Representations of Truth and Falsehood in Hellenistic Poetry A dissertation submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Cincinnati in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy In the Department of Classics Of the College of Arts and Sciences by Kathleen Kidder B.A. University of Texas at Austin February 2018 Committee Chair: Kathryn J. Gutzwiller, Ph.D. Abstract This dissertation examines how five Hellenistic poets represent the processes of evaluating truth and falsehood. Applying the philosophic concept of a criterion of truth, I demonstrate that each poetic persona interrogates truth by suggesting a different kind of criterion. Due to the indebtedness of Hellenistic poetry to previous literature, the second chapter summarizes the evolution of pertinent vocabulary for truth and falsehood, tracking the words’ first appearances in early poetry to their reappearance in Hellenistic verse. In my third chapter, I discuss notions concerning the relationship between truth and poetry throughout Greek literary history. The fourth chapter covers Aratus’ Phaenomena and Nicander’s Theriaca, two poems containing scientific subject matter framed as true. Yet, as I argue, the poems’ contrasting treatments of myths attest to the differences in the knowability of the respective material. In the Phaemomena, a poem about visible signs, Aratus’ myths offer a model for interpreting an ordered Stoic universe via regular and perceptible signs. By contrast, Nicander’s myths replicate the uncertainty of his subject matter (deadly creatures and remedies) and the necessity of direct experience as a criterion. The dichotomy between certainty and uncertainty applies also to the fifth chapter, which analyzes the narratorial voices of Callimachus in the Aetia and Apollonius of Rhodes in the Argonautica. While the Callimachean persona exhibits a confident attitude in assessing sources and information, employing personal experience as a criterion, the Apollonian narrator expresses doubt and implies a lack of a definite criterion. The sixth chapter, devoted to Lycophron’s Alexandra, focuses on how the prophetess Cassandra assesses truth through her understanding of hidden inner essences. Cassandra’s strategy, however, contrasts with that of the messenger, who claims to report her speech accurately but fails to comprehend or believe it. Ultimately, in comparing the treatments of truth and falsehood in these five works, I show that ii the combination of poetic language, allusion, and myth can embody the methods for reconciling certainty and doubt. iii © 2018 Kathleen Kidder iv Preface The question of truth and falsehood is one of the fundamental issues underlying the study and reception of Ancient Greek poetry. Can poems, with their beautiful and ordered language, reveal deeper truths—truths about the world, society, and self? What role, moreover, does falsehood play in poetic production? Yet how can a person distinguish truth from falsehood, not just in verse, but in all spheres in existence? Is such a distinction even possible? These are the questions that motivate my analysis of five Hellenistic poems. During this time, not only had prose usurped poetry’s role as purveyor of knowledge, the notion of truth was further complicated by a variety of factors. While the philosophic schools debated the criterion of truth, the Library of Alexandria stored an accumulation of information, much of which was conflicting. In this dissertation I consider conflict, not just between truth and falsehood, but also between order and chaos, certainty and doubt, clarity and ambiguity, seen and unseen, and being and seeming. v Acknowledgments This dissertation is the culmination of ten years of training in Classics. The past two years of fellowship funding, from the Department of Classics and the University of Cincinnati, have facilitated this project, allowing more time for research and conference travel. Yet aside from these obvious requirements of time and financial support, numerous individuals have assisted in the genesis and completion of the work. I wish to thank them here. I begin by offering my profound thanks to my advisor, Kathryn Gutzwiller, who has supported me throughout my graduate career. Her insightful comments on my chapters aided me in developing and sharpening my arguments and analyses. Most importantly, she has taught me, to steal her metaphor, to look at the forest, not just the trees. At the same time, I would like to thank the members of the dissertation committee for their comments and advice. Richard Hunter offered bibliography and suggestions for revising some arguments, as did Daniel Markovic and Susan Prince, bringing in their own specialties. In addition to the committee members, there are several others here at UC whom I would like to acknowledge: Kathleen Lynch, Jack Davis, the late Getzel Cohen, Barbara Burrell, and Lauren Ginsberg. I would also like to thank the library staff: the retired Jacquie Riley, Mike Braunlin, Cade Stevens, and all of the student workers. Thank you also to Jenny Lin, Joseph Katemkamp, and John Wallrodt for assistance with administrative and technical issues. Finally, I would like to thank Angelica Wisenbarger, Andy Lund, and Carina Moss. All three kindly agreed to look at portions of the final draft for typos and errors. Over the past several years, I have received invaluable support from the following friends: Morgan Calahan, Erica Allseitz, Sarah Daigneault, Emily Wetzel, Molly Donnermeyer, Liz Barnes, Katie Durante, and Amy Rudnik. I express the deepest thanks to my partner Steven vi Kemple, who has supported me in every way possible, emotionally and intellectually. Not only has he used his librarian skills for proofreading and checking my bibliography, he has encouraged me to pursue my ideas in research, visual work, and performance. Without him, finishing this dissertation would have been possible, but much less pleasant. Finally, I thank my parents, Kay and Harold Kidder. Despite living far away in Texas, they have been with me every step of this process. I dedicate this dissertation to them. vii Table of Contents Chapter 1: Introduction ............................................................................................................... 1 Chapter 2: The Vocabulary of Truth and Falsehood .............................................................. 17 Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 17 Truth .......................................................................................................................................... 18 ἀλήθεια and ἀληθής .............................................................................................................. 18 ἔτυμος, ἐτήτυμος, and ἐτεός ................................................................................................. 20 νημερτής and ἀτρεκής ........................................................................................................... 22 Truth in Hellenistic Poetry .................................................................................................... 24 Falsehood .................................................................................................................................. 27 ψεῦδος and ψεύδομαι ............................................................................................................ 27 Falsehood in Hellenistic Poetry ............................................................................................ 28 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................ 29 Chapter 3: Background .............................................................................................................. 32 Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 32 Poetry ........................................................................................................................................ 33 Homer ....................................................................................................................................... 33 Hesiod ................................................................................................................................... 38 Pindar .................................................................................................................................... 42 Sixth and Fifth Century Criticism ............................................................................................. 44 Philosophy................................................................................................................................. 48 Plato ...................................................................................................................................... 48 Aristotle................................................................................................................................. 53 The Early Stoics .................................................................................................................... 57 Chapter 4: Aratus and Nicander ............................................................................................... 61 Introduction ..............................................................................................................................