Dreams of Mount Helicon: Callimachus and Oneiric Inspiration by Austin Aozora Hattori A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Cincinnati in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts in Classics Chair: Daniel Marković Cincinnati, Ohio 2020 ABSTRACT I begin this thesis by overviewing the papyri and testimonia for Callimachus’ dream in Aetia. Callimachus relates that in this dream, he was transported to Mount Helicon and encountered the Muses, who granted him a poetic initiation in the manner of Hesiod’s Theogony. The first chapter looks back to the potential sources from which Callimachus drew for his dream, finding that lyric and philosophical sources provide the closest parallels. My research also indicates that there is no unambiguous source preceding Callimachus in which a poet describes, in their own poem, their poetic initiation as having occurred in a dream. The reason for this innovation is found in Callimachus’ desire to be a new Hesiod: the dream allows him access to the Muses on Helicon while grounded in his Alexandrian context. Moreover, the dream allows him to be both a young and old man in his poem, both the old man of in Telchinas and the youth “with his beard just sprouting” in his somnium. In this way he is able to navigate the competing pressures of poetic senescence and juvenescence found in the ancient traditions surrounding Hesiod. The second chapter raises some problems that remain unanswered. Hesiod does not portray his poetic initiation as having occurred in a dream, and it does not appear that Callimachus must utilize an oneiric Dichterweihe since he does not use a dream for his poetic instruction by Apollo in fr. 1. I therefore suggest that Callimachus’ desire to be a Novus Hesiodus does not in itself fully explain his choice of a dream to portray his poetic initiation. To find further insights, I contextualize Aetia within contemporary Alexandrian discourse on dreams. The Ptolemies, including Ptolemy II who reigned for most of Callimachus’ career, spent many resources on temples associated with incubation, and Demotic texts indicate that the Ptolemies asserted access to the gods through dreams. I suggest that Posidippus 36, in which ii Arsinoë II appears as Isis-Aphrodite to a devotee in a dream, is a parallel to Arsinoë’s appearance as a tenth Muse in Callimachus’ dream. Another motivation for Callimachus’ somnium, therefore, is to pay homage to his Ptolemaic patrons by deifying the queen and including her among those providing him the inspiration for the poem. In my concluding section, I bridge the gap between Callimachus’ desire to be a new Hesiod on one hand, and his motivation to advance Ptolemaic propaganda on the other. I return to the urtext, Hesiod’s Theogony, and outline how the relationships between poets, lords, and gods in Hesiod are closely paralleled and adapted in Callimachus’ poem. Callimachus praises his rulers as part of an exchange in the patron-client relationship, but I emphasize that he does so also because Hesiod himself praises his rulers. Moreover, while his dream deified Arsinoë, Callimachus also positions himself as the semi-divine Hesiodus Redivivus, hearkening back to Hesiod’s audē thespis. His Ptolemaic ideology is not merely Ptolemaic: ultimately, he manipulates the propaganda to bolster his own poetic persona. iii © 2020 Austin Aozora Hattori All Rights Reserved iv DEDICATION τῇ οἰκίᾳ μου τῇ παρὰ τὸ γένος τε καὶ τῇ παρὰ τὴν φιλίαν· v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This has been a challenging year to write a thesis. Amid library closures and the general disruption to academic life, I am deeply thankful for the people who helped me in the completion of this thesis, without whose editorial suggestions as well as general encouragement this project would have been impossible. I extend my thanks to Daniel Marković, my thesis chair, in whose class in my first semester in the graduate program I first explored oneirology in Classical literature. I am indebted to him for consistently prompting me to think critically about my argumentation. I express my thanks to Mirjam Kotwick, who also pushed me to rethink my argumentation and challenged me to seek clarity in my writing. I would also be remiss not to express gratitude to Jackie Murray, whose expertise was particularly helpful in the formation of my second chapter. Words cannot express how fortunate I am to have my fellow graduate students in this department. They have constantly extended their support and encouragement to me in a time which we have been compelled to spend apart. I also thank my family for their support, as well as David, Megan, Jessie, and Alice. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract……………………………………………………………………………………………ii Dedication…………………………………………………………………………………………v Acknowledgements……………………………………………………………………………….vi Chapter 1: Callimachus and Literary Dreams Background: Non Inflati Somnia Callimachi……………………………….