, Narcissism, and Identity in Elizabethan and Stuart Drama,’ Medieval and Renaissance Drama in England 4: 13- 51. Fraioli, D. 2006 ‘Nine Worthy Women,’ in M. Schaus eds. Women and Gender in Medieval Europe: An Encyclopedia, London and New York: Routledge. Frandsen, P.J. 2009. Incestuous and Close-Kin Marriage in Ancient Egypt and Persia: An Examination of the Evidence, Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum Press. Frazer, J.G. Sir. 2009. The Golden Bough: a study in magic and religion, 3rd edition, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Frontenrose, J. 1951. ‘White Goddess and Syrian Goddes,’ in W. J. Fischel eds. Semitic and Oriental Studies, Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 125-148. Gammie, J. G. 1986. ‘Herodotus on Kings an Tyrants: Objective Historiography or Conventional Portraiture?,’ JNES 45: 171-195. Gardiner-Garden, J.R. 1987. Ktesias on Early Central Asian History and Ethnography, Bloomington, IN: Research Institute for Inner Asian Studies. Gee, R. 2008. ‘From Corpse to Ancestor: The Role of Tombside Dining in the Transformation of the Body in Ancient Rome,’ in F. Fahlander and T. Oestigaard eds. The Materiality of Death: Bodies, Burials, Beliefs, Oxford: Archaeopress, 59-70. George, A. R. 2003. The Babylonian Gilgamesh Epic: Introduction, Critical Edition and Cuneiform Texts, Volume 1 and 2. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Gera, D. 1997. Warrior Women: The Anonymous Tractatus De Mulieribus, Köln: E.J. Brill. Gibson, W. S. 2009. ‘A Sacred Text Profaned: Seven Women Fight for the Breeches,’ in E.C. Block and M. Jones eds. Profane Imagery in Marginal Arts of the Middle Ages, Turnhout: Brepols Publishers, 221-237. Gorman, R. J. and V. B. Gorman. 2014. Corrupting Luxury in Ancient Greek Literature, Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press. 134

Gould, J. 1989. Herodotus, Avon: The Bath Press. Gray, V. 1995. ‘Herodotus and the Rhetoric of Otherness,’ The American Journal of Philology 116. 2: 185-211. Grayson, A. K. 2000. Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, Winona Lake, Indianna: Eisenbrauns. Grosrichard, A. (trans. L. Heron) 1998. The Sultan’s Court: European Fantasies of the East, London and New York: Verso. Grössinger, C. 1997. Picturing women in late Medieval and Renaissance art, New York: Manchester University Press. Hacikyan, A. J. 2000. The Heritage of Armenian Literature: From the oral tradition to the Golden Age, Detroit: Wayne State University Press. Hall, E. 1989. Inventing the Barbarian, Oxford: Clarendon Press. Hamer, M. 1993. Signs of Cleopatra: History, politics, representation, London and New York: Routledge. Hammer, W. 1944. ‘The Trebeta Legends,’ Germanic Review 19.4: 241-268. Hammond, N.G.L. 1996. ‘Some Passages in Polyaenus "Stratagems" Concerning Alexander,’ Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies 37: 23-53. Hardwick, L. and Stray, C. eds. 2008. A companion to classical receptions, Chichester, West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell. Harper, R.F. 1892-1914. Assyrian and Babylonian Letters, London and Chicago. Hart, J. 1982. Herodotus and Greek History, London and Canberra: St. Martin’s Press. Hartog, F. 1988. The Mirror of Herodotus, Berkeley: University of California Press. Haskell, F. and Penny, N. 1981. Taste and the Antique: The Lure of Classical Sculpture 1500-1900, Yale University Press: New Haven and London. Hawass, Z., Gad, Y.Z., Ismail, S. et al . 2010. ‘Ancestry and pathology in King Tutankhamun’s family,’ Journal of the American Medical Association 303: 638–47. Hawes, G. 2014. Rationalizing Myth in Antiquity, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Hays, G. 2003. ‘The Date and Identity of the Mythographer Fulgentius,’ The Journal of Medieval Latin 13: 163–252. Heid, S. 2007. ‘The Romanness of Roman Christianity,’ in J. Rüpke eds. A Companion to Roman Religion, Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, 406-426. Heller, W. 2004. Emblems of Eloquence: Opera and Women’s Voices in Seventeenth-Century Venice, Berkeley: University of California