Callimachus' Book of Iambi 019924006X, 9780199240067

Citation preview

CALLIMACHUS' Book of Iambi ARND

CLARENDON Iambus VI

22-49

(POxy. XVIII

2171

fr.

2

ii+ fr.

4

+ fr. 5)

KERKHECKER

PRESS 1999

· OXFORD

OXFORD UNIVERSITY

Great Clarendon

PRESS

Street, Oxford oxz 6nP

Oxford Uni\·ersity Press is a department of the UniYersity of Oxford. It furthers the University's objectiYe of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing ,vorldwide in Oxford New York Athens Auckland Bangkok Bogota Buenos Aires Calcutta Cape Town Chennai Dar es Salaam Delhi Florence Hong Kong Istanbul Karachi Kuala Lumpur Madrid Melbourne Mexico City Mumbai Nairobi Paris Sao Paulo Singapore T~1ipei Tokyo T'oronto \:Varsa\Y and associated companies

in Berlin

Ibadan

Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford Uni\'ersity in the CK and in certain other countries

Press

Published in the United States by Oxford University Press Inc., New York © Arnd Kerkhecker 1999 The moral rights of the author have been asserted

Database

right of Oxford Uni,·ersity First published

Press (maker)

1999

All rights n!scrYed. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval systein, or transmitted, in any forn1 or by any means, without the prior permission in writing of Oxf01·d U ni,·ersity Press, or as expressly permitted by law, or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics rights organizations. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the aboYe should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the address abo,·e

i i

You n1ust not circulate this book in any other binding or cover and you must in1pose the same condition on any acquirer British Library

Cataloguing

in Publication

Data

Data available Library

of Congress

Cataloging

in Publication

Data

Kerkhecker, Arnd. CallimachKE[: o1Aq> KE[?(Parsons) p,Ep,ay]µ,lv77?(Parsons) ] . .>ta 1T0l~C[j AvEL]n? (Parsons)

XT/.fc

x~n?

] .E

14 30 34

TJ

)A,\a 1TOl~C[jC

Iambus VI 16-21 39

In fr. 200a, only line 1 can stand as a fragment. At Str. IX 5,17 p. 438, I suggest reading: KaU{µ,axoc µiv ovv cprycivEVTl{i laµ{:3({) ("Tac 'Acppoo£rnc)(,} 0Eocyap OUµ{a)" T~VKacTVlY)TlVV1TEpj:36.,\,\EC0at 1TacacT({icppovdv.

two more lines after 2 1?

ovc£av N orsaVitelli

aldav pap.

vµ,77v 01µ,w oc/!ff KTElVElV TY)CO' dxii[ Cl_]. (!ElCOp,at l.Vlovca 1roAAa

vµEtv? (Rea, Parsons) ENµ,iv KTElVEl,;J{q,(Rea, Coles) Tijco' Evxii[,', Ey]0 o'q,dcoµat 9ovca? (Coles, Rea) 1ro,\,\d, 9'? (Carden, Coles)

Iambus XII l I

12 17 19 20 29

Note on the Text

XXlV

J ..wLB..

]krc7oc? (Rea) include Pfeiffer's Addenda

] . lYEV . [.] _Aicyoc

L1lKYJV Tl/,Lf Iov K

.•..

[

86qr,

KaAAlCTOVKaKov[

86qs:.

Iambus XIII

Dieg.

correct Pfeiffer's linebreaks include Pfeiffer's Addenda

I 506

, E7!

l1r .'/]'>.0' ..

]q>pq,Kal Tpa77[

8i1ef>pq, Ka! Tpa1J[E,av

(Barber) 45

56

. [ . E1 KpOVCE 'l!P......

Introduction

II n8f BEµ,iv

OU

4[vE1KpovcE (Gallavotti) 1JPQ114111Jov (Lloyd-] ones)?

