Orphic Tradition and the Birth of the Gods

Dwayne A Meisner install download

https://textbookfull.com/product/orphic-tradition-and-the-birth-
of-the-gods-dwayne-a-meisner/

Download more ebook instantly today - get yours now at textbookfull.com

We believe these products will be a great fit for you. Click
the link to download now, or visit textbookfull.com
to discover even more!

Towards the Humanisation of Birth: A study of epidural

analgesia and hospital birth culture 1st Edition
Elizabeth Newnham

https://textbookfull.com/product/towards-the-humanisation-of-
birth-a-study-of-epidural-analgesia-and-hospital-birth-
culture-1st-edition-elizabeth-newnham/

Hippocrates’ Oath and Asclepius’ Snake: The Birth of

the Medical Profession T. A. Cavanaugh

https://textbookfull.com/product/hippocrates-oath-and-asclepius-
snake-the-birth-of-the-medical-profession-t-a-cavanaugh/

Transcendent Wisdom of the Maya The Ceremonies and

Symbolism of a Living Tradition Gabriela Jurosz-Landa

https://textbookfull.com/product/transcendent-wisdom-of-the-maya-
the-ceremonies-and-symbolism-of-a-living-tradition-gabriela-
jurosz-landa/

Reincarnation in Tibetan Buddhism: The Third Karmapa

and the Invention of a Tradition Ruth Gamble

https://textbookfull.com/product/reincarnation-in-tibetan-
buddhism-the-third-karmapa-and-the-invention-of-a-tradition-ruth-
gamble/
Life Hereafter: The Rise and Decline of a Tradition 1st
Edition Paul Crittenden

https://textbookfull.com/product/life-hereafter-the-rise-and-
decline-of-a-tradition-1st-edition-paul-crittenden/

Badiou and the German Tradition of Philosophy Jan

Völker

https://textbookfull.com/product/badiou-and-the-german-tradition-
of-philosophy-jan-volker/

Globalists The End of Empire and the Birth of

Neoliberalism Quinn Slobodian

https://textbookfull.com/product/globalists-the-end-of-empire-
and-the-birth-of-neoliberalism-quinn-slobodian/

The last pirate of New York a ghost ship a killer and

the birth of a gangster nation First Edition Cohen

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-last-pirate-of-new-york-a-
ghost-ship-a-killer-and-the-birth-of-a-gangster-nation-first-
edition-cohen/

Americans and the Birth of Israel Lawrence J. Epstein

https://textbookfull.com/product/americans-and-the-birth-of-
israel-lawrence-j-epstein/
Orphic Tradition and
the Birth of the Gods
Orphic Tradition and
the Birth of the Gods
dwayne a. meisner

1
1
Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers
the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education
by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University
Press in the UK and certain other countries.

Published in the United States of America by Oxford University Press

198 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016, United States of America.

© Oxford University Press 2018

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in

a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the
prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted
by law, by license, or under terms agreed with the appropriate reproduction
rights organization. Inquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the
above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the
address above.

You must not circulate this work in any other form

and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer.

CIP data is on file at the Library of Congress

ISBN 978–​0–​19–​066352–​0

9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Printed by Sheridan Books, Inc., United States of America
Contents

Preface vii
List of Abbreviations xi

1. Introducing Orphic Theogonies 1

The Orphic Question 3
Ancient Theogonic Traditions 18
Theogonic Hymns 33
Mythical Poetry and Philosophical Prose 43
2. The Derveni Papyrus 51
Orphic Ritual and the Derveni Author 53
The Reconstruction of the Derveni Poem 65
Zeus and the Act of Swallowing 75
3. The Eudemian Theogony and Early Orphic Poetry 87
The Cosmic Egg in Aristophanes’ Birds 88
The Primordial Deities of the Eudemian Theogony 94
The Orphic Hymn(s) to Zeus 101
Demeter and Dionysus in Early Orphic Poetry 114
4. The Hieronyman Theogony 119
The Evidence: Apologist versus Neoplatonist 122
Reconstruction: Athenagoras, Damascius, and Bernabé 127
The Narrative Pattern of Chronos and Phanes 139
The Succession Myth and the Incest of Zeus 150
5. The Rhapsodies 159
Introduction 161
vi contents

Rhapsodic Theogony or Rhapsodic Collection? 170

Chronos, the Cosmic Egg, and Phanes 187
Three Nights or One? 200
The Rhapsodic Succession Myth 210
Zeus the Demiurge Swallows Phanes the Paradigm 219
6. Dionysus in the Rhapsodies 237
Modern Interpretations of the Zagreus Myth 239
Ancient Interpretations of Dionysus and the Titans 253
The Story of Dionysus in the Rhapsodies 273
7. Conclusion 279