Press. Henry, M. M. 1995. Prisoner of History: Aspasia of Miletus and Her Biographical Tradition, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Holderness, J.S. 2005. ‘Feminism and the Fall: Boccaccio, Christine de Pizan, and Louise Labé,’ Essays in Medieval Studies 21: 97-108. Hooper, L. E. 2019. ‘Characterisation’, in Baranski, Z. G. and Gilson, S. eds. The Cambridge companion to Dante's Commedia, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 43-60. Hope, V. M. 2000. ‘Contempt and Respect: The treatment of the corpse in ancient Rome,’ in V. M. Hope and E. Marshall eds. Death and Disease in the Ancient City, Routledge: London and New York, 104-127. Hopkins, K. 1980. ‘Brother-Sister Marriage in Roman Egypt,’ Comparative Studies in Society and History 22.3: 303–54. Hopkins, L. 2002. Writing Renaissance Queens, Newark: University of Delaware Press. Hopkins, L. 2007. ‘The dark side of the moon: Semiramis and Titania,’ in A. Connolly and L. Hopkins eds. Goddesses and Queens: the iconography of Elizabeth I, Manchester University Press: Manchester: 117-135. Howatson, M. C. 1989. The Oxford Companion to Classical Literature, Oxford University Press: Oxford. 135

Huebner, S.R. 2007. ‘‘Brother-Sister’ Marriage in Roman Egypt: a Curiosity of Humankind or a Widespread Family Strategy?,’ Journal of Roman Studies 97: 21-49. Hughes-Hallet, L. 1990. Cleopatra: histories, dreams, and distortions, London: Bloomsbury. Humphreys, S. 1987. ‘Law, Custom and Culture in Herodotus,’ Arethusa 20: 211-220. Hunter, R. 2009. On Coming After: Studies in Post-Classical Greek Literature and its Reception, Berlin and Boston: De Gruyter. Isaac, B. 2004. The Invention of Racism in Classical Antiquity, Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press. Johnson, D.L. 1997. ‘Claudius Aelianus' "Varia Historia" and the tradition of the miscellany,’ PhD Thesis, Vancouver Canada: The University of British Columbia (ProQuest Dissertations Publishing). Jordan, C. 1987. ‘Woman’s Role in Sixteenth-Century British Political Thought,’ Renaissance Quarterly 40.3: 421-451. Jordan, P. 2002. Seven Wonder of the Ancient World, London: Longman. Kay, T. 2019. ‘Vernacular Literature and Culture’, in Baranski, Z. G. and Gilson, S. eds. The Cambridge companion to Dante's Commedia, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 140-157. Kircher, T. 2015 ‘Petrarch and the Humanists,’ in A. R. Ascoli and U. Falkeid eds. The Cambridge Companion to Petrarch, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 179-190. Klein, S. S. 2006. Ruling Women: Queenship and Gender in Anglo-Saxon Literature, Notre Dame: Notre Dame University Press. Kohl, B. G. 1974. ‘Petrarch’s Prefaces to De Viris Illustribus,’ History and Theory 13.2: 132-144. Koldewey, R. (trans. Agnes S. Johns) 1914. The excavations at Babylon, London: Macmillan. Koldewey, R. 1990. Das wieder erstehende Babylon, Leipzig: J. C. Hinrichs. Kolsky, S. 2004. The Genealogy of Women: Studie’s in Boccaccio’s De mulieribus Claris, New York: Peter Lang Publishing. Kramer, S. N. 1969. The Sacred Marriage Rite, London; Indiana University Press. Kretzschmar, W. A. 1987. ‘Adaptation and anweald in the Old English Orosius,’ Anglo-Saxon England 16: 127-145. Krumbholz, P. 1897. ‘Zu den Assyriaka des Ktesias,’ Rheinisches Museum für Philologie 52: 237–85. Kuhrt, A. 2002. ‘Babylon,’ in Bakker, E.J., de Jong, I.J.F., and van Wees, H. eds. Brill’s Companion to Herodotus, Koln: Brill, 475-496. Langdon, S. 1924. ‘The Babylonian and Persian Sacaea,’ The Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, 65-72. Lapinkivi, P. 2008. ‘The Sumerian Sacred Marriage and Its Aftermath in Later Sources,’ in M. Nissinen and R. Uro eds. Sacred Marriages: The Divine-Human Sexual Metaphor from Sumer to Early Christianity, Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 7-42. Ledda, G. 2019. ‘Dante Alighieri, Dante-poet, Dante-character’, in Z. G. Baranski and S. Gilson eds. S. The Cambridge companion to Dante's Commedia, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 28- 42. Leick, G. 2003. Sex and Eroticism in Mesopotamia Literature, New York: Routledge. Lenfant, D. 2004. Ctésias de Cnide, Paris: Les Belles Lettres. Lennon, J. 2013. Pollution and Religion in Ancient Rome, New York: Cambridge University Press. Léonard, É.G. 1957. Les Angevins de Naples, Paris: University of France Press. Lestocquoy, J. 1978. Deux Siècles de l’histoire de la tapisserie (1300–1500): Paris, Arras, Lille, Tournai, Bruxelles, Arras: Commission départementale des monuments historiques du Pas-de-Calais. Létoublon, F. 2011. ‘Homer’s Use of Myth,’ in K. Dowden and N. Livingstone eds. A Companion to Greek Mythology, Oxford: Wiley‐Blackwell, 25-45. 136