In every other respect, Pfeiffer's edition remains authoritative. For convenience, I give a Lesetext (with brackets and sublinear dots, but omitting half-brackets). This may be the place to mention two other conventions. I for exact quotations, single quotause double quotation-marks tion-marks for paraphrase and the like. References to the Old Testament are to the text of the LXX, parts of which may well have been around for Callimachus to consult.

THIS study is about a book of Iambic poems from the heyday of Ptolem.aic Alexandria, by one of the most accomplished of Greek poets. These poems were lost until the early years of this century, when the rubbish heaps of ancient towns in Egypt began to yield their fragmentary secrets, and a number of papyri restored Callimachus' Iambi to a shadowy existence. The pieces were edited-splendidly edited, and more than once. Enough survives to give at least an idea of each poem. Some are almost complete; none has vanished without trace. We can survey the whole of the collection, and study its design. And yet, these poems have attracted little attention. The bibliography is agreeably slim. They seem to have acquired a reputation for difficulty, and their fragmented condition does not help. It is one purpose of the following chapters to make at least the text (and, perhaps, the poetry) of the Iambi more readily accessible: to explain how the various witnesses (papyri, quotations, etc.) combine, and to spell out the arguments underlying Pfeiffer' s presentation; to distinguish what is firmly established from inference and conjecture; to attempt an integrated interpretation of each poem, and of the Book as a whole. It is, I believe, worth the effort. There is some of Callimachus' finest writing here, and in their variety of theme and manner, the Iambi present a microcosm of his art. In particular, the Iambi offer a paradigm for Callimachus' attitude to the literature of the past. Iambus I is spoken by the ghost of Hipponax coming up from Hades to lecture the scholars of Alexandria. In the new setting, he finds new things

2

Introduction

to say. The opening poem is not just an etude in the style of an old master-it makes explicit the considered re-creation and adaptation of choliambic poetry. The choice of tradition ('genre'), the very fact that there is such a choice, is significant. In Callimachus' muvre, no single genre dominates. In the Alexandrian Library, the entire literary past has become available. For the scholar, everything is within reach. The poet can pick and choose. This is what Callimachus does, and what he defends in Iambus XIII. When Callimachus chooses to write in (and about) the Iambic tradition, we can ask: why Iambi? Why Hipponax? What does this particular type of poetry mean to Callimachus and his Hellenistic readers? How do his own Iambi compare? Are they different? We shall still find an Iambic 'I', though rather more civilized than aggressive. We shall still find judgements, moral and aesthetic, though the communal (Archilochean?) agenda of the /.rnipoi at the cvµ,?Tocwv give way to an individual's (Hipponactean?) concern with manners. To this individual, poetry and philology matter, but so do friendship and love. Moralizing goes beyond the pedantries of poetological programmes. The academic setting of Iambus I provides the scene for general moral reflection. We shall still find individuals attacked and named, but these names may be fictitious. The pungent taste of cantankerous individuality is conjured up with great skill, but the emphasis moves away from proclaiming judgements to reflections about judging. Iambus IV is about a quarrel, yet we do not learn what the quarrel is about. Instead, we concentrate on how those quarrelling behave. Callimachus' interest is in manners. He is conducting a critical experiment. The setting is still recognizably contemporary, but for the purpose of his experiment, he can afford to fictionalize, to generalize reality. The studied crudity of the old Iambus appears ennobled, the hatred has mellowed. If Callimachus' choice of genre is significant, it should be instructive to set his new civilized invective against the background of the tradition. This could be done in two ways. Firstly, through direct comparison of individual poems. This is attempted, where possible, in the following chapters (especially