Bibliography 285
Index 299
Index Locorum 307
Index of Orphic Fragments 315
Preface

The topic of Orphism is a controversial one, and to many people it is enig-

matic too. While some students and scholars might prefer to avoid Orphism
and its controversies, there are a few others who bring outstanding expertise
to the discussion. In fact, some of the biggest names in the fields of Greek lit-
erature and religion have written important works on this topic, such as the
recently departed Walter Burkert and Martin West. And so, in order to research
this bizarre ancient phenomenon we call Orphism, one must stand upon the
shoulders of some of the biggest giants in Classical scholarship, and at the
same time dive into the midst of one of the biggest debates on Greek religion.
No wonder many shy away from it. However, as complicated and controver-
sial as the topic of Orphism may appear, it is not incomprehensible. So with a
humble recognition that there will be little certainty, I present a study of Orphic
theogonies in the hopes that, whether or not I can contribute something val-
uable to the ongoing debates on Orphism, at least I can make this topic more
accessible to those who have not dedicated years of their lives to researching
it. “I will sing to those who know” (OF 1 B)—​and hopefully in the process, this
topic will catch the interest of those who do not know.
Having first become acquainted with scholarship on Orphism when I was
doing research on the Dionysiac mysteries for my master’s thesis, I quickly
became fascinated with the ongoing debates about Orphism as I read modern
scholars from one end of the spectrum to another. Reading at the same time
early scholars who saw Orphism as a unified religious movement and more re-
cent and skeptical scholars who see it as mainly a literary phenomenon, I was
never entirely convinced by either side of the argument. As a newcomer to the
viii preface

modern discourse on Orphism, in a sense I have the advantage of a new per-

spective, neither weighed down by outdated models nor deeply involved in the
process of deconstruction, but I also have the disadvantage of having far less ex-
pertise than some of the scholars who are already engaged in Orphic discourse.
Therefore, this book is not an attempt to propose an alternative definition of
Orphism, or to critique the brilliant work that has already been done on the
Orphic gold tablets or the Derveni Papyrus. Instead, I concentrate on a set of
fragments that has received less attention in recent years, by attempting to re-
construct four Orphic theogonies, based on the recent collection of the Orphic
Fragments by Alberto Bernabé. I hope this book will contribute to discourse on
Orphism by applying new models and interpretations to these often-​neglected
fragments, while also making that discourse more accessible to students and
scholars who are new to the topic by explaining the Orphic literary tradition in
the simplest terms possible.
This book is an adaptation of my doctoral thesis, which really did two
things: first, it was a reconstruction of the literary history of Orphic theogonies,
and that is the subject of this book; and second, it sought to explain the met-
aphysical allegories of the Neoplatonists who often referred to the Orphic
Rhapsodies. These complex allegorical interpretations are the reason why we
have more than two hundred fragments of the Rhapsodies, but few modern
scholars have paid significant attention to explaining these interpretations
and determining how the Neoplatonists manipulated their presentation of the
text of the Rhapsodies. My work on Neoplatonic allegories has been mostly re-
served for a future project, but it does come into play in this book when dealing
with fragments from Neoplatonic sources. In every case I have endeavoured to
keep the discussion of allegory as brief and simple as possible, always limited
to that which is necessary for the reconstruction of the Orphic poems.
A note on translations: All translations of ancient texts are mine unless oth-
erwise noted in the footnotes. Many of my translations have been done in con-
sultation with recent published editions, and these are noted in the footnotes
as well. Some of the modern sources I consulted while doing this study are in
foreign languages (e.g., Lobeck in Latin, Brisson in French), and where these
authors are quoted, I have translated them into English for the sake of reada-
bility, with few exceptions. These translations are also my own.
In the development of this monograph, I have received guidance and
direction from various scholars to whom I owe a debt of gratitude. Since
this project began as a doctoral thesis, the first person to acknowledge is
Christopher G. Brown, my thesis supervisor whose philological expertise
has directed me many times to texts and ideas that have profoundly shaped
my arguments. A heartfelt thank you to Anne-​France Morand, the only other
Canadian scholar (as far as I know) who specializes in Orphism, for agreeing
to be my external examiner and for always being willing to offer me valuable
advice. Special thanks to Radcliffe Edmonds, for reviewing this book and
 preface ix