Levi, D. 1944. ‘The Novel of Ninus and Semiramis,’ Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 87.5: 420-428. Levi, D. 1947. Antioch Mosaic Pavements, Volume 1, Rfdronkome: L’erma di Bretshneider. Levin, C. 1994. The Heart and Stomach of a King: Elizabeth l and the Politics of Sex and Power, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Lewis, S. eds. 2006. Ancient Tyranny, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Lewy, H. 1952. ‘Nitokris-Naqîʾa,’ Journal of Near Eastern Studies 11.4: 264-286. Ley, D.J. 2012. Insatiable Wives: Women Who Stray and the Men Who Love Them, Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield. Liebeschuetz, J.H.W.F. 2015. East and West in Late Antiquity: Invasion, Settlement, Ethnogenesis and Conflicts of Religion, Leiden: Brill. Lightfoot, J.L. 2003. Lucian On the Syrian Goddess, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Lightfoot, J.L. 2005. Rev. of The Narratives of Konon: Text, translation and commentary of the Diegeseis, by M.K. Brown. 2002, München and Leipzig: Saur. Gnomon 77: 299-305. Liverani, M. 1995. ‘The Deeds of Ancient Mesopotamian Kings,’ in J. M. Sasson eds. Civilizations of the Ancient Near East, New York: Scribner’s, 2352-2366. Llewellyn-Jones, L. 2003. Aphrodite’s Tortoise: The Veiled Woman of Ancient Greece, Swansea: The Classical Press of Wales. Llewellyn-Jones, L. 2013a. ‘‘Empire of the Gaze’: Despotism and Sergalio Fantasies à la grecque in Chariton’s Callirhoe,’ Helios 40 1-2: 167-191. Llewellyn-Jones, L. 2013b. King and Court in Ancient Persia 559 to 331 BCE, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Llewellyn-Jones, L. and Robson, J. 2009. Ctesias’ History of Persia: Tales of the Orient, London and New York: Routledge. Louth, A. 2005. ‘The Eastern Empire in the sixth century,’ in P. Fouracre eds. The New Cambridge Medieval History, Volume 1, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 91-117. Madreiter, I. and Schnegg, K. 2014. ‘Gender and Sex,’ in B. Jacobs and R. Rollinger eds. A companion to the Achaemenid Persian Empire, 2 vols, Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell. Mallan, C.T. 2013. ‘Cassius Dio on Julia Domna: A Study of the Political and Ethical Functions of Biographical Representation in Dio's "Roman History",’ Mnemosyne 4.66: 734-760. Manwuld, G. 2013. Nero in Opera: Librettos as Transformations of Ancient Source, Berlin and Boston: De Gruyter. Marchesi, S. 2018. ‘Classical Culture,’ in Z.G. Baranski and S. Gilson eds. The Cambridge companion to Dante's Commedia, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 127-139. Marcovich, M. 1996. ‘From Ishtar to Aphrodite,’ The Journal of Aesthetic Education 30.2: 43-59. Marquart, J. 1891/3. ‘Die Assyriaka des Ktesias,’ Philologus Supplement 6: 504. Martin, R. G. 1923. ‘A Critical Study of Thomas Heywood’s “Gunaikeion”,’ Studies in Philology 20.2: 160-183. Martindale, C. 1993. Redeeming the Text: Latin Poetry and the Hermeneutics of Reception, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Martindale, C. and Thomas, R. F. 2008. Classics and the Uses of Reception, Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Martinez, R.L. 2009. ‘The Book without a Name: Petrarch’s Open Secret (Liber sine nomine)’, in V. Kirkham and A. Maggi eds. Petrarch a critical guide to the complete works, Chicago: Chicago University Press, 291-300. Maslakov, G. 1984. ‘Valerius Maximus and Roman Historiography. A Study of the exempla Tradition,’ ANRW II 32.1: 437-496.