……..1 Introduction: Poetic Inspiration and Initiation…………………………………….5 Literary Sources for Callimachus’ Dream………………………………………...9 Callimachus’ Dream as a Poetic Innovation……………………………………..18 Conclusion……………………………………………………………………….23 2: Hellenistic Dreams and Royal Ideology Further Questions in Callimachus’ Dream of Helicon…………………………..25 Incubation and Dream Interpretation in Hellenistic Egypt………………………27 Dreams in Ptolemaic Court Poetry………………………………………………37 Conclusion……………………………………………………………………….48 3: Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………….50 Editions of Primary Sources Cited……………………………………………………………….60 Secondary Sources Cited………………………………………………………………………...62 vii CHAPTER 1: CALLIMACHUS AND LITERARY DREAMS BACKGROUND: NON INFLATI SOMNIA CALLIMACHI After his famous prologue to Aetia (fr. 1 Harder 2012),1 Callimachus transitions to an encounter he had with the Muses on Mt. Helicon in Boeotia, where, as described in the proem to Theogony, the Muses had appeared to Hesiod in Archaic times. A fragment of a passage introducing this experience is found in P.Oxy. 2208, first published in 1948:2 ποιμ⸥ένι μῆλα νέμ̣⸤οντι παρ’ ἴχνιον ὀξέοϲ ἵππου Ἡϲιόδ⸥ωι Μουϲέων ἑϲμὸ⸤ϲ ὅτ’ ἠντίαϲεν μ]έ̣ν οἱ Χάεοϲ γενεϲ̣[ ]ἐπὶ πτέρν̣ηϲ ὑδα[ τεύχω⸥ν ὡϲ ἑτέρωι τιϲ ἑῶι ⸤κακὸν ἥπατι τεύχει ]ῶ ζώειν ἄξιον α[ ].εν πάντεϲ ϲε· τὸ γα[ ].δε πρήϲϲειν εὐμα[ ]...ι̣π̣ὰ̣.ʽ[..].[ . …when a swarm of Muses encountered the shepherd Hesiod, who was setting his flocks to pasture near the hoof-print of the swift horse… …they told him the birth of Chaos?... …on the water of the hoof?... …that if one causes evil for another, one causes it for one’s own liver… …worth living?... …we all…you; for the…?... …to do it with easy success?... … (Callim. Aet. fr. 2 mod. trans. Harder) This is the only extant fragment of Callimachus’ introduction to his encounter with the Muses; the exact nature of its narrative continuity with fr. 1, the “Reply to the Telchines,” is not clearly understood, although it seems likely that there was at least a brief narrative transition between in 1 Harder 2012 is used in this thesis except where otherwise noted. 2 The Oxyrhynchus Papyri: XIX. Ed. Lobel, E.; Wegener, E. P.; Roberts, C. H.; Bell, H. I. London: Egypt Exploration Society, 1948, pp. 1–3. 1 Telchinas and the somnium.3 What is clear, however, is that Callimachus explicitly rehearses the Hesiodic experience and applies it to his own. The first two lines appear to be modeled on Theog. 22–3, “they [the Muses] at one time taught a beautiful song to Hesiod, who was setting his sheep to pasture below holy Helicon,” (αἵ νύ ποθ’ Ἡσίοδον καλὴν ἐδίδαξαν ἀοιδήν, / ἄρνας ποιμαίνονθ’ Ἑλικῶνος ὕπο ζαθέοιο). Callimachus’ “hoof-print of the swift horse” (ἴχνιον ὀξέοϲ ἵππου, fr. 2.1) refers to the Hippocrene, a spring on Mt. Helicon in which Hesiod’s Muses are said to bathe (Theog. 5–6),4 and the somewhat cryptic injunction that “that if one causes evil for another, one causes it for one’s own liver” (τεύχω⸥ν ὡϲ ἑτέρωι τιϲ ἑῶι ⸤κακὸν ἥπατι τεύχει, fr. 2.5) adapts Hesiod Op. 265, “a man causes evil for himself when he causes evil for someone else” (οἷ αὐτῷ κακὰ τεύχει ἀνὴρ ἄλλῳ κακὰ τεύχων).5 Though fragmentary, we can gather that Callimachus’ rehearsal of the Hesiodic experience serves to look back on the programmatic relationship between the Muse and the poet as established in fr. 1: Callimachus stands in contrast to the Telchines, his muttering critics who are no friends of the Muse (νήιδε⸥ϲ οἳ Μούϲηϲ οὐκ ἐγένοντο φίλοι, 1.2), and the fragment concludes with the poet asserting the Muses’ favor on a poet even in old age (Μοῦϲαι γ⸥ὰρ ὅϲουϲ ἴδον ὄθμα⸤τ⸥ι παῖδαϲ / μὴ λοξῶι, πολιοὺϲ⸥ οὐκ ἀπέθεντο φίλουϲ, 1.37–8). Thus, by re-incorporating the proem of Theogony and echoing Works and Days in fr. 2, Callimachus invokes Hesiodic authority for his poetics. At the same time, the moralizing line 5 in fr. 2 looks forward to the theme of self- 3 The end of our fr. 1 includes the lines, “for whomsoever the Muses did not look at askance as a child / they will not reject as a friend when he is old” (Μοῦϲαι γ⸥ὰρ ὅϲουϲ ἴδον ὄθμα⸤τ⸥ι παῖδαϲ / μὴ λοξῶι, πολιοὺϲ⸥ οὐκ ἀπέθεντο φίλουϲ, fr. 1.37–8), which may be a segue to Callimachus’ encounter with the Muses as a young man; see Kerkhecker, A., “Ein Musenanruf am Anfang der Aitia des Kallimachos,” ZPE 71 (1988): pp. 16–24. 4 According to Aratus Phaen. 216–21, the Hippocrene was so named because his hoof struck the summit of Mt. Helicon, and from this cavity a fountain sprung forth. On the Hippocrene in Aetia, see Harder, 2012 (2), pp. 99–101. 5 Implying that the Muses imparted Op. as well as Theog. on Mt. Helicon; on Op. in this passage see Harder, 2012 (2), pp. 104–5. 2 destruction found later in the Aetia,6 and indeed, the Hesiodic-Heliconian motif is recalled in Aetia’s epilogue at the end of Book 4.7 This is not all we know about Callimachus’ dream, however, as various scholia and testimonia fill in the gaps.