offering encouraging feedback. I am grateful for the thoughtful comments

of the members of my thesis committees, including Bonnie MacLachlan,
Charles Stocking, Bernd Steinbock, and Dan Smith; and the institutional
support of the Department of Classics at the University of Western Ontario
and Campion College at the University of Regina. During my doctoral de-
gree, my research was supported by funding from the Department of
Classical Studies at the University of Western Ontario, the Ontario Graduate
Scholarship, and two scholarships awarded by the Social Sciences and
Humanities Research Council of Canada.
Over the years, there have been many others who have contributed in
some small way to the personal and professional development that have
made this book possible. The first to be acknowledged is Ken Leyton-​Brown,
who acted as my advisor during my master’s degree when I was studying the
Dionysiac mysteries and since then has continued to be a valuable mentor
and colleague. I appreciate the fact that my family and friends, and especially
my wife, Amanda, have tolerated years of both geographical and personal
isolation while I have spent large chunks of time on research. Somewhere
within the cultural cluster of ideas and practices that included Orphic liter-
ature, Bacchic mysteries, and Platonic philosophy, the Greeks discovered
something universal and inexpressable about human nature and about
the universe. It is my hope that through this book some small fragment
of that mystical discovery might become slightly more comprehensible to
modern minds.
Abbreviations

Not all ancient authors and works are cited using abbreviations, but those that
are abbreviated follow the format of citations used by Alberto Bernabé in his
recent edition of Poetae Epici Graeci: Testimonia et Fragmenta, Pars II, Fasc.
1–​3 (Leipzig: Teubner, 2004–​2007). The abbreviations used most frequently
are these:

OF # B = # K (e.g., OF 243 B = 168 K): OF = Orphicorum Fragmenta (in some

cases, OT = Orphicorum Testimonia); B = Bernabé; K = Kern.
DP = Derveni Papyrus
HH = Homeric Hymns
OH = Orphic Hymns

Some scholarly journals, reference works, books with multiple authors, and
collections of inscriptions and fragments are abbreviated as follows:

BNP Brill’s New Pauly (eds. H. Cancik, C. Salazar et al., Leiden: Brill,
2005; accessed at http://​referenceworks.brillonline.com/​browse/​
brill-​s-​new-​pauly)
CQ Classical Quarterly
D-​K H. Diels and W. Kranz (Die Fragment der Vorsokratiker, Vols. 1–​2,
10th ed., Berlin: Weidmannsche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1961)
FGrH Die Fragmente der griechischen Historiker (ed. F. Jacoby et al.,
Leiden: Brill, 1923–​1958)
GGM Geographi Graeci Minores (ed. K. Müller, Hildesheim: G. Olms,
[1855–​1861] 1965)
xii abbreviations

IG Inscriptiones Graecae, Vols. 1–​12 (ed. O. Kern et al., Berlin: De

Gruyter, 1913–​2012)
JHS Journal of Hellenic Studies
KPT T. Kouremenos, G. Parássoglou, and K. Tsantsanoglou (The Derveni
Papyrus, Florence: Casa Editrice Leo S. Olschki, 2006)
KRS G. S. Kirk, J. Raven, and M. Schofield (The Presocratic Philosophers,
2nd ed., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983)
KTU Keilalphabetische Texte aus Ugarit (Ugaritic Baal Cycle; cited in Smith
1994; Smith and Pitard, 2009)
LfgrE Lexikon des frühgriechischen Epos (ed. B. Snell et al.,
Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, [1982] 2004)
LIMC Lexicon Iconographicum Mythologiae Classicae (eds. H. Ackermann
and J. R. Gisler, Zürich: Artemis, 1981–​1997)
LSJ Liddell-​Scott-​Jones (Greek-​English Lexicon, 9th ed., Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 1996)
M-​W R. Merkelbach and M. L. West (Fragmenta Hesiodea, Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 1967)
PSI Pernigotti, C. (Papiri della Società Italiana, Vol. 15, Florence: Firenze
University Press, 2008)
SEG Supplementum Epigraphicum Graecum. Vols. 1–​60 (eds. A. Chaniotis
et al., Leiden: Brill, 1923–​2010)
SVF Stoicorum Veterum Fragmenta. Vols. 1–​3 (ed. H. von Arnim,
Stuttgart: Teubner, 1964 [1903–​1905])
TrGF Tragicorum Graecorum Fragmenta. Vols. 1–​5 (eds. B. Snell et al.,
Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1971–​2004)
ZPE Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik
1
Introducing Orphic Theogonies