137

McLeod, G. 1991. Virtue and venom: catalogs of women from antiquity to the Renaissance, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. McMillan, A. 1979. ‘Men’s Weapons, Women’s War: The Nine Female Worthies, 1400-1640,’ Mediaevalia 5: 113-139. Melville, S. 1994. ‘The role of Naqia/Zakutu in Sargonid politics,’ PhD Thesis, New Haven Connecticut: Yale University (ProQuest Dissertations Publishing). Michalowski, P. 2010. ‘Masters of the Four Corners of the Heavens: Views of the Universe in Early Mesopotamian Writings,’ in Kurt A. Raaflaub and Richard J. A. Talbert eds. Geography and Ethnography: Perceptions of the World in Pre-Modern Societies, 147-168. Moennig, U. 2004. Die Erzählung von Alexander und Semiramis. Berlin and New York: De Gruyter. Mollat, G. (trans J. Love) 1963. The popes at Avignon, 1305-1378, London: Nelson. Moreau, P. 2002. Incestus et prohibitae nuptiae. Conception rom l'inceste et histoire des prohibitions matrimoniales pour cause de dans la Rome antique, Paris: Les Belles Lettres. Morgan, J. 2016. Greek Perspectives on the Achaemenid Empire: Persia through the Looking Glass, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Moyer, C. J. 2010. ‘The Beautiful Outsider Replaces the Queen: A “Compound Topos” in Esther 1-2 and Books 5 and 6 of Chariton’s Chaereas and Callirhoe,’ Vetus Testamentum 60.4: 601-620. Munson, R.V. 2001. Telling Wonders: Ethnographic and Political Discourse in the Work of Herodotus, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Muntz, C. E. 2017. Diodorus Siculus and the World of the Late Roman Republic, New York: Oxford University Press. Newby, Z. 2009. ‘Absorption and Erudition in Philostratus’ Imagines,’ in E. Bowie and J. Elsner eds. Philostratus, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 322–342. Newman, J.O. 1996. ‘Sons and Mothers: Agrippina, Semiramis, and the Philological Construction of Gender Roles in Early Modern Germany (Lohenstein’s Agrippina, 1665),’ Renaissance Quarterly 49: 77-113. Noegel, S. B. 2005. ‘Mesopotamian Epic’ in J. Miles Foley eds. A Companion to Ancient Epic, Malden, MA: Blackwell. O’Hear, N. and O’Hear, A. 2015. Picturing the Apocalypse: The Book of Revelation in the Arts Over Two Millennia, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Oates, J. and Oates, D. 2003. Nimrud: An Assyrian Imperial City Revealed, London: British School of Archaeology in Iraq. Ooghe, B. 2007. ‘The Rediscovery of Babylonia: European Travellers and the Development of Knowledge on Lower Mesopotamia, Sixteenth to Early Nineteenth Century,’ Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, Third Series 17.3: 231-252. Pagden, A. 1986. The Fall of Natural Man: The American Indian and the Origins of Comparative Ethnology, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Pampinella-Cropper, M. 2012. ‘Myrrha: Incestuous Passion and Political Transgression,’ Forum Italicum 46: 82-109. Paribeni, R. 1926. Optimus Prineps: Saggio sulla storia e sui tempu dell’ imperatore Traiano, Messina and New York: Arno Press. Parisinou, E. 2002. ‘The ‘language’ of female hunting outfit in ancient Greece,’ in L. Llewellyn-Jones eds. Women’s Dress in the Ancient Greek World, Swansea: The Classical Press of Wales, 55-72. Parker, V. 2009. ‘Source-Critical Reflections in Cleitarchus’ Work’ in R. Hannah and P. Wheatley eds. Alexander and His Successors: Essays From the Antipodes, Claremont, CA: Regina Books, 28- 55. Parr, J. 1970. ‘Chaucer’s Semiramis,’ The Chaucer Review 5: 57-61.