Introduction

3

for Iambus V). Secondly, by reconstructing the views commonly held about Iambic poetry, its general image. The image of Iambic poets is of particular interest, because it is Callimachus' starting-point, defined for him by his audience. Whatever he wants to make of the old Iambus, this is where he has to meet his readers. However, I cannot offer full discussion of the Iambic image here. I shall briefly outline what could be done, and summarize the results. One could present the Iambic image in three steps: first, a sketch of the Wirkungsgeschichte of the three canonic Iambicists (Archilochus, Hipponax, Semonides); second, a survey of the demise of the Iambus, and the continued use of its metres (especially trimeter and scazon) in later Hellenistic and Imperial poetry; and third, an account of (chol-)Iambic poets contemporary with Callimachus. Why confine oneself to the three canonic Iambicists? Because only for Archilochus and Hipponax is there enough evidence. Why, then, include Semonides? Because the selection is old,1 and may well be indebted to Callimachus' IUvaKEc. 2 A discussion of Iambic Wirkungsgeschichte can draw on the following sources: testimonia vetera (especially pre-Hellenistic references and quotations); scholarly work (and Lives); Hellenistic epigrams. 3 First, Archilochus: a figure of pan-Hellenic fame, much like Homer and Hesiod.+ His poetry is recited at (rhapsodic) aywvEc,5 a biographical legend arises,6 and he receives cultic worship (like Homer, Hesiod, Pindar, Aeschylus, Sophocles). 7 There are numerous papyri (of Ptolemaic and Roman date). 1 The date of the 'Alexandrian Canon' is problematic, but the lists are the work of antiquity. See Pfeiffer (1968) 203-8, esp. 204 on the Iambicists. I hope to publish my work on the canon elsewhere. 2 For later work based on the Il{vaKEC, cf. Ar. Byz., Ilpoc Tovc Kai\i\,µ6.xov Il{vaKac (frr. 368f Slater), with Pfeiffer (1968) 133f. ·' Gabathuler (1937). 4 Von Blumenthal (1922); Semerano (1951); Bossi (1981). Collections of testimonia in the editions of I. Liebel (Leipzig 1812) and G. Tarditi (Rome 1968). Cf. Pohlmann (1994) 14f. ' Heraclit. 22 B 42 D.-K.; cf. Pl. Ion 531 A, 532 A; Clearch. fr. 92 Wehrli; West (1974) 18f. '' West (1974) 26f; Lefkowitz (1981) 25-31; C. W. Muller (1985). ' Farnell (1921) 363-5, and 420-6; Pfister (1909. 1912). Cf. Pohlmann (1994) 15 (with 106,50).

4

Introduction

A clear image emerges from the early references (Heraclitus, Pindar, Critias, Plato, comedy), and is found everywhere in later literature. Archilochus is the great hater, the railing reviler ((311.accfn11;,oc), whose disgraceful frankness (1rappYJda)and abusive slander (11.oi8opfa)drive Lycambes and his daughters into suicide. 8 Hipponax is much more obscure. 9 His claim to fame is the 'invention' of the scazon. 10 Otherwise, he is hardly more than a name. There is altogether less material, and very few traces before the Hellenistic age. 11 His poems, it appears, remained forgotten until the end of the fourth century. So far, all extant papyri are of Roman date. His image in the Hellenistic epigrams closely resembles that of Archilochus, 12 and the same is true for biographical legend. Hipponax, too, hurls poems against his personal enemies, Bupalus and Athenis. They, too, commit suicide. 13 Finally, Semonides. He is even more shadowy. (Was he included just to make up a triad?) Very little survives, so far no papyri. His name is often dropped from the canon, and he lacks any distinct profile.'" In short, the image of Iambic poetry is determined by the image of the classics, above all Archilochus. Although (or because) there is a clear gradation of prominence between the three canonic Iambicists, the picture of Iambic mood, temper, character is homogeneous. Even Theocritus, while setting himself against the communis opinio, treats Archilochus and Hipponax alike. ' The only exception: Theoc. Ep. 21; cf. Bing (1988). Call. fr. 380; Degani ( 1984) 173-6; cf. frr. 384,39; 544; Hermipp. Toti KaAA,µaxE