The aim of this study is to sort out the history, structure, and contents of four
Orphic theogonies, in the hope that some of their major themes and concerns
might be clarified. According to most modern reconstructions of Orphic lit-
erature by scholars such as Otto Kern, Martin West, and Alberto Bernabé,
there were at least four major Orphic theogonies: (1) the “Derveni Theogony,”
which is the poem underlying the commentary contained in the Derveni
Papyrus (fourth century bc),1 and three other Orphic theogonies known to the
Neoplatonist Damascius (sixth century ad): (2) the “Eudemian Theogony” (fifth
century bc), named after Eudemus, a student of Aristotle who made references
to an Orphic theogony in his philosophical works;2 (3) the “Hieronyman
Theogony” (second century bc), a Hellenistic version known to two obscure
authors named Hieronymus and Hellanicus;3 and (4) the Rhapsodies, or
“Rhapsodic Theogony” (first century bc/​ad), which was the longest version
and the only one that Damascius considered current.4 The Derveni, Eudemian,
Hieronyman, and Rhapsodic theogonies are preserved only in fragments by
prose authors, mostly philosophers and apologists, and these fragments have
been collected recently in Bernabé’s Poetae Epici Graeci in a way that reflects
modern assumptions about what a Greek theogony might have looked like.5

1. Kouremenos, Parássoglou, and Tsantsanoglou 2006 (hereafter referred to as KPT);

Bernabé 2007a. Other important editions are found in Janko 2002; Betegh 2004; and Tortorelli
Ghidini 2006.
2. Damascius, De Principiis 124 (3.162.19 Westerink) (OF 20 I B = 24 K).
3. Damascius, De Principiis 123 bis (3.160.17 Westerink) (OF 69 I B = 54 K). These dates are
disputable: Brisson (1995: 394–​396) dates the Hieronyman theogony to the second century ad, but
West (1983: 225–​226) suggests that it was written shortly after the third century bc.
4. Damascius, De Principiis 123 (3.159.17 Westerink) (OF 90 B = 60 K); Suda, s.v. “Ὀρφεύς”
(3.564.30 Adler) (OF 91 B = 223d K).
5. For all Orphic fragments, I rely on Bernabé’s collection of epic fragments in Poetae Epici
Graeci (2004, 2006, 2007a), but I also consult the Orphicorum Fragmenta in Kern (1922) for tex-
tual comparison and history of scholarship. Fragments from Bernabé’s collection are cited as OF #
B, and fragments from Kern’s collection as (OF) # K. For most fragments, I note first the original
2 orphic tradition and the birth of the gods

Scholars have assumed that each of these theogonies was a lengthy, chron-
ological narrative that stretched from the beginning of creation to the current
state of the cosmos, similar to the format of Hesiod’s Theogony. From this
perspective, even though it seems clear that Orphic practitioners (whoever
they might have been) used poetic texts in their rituals, it has been difficult
to determine how a theogony of this type might have been used in ritual per-
formance. If, on the other hand, Orphic theogonies were shorter narratives
that functioned as hymns to particular gods, then instead we might call them
theogonic hymns, similar to the Homeric Hymns in the sense that they describe
the attributes of deities and narrate the way these deities stepped into their
spheres of influence. If we view the texts in this way, then the particular perfor-
mance contexts and varied purposes of these texts become far more complex
than a lengthy theogony and the puzzle might become impossible to solve,
but the basic function of these texts in ritual might become simpler to im-
agine in some cases. Many modern discussions about Orphic ritual have been
driven by the controversy and confusion over what Orphism was. This confu-
sion stems not only from our lack of knowledge about Orphic ritual, but also
from our misunderstanding of the nature of the texts. Therefore, this study is
about the texts. What were Orphic theogonies, and what role did they play in
Orphism? And how does a reading of Orphic theogonies influence our defini-
tion of Orphism?
In this book, I attempt to reconstruct the history of Orphic theogonies
based on Claude Lévi-​Strauss’ concept of bricolage.6 As I argue in this chapter,
rather than viewing these theogonies through the rigid model of a manuscript
tradition, it would be preferable to interpret each individual text or fragment
as the original creation of a bricoleur: an anonymous author who drew from
the elements of myth that were available at the time, and reconfigured these
elements in a way that was relevant to the pseudepigrapher’s particular context.
Beginning with the Derveni theogony, I point out that it combines well-​known
elements of Hesiod’s Theogony with elements of earlier Near Eastern mythology
to create a profound but enigmatic narrative, centered around Zeus and the act
of swallowing. Moving on to the Eudemian theogony, I argue that the scattered
references to Orphic poetry in the works of Plato, Aristotle, and others do not
necessarily refer to the same theogony, and even if they did, this did not nec-
essarily mean that they contained the earliest renditions of the Orphic Hymn
to Zeus or the story of Dionysus Zagreus. In ­chapter 4, I review our only two
sources for the Hieronyman theogony and suggest that in this case we might
actually be dealing with two separate poems. The scattered fragments of the
three earliest Orphic theogonies suggest a varied and fluid tradition, in which