138

Parrot, A. and Nougayrol, J. 1956. ‘Asarhaddon et Naqi'a sur un Bronze du Louvre (AO20.185),’ Syria 33, 147-160. Peacock, M.L.M. 1989. ‘Harpies and Henpecked Husbands: Images of the Powerful Housewife in Netherlandish Art 1550-1700,’ PhD Thesis, Columbus Ohio: Ohio State University. Peacock, M.M. 1999. ‘Proverbial Reframing: Rebuking and Revering Women in Trousers,’ The Journal of the Walters Art Gallery 57: 13-34. Pearson, L. 1983. The Lost Histories of Alexander the Great, Chico, CA: Scholars Press. Perry, B. E. 1967. The Ancient Romances: A Literary-Historical Account of their Origins, Berkeley: University of California Press. Pertile, L. 2007. ‘Introduction to Inferno,’ in R. Jacoff eds. The Cambridge Companion to Dante, Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, 67-90. Pettinato, G. 1988. Semiramis: Herrin über Assur und Babylon, Zurich and Munich: Artemis. Pettinato, G. 2005. ‘Akitu,’ in L. Jones eds. Encyclopaedia of Religion, 2nd edition, Detroit, MI: Macmillan Reference USA. Philips, E.D. 1968. ‘Semiramis at Behistun,’ Classica & Mediaevalia 29: 162-168. Phillippy, P. A. 1986. ‘“Establishing Authority: Boccaccio’s De Claris Mulieribus and Christine de Pizan’s Le Livre de la Cité des Dames”’, A Romantic Review 77.3: 167-194. Pinnock, F. 1995. ‘Erotic Art in the Ancient Near East’, in eds. J. Sasson et al. Civilisations of the Ancient Near East, New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 2521-2531. Pryke, L. M. 2017. Ishtar, London: Routledge. Pucci, J. 2018. ‘Late Antique Literature in the Western Middle Ages’ in S. McGill and E.J. Watts eds. A Companion to Late Antique Literature, Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc, 583-596. Quilligan, M. 1991. The Allegory of Female Authority: Christine de Pizan’s Cité des Dames, Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press. Rapp, C. 2016. Brother-Making in Late Antiquity and Byzantium: Monks, Laymen, and Christian Ritual, New York: Oxford University Press. Rawson, E. 1989. ‘“Roman Rulers and the Philosophic Adviser” Philosophia Togata: Essays,’ in M Griffin and J. Barnes eds. Philosophia togata. I, Essays on philosophy and Roman society, Oxford: Clarendon Press; New York: Oxford University Press, 233-57. Reade, J. 1998. Assyrian Sculpture, London: The British Museum Press. Reade, J. 2000. ‘Alexander the Great and the Hanging Gardens of Babylon,’ Iraq 62:195-217. Richards, J. M. 1997. ‘“To Promote a Woman to Beare Rule”” Talking of Queens in Mid-Tudor England,’ The Sixteenth Century Journal 28: 101-121. Riley, J. 2002. ‘Women in Justin: Investigation into the Presentation of Female Characters in Justin’s Epitome of Pompeius Trogus’ Philippic Histories,’ PhD Thesis, Newcastle Australia: University of Newcastle. Robertson Smith, R. 1887. ‘Ctesias and the Semiramis Legend,’ The English Historical Review 2.6: 303- 317. Robson, J.E. 1997. ‘Bestiality and Bestial Rape in Greek Myth,’ in S. Deacy and K. F. Pierce eds. Rape in Antiquity, London: Gerald Duckworth. Rohrbacher, D. 2002. The Historians of Late Antiquity, Oxford: Routledge. Roisman, J. 2003. ‘Honor in Alexander’s Campaign,’ in J. Roisman eds. Brill’s Companion to Alexander the Great, Leiden and Boston: Brill, 279-321. Roller, D.W. 2003. The world of Juba II and Kleopatra Selene: royal scholarship on Rome's African frontier, New York and London: Routledge. Roux, G. 1991. Ancient Iraq, 3rd edition, London: Penguin Books. Roux, G. (trans. Antonia Nevill) 2001. ‘Semiramis: The Builder of Babylon,’ in J. Bottéro eds. Everyday life in ancient, Baltimore, MA: Johns Hopkins University Press, 141-161. 139

Sacks, K. S. 1990. Diodorus Siculus and the first century, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Said, E. W. 1978. Orientalism, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Säid, S. 1980. ‘Guerre, intelligence et courage dans les Histoires d’Hérodote,’ Ancient Society 11: 83- 117. Salvini, M. 1992. ‘Il canale de Semiramide,’ Geographica Antiqua 1: 67-80. Samuel, I. 1944. ‘Semiramis in the Middle Ages: The History of a Legend,’ Medievalia et humanistica 2.32: 32-44. Sancisi-Weerdenburg, H. 1987. ‘Decadence in the Empire or Decadence in the Sources? From Source to Synthesis: Ctesias’, in H. Sancisi Weerdenburg eds. Sources, Structures and Synthesis: proceedings of the Groningen 1983 Achaemenid History Workshop, Leiden: Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten, 33– 45. Scheid, J. 2007. ‘Sacrifices to Gods and Ancestors,’ in J. Rüpke eds. A Companion to Roman Religion, Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, 263-271. Schepens, G. 1989. ‘Zum problem der «unbesiebarkeit» Alexanders des Grossen,’ Ancient Society 20: 15-53. Schleiner, W. 1978. ‘"Divina Virago": Queen Elizabeth as an Amazon,’ Studies in Philology 75.2: 163- 180 Schmeling, G. (eds.) 2003. The novel in the ancient world, Boston: Brill Academic Publishers. Schoch, R. 2016. Writing the History of the British Stage: 1600-1900, Cambridge University Press: Cambridge. Scurlock, J.A. 1993. ‘Lead Plaques and Obscenities,’ Cahiers de Nouvelles Assyriologiques Breves et Utilitaires 1:15. Shapiro, M. 1975. ‘SEMIRAMIS IN "INFERNO" V,’ Romance Notes 16.2: 455-456. Shaw, B.D. 1992. ‘Explaining incest: brother– sister marriage in Graeco-Roman Egypt,’ Man 27.2: 267– 99. Shaw, P. 2019. ‘Transmission History,’ in Z.G. Barański and S. Gilson eds. Cambridge Companion to Dante’s ‘Commedia’, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 229-244. Shell, M. 1988. The End of Kinship: “Measure for Measure,” Incest, and the Ideal of Universal Siblinghood, Stanford: Stanford University Press. Skidmore, S. 1996. Practical Ethics for Roman Gentlemen. The Work of Valerius Maximus, Exeter: Exeter University Press. Smarr, J. 1998. ‘The “Parlement of Foules” and “Inferno” 5,’ The Chaucer Review 33.2: 113-122. Souchal, G. (trans. R. A. H. Oxby) 1974. Masterpieces of tapestry from the fourteenth to the sixteenth century; an exhibition at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, NY: Metropolitan Museum of Art. Squire, M. 2013. ‘Apparitions Apparent: Ekphrasis and the Parameters of Vision in the Elder Philostratus’ “Imagines”,’ Helios 40: 97-140. Stadter, P.A. 2013. ‘Plutarch and Rome,’ in M. Beck eds. The Companion to Plutarch, Hoboken: Wiley, 13-31. Stafford, P. 2016. Gender, Family and the Legitimation of Power: England from the Ninth to Early Twelfth Century, Aldershot: Ashgate. Stamm, C. 2003. Vergangenheitsbezug in der Zweiten Sophistik?: die Varia Historia des Claudius Aelianus, Frankfurt and New York: P. Lang. Strasburger, H. 1982-1990. Studien zur Alten Geschichte, eds. W. Schmitthenner and R. Zoepffel, Hildesheim. Stephens, S.A. and Wrinkler, J.J. 2014. Ancient Greek Novels, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Stonach, D. 1990. ‘Gardens as political statement: some case studies from the Near East in the first millennium BC,’ Bull.Asia Inst. 4: 171-80. 140

Stoneman, R. 2008. Alexander the Great: A Life in Legend, New Haven and London: Yale University Press. Stronk, J.P. 2007. ‘Ctesias of Cnidus, a Reappraisal,’ Mnemosyne 60: 25-58. Sulimani, I. 2005. ‘Myth or Reality: A Geographical Examination of Semiramis’ Journey in Diodorus,’ Scripta Classica Israelica 24:45–63. Sulimani, I. 2011. Diodorus’ Mythistory and the Pagan Mission: Historiography and Culture-heroes in the First Pentad of the Bibliotheke, Leiden: Brill. Suter, A. 2008. Lament: studies in the ancient Mediterranean and beyond, New York: Oxford University Press. Svärd, S. 2015. Women and Power in Neo-Assyrian Palaces, Helsinki: Neo-Assyrian Text Corpus Project. Tilg, S. 2010. Chariton of Aphrodisias and the Invention of the Greek Love Novel, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Tuplin, C. 1996. Achaemenid Studies, Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag. Turner Wright, C. 1946. ‘The Elizabethan Female Worthies,’ Studies in Philology 43.4: 628-643. Van De Mieroop, M. 2004. ‘A Tale of Two Cities: Nineveh and Babylon,’ Iraq 66, 1-5. Van Nuffelen, P. 2012. Orosius and the Rhetoric of History, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Vasselin, M. 1994. ‘Histoires déformées, miroirs déformants: l’image artistique des héronïnes au XVIe siècle,’ Nouvelle Revue du XVIe Siècle 12: 33-62. Veldmen, I.M. (trans. Michael Hoyle) 1997. Maarten van Heemskerck and Dutch humanism in the sixteenth century, Maarssen: Gary Schwartz and Amsterdam: Rijksmuseum. Veness, R. 2002. ‘Investing the barbarian? The dress of Amazons in Athenian art,’ in L. Llewellyn-Jones eds. Women’s Dress in the Ancient Greek World, Swansea: The Classical Press of Wales, 95-109. Vessey, D. W. T. C. 2008. ‘Challenge and Response,’ in E. J Kenney and W.V. Clausen eds. The Cambridge History of Classical Literature II: Latin Literature, Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, 497-502. Volkmann, R. 1869. Leben, Schriften und Philosophie des Plutarch von Chaeronea, Berlin: Varlag Von S. Calvary & Co. Walcot, P. 1991. ‘On Widows and Their Reputation in Antiquity,’ Symbolae Osloenses 66: 5-26. Walker, S. and Burnett, A. 1981. Image of Augustus, London: British Museum Publications. Waters, M. W. 2017. Ctesias’ Persica in Its Near Easter Context, Madison, WI: The University of Wisconsin Press. Webb, R. 2006. ‘The Imagines as a Fictional Text: Ekphrasis, Apatê and Illusion,’ in M. Costantini et al. eds. Le Défi De L’Art: Philostrate, Callistrate et l’image sophistique, Rennes: La Licorne, 113- 36. Weltecke, D. 2009. ‘Michael the Syrian and Syriac Orthodox Identity,’ Church History and Religious Culture 89: 115-125. Westenholz, J. G. 1995. ‘Love Lyrics from the Ancient Near East,’ in J. Sasson et al. eds. Civilisations of the Ancient Near East, New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1284-2471. Wetzel, F. 1944. ‘Babylon zur Zeit Herodots,’ ZA 48: 45-68. Whitmarsh, T. 2018. Dirty Love: The Genealogy of the Ancient Greek Novel, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Wilgaux, J. 2011. ‘Consubstantiality, Incest, and Kinship in Ancient Greece,’ in B. Rawson eds. A companion to families in the Greek and Roman worlds, Chichester and Malden, MA: Wiley- Blackwell, 217-230. Wilson, N.G. 1994. The Bibliotheca: A Selection, London: Duckworth.

141

Witt, R. G. 2008. ‘The Rebirth of the Roman as Models of Character,’ in V Kirkham and A. Maggi eds. Petrarch: A Critical Guide to the Complete Works, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 103- 111. Womack, P. 2006. English Renaissance drama, Malden, MA and Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing. Wrigley, J.E. 1965. ‘A Rehabilitation of Clement VI. Sine nomine 13 and the Kingdom of Naples,’ Archivum Historiae Pontificiae 3, 127-138. Yardley, J.C. 2016. Justin and Pompeius Trogus: A Study of the Language of Justin's "Epitome" of Trogus, Tronto; Tronto University Press. Yildirim, B. 2008. ‘Identities and empire: local mythology and the self-representation of Aphrodisias,’ in B. E. Borg eds. Paideia: The World of the Second Sophistic, Berlin and Boston: De Gruyter, 23-52. Zak, G. 2015. ‘Boccaccio and Petrarch,’ in G. Armstrong, R. Daniels, and S. J. Milner eds. The Cambridge Companion to Boccaccio, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 139-154. Ziolkowski, J.M. 1989. Jezebel: A Norman Latin Poem of the Early Eleventh Century Human, New York: Peter Lang.

142