author, and then both Bernabé’s and Kern’s editions. For example: Damascius, De Principiis 124
(3.162.19 Westerink) (OF 20 I B = 24 K).
6. Lévi-​Strauss 1966: 16–​36.
 introducing orphic theogonies 3

the format and content of the poems were subject to change, since each poem
was the individual product of the creativity of a bricoleur.
The fifth and sixth chapters concentrate on the Orphic Rhapsodies, which
constitute the largest body of fragments because the text was still current at
the time of the Neoplatonists. Responding to a recent argument by Radcliffe
Edmonds that the Rhapsodies could have been a collection of twenty-​four
poems, rather than one poem in twenty-​four books,7 I agree with Edmonds that
this is possible, but I argue that one of these books must have contained a con-
tinuous narrative of six generations of divine rulers, with a particular emphasis
on the character and actions of Phanes and Zeus, in addition to Dionysus. This
emphasis on Phanes and Zeus forms the background of ­chapter 6, where I re-
view both ancient and modern interpretations of the story of Dionysus Zagreus
and his dismemberment by the Titans. Long thought to have been the cen-
tral myth of the Orphic religion, this story has always been at the center of
the modern debate on Orphism. One of the most controversial aspects of this
story centers around its age: if the story was told in the Archaic Period, then
it is more likely that it served as the central myth of Orphism; but more skep-
tical scholars have argued that certain elements of this myth were introduced
later, by the Neoplatonist Olympiodorus (sixth century ad) or even by modern
scholars. In c­ hapter 6, I read the myth of Dionysus and the Titans in the one
literary context where we are actually certain that it appeared: as one episode in
the six-​generation myth of the Orphic Rhapsodies. I conclude that in this con-
text the myth reveals as much about Zeus as it does about Dionysus.

The Orphic Question

Whenever there is a discussion of Orphica, or whenever we label anything

“Orphic,” underlying this designation are three interrelated topics: (a) a legend,
(b) a set of ritual practices, and (c) a literary tradition.
(a) First, the legend is about the singer and musician Orpheus who appears
in mainstream Greek mythology. This is the Orpheus whose music enchanted
the animals and trees, who joined Jason and the Argonauts on their adven-
ture and was able to out-​sing the Sirens, and who used music to make his way
through the underworld in an attempt to bring back his wife, Eurydice. The
Orpheus of legend was known for his music since at least the sixth century bc,
when the lyric poet Ibycus referred to him as “famous-​named Orpheus.”8 While

7. Edmonds 2013: 148–​159.

8. West (2011: 120–​122) suggests that the Argonautic adventure appeared in the tenth or elev-
enth century bc, based on the -​εύς ending found on Linear B tablets (cf. Atreus, Odysseus). But
note the form Ὀρφῆς in Ibycus, fr. 306 Page (Priscian. Inst. 6.92). A fragment of Simonides (fr. 384
Page) refers to the enchanting effect of Orpheus’ music on nature, and Orpheus’ name appears
4 orphic tradition and the birth of the gods

the legend of Orpheus the Argonaut had early roots, the earliest evidence of his
katabasis does not appear until the fifth century, in a brief passage of Euripides’
Alcestis (962–​966). In this passage, Orpheus is successful in bringing his wife
back from the dead, but in other early versions of his katabasis, such as the one
mentioned in Plato’s Symposium, he fails to do this for one reason or another.9
Because of the mystical quality of his music and because of his experiences
in the underworld, by the fifth century the legendary figure of Orpheus was
considered an appropriate culture hero for the foundation of mystery cults.10
(b) The role of Orpheus as a culture hero in Greek legend is the focus of
the second topic labeled “Orphic,” which consists of the cult practices he was
believed to have founded. Here he is the subject of a debate that has continued
for nearly two centuries about the nature and existence of what earlier scholars
called “Orphism”—​that is, a group of religious communities who practised a
reformed version of Greek religion that they believed to have been founded
by Orpheus, and to have used Orphic texts as scriptures. Despite the opinions
of earlier scholars,11 it is now generally believed that this type of Orphism
never existed as a definable institution or religious community. More skeptical
scholars prefer to speak only of an Orphic literary tradition, but recently it has
also become acceptable to speak of “Orphics” in the sense of ritual practitioners
who used Orphic texts or adhered to Orphic doctrines. The Orphics were nei-
ther a distinct, coherent sect nor authors in a strictly literary tradition but, as
the shifting debates have gradually been making clear, they were something in
between. Whatever conclusions we may draw about the nature of “Orphism,”
one of its most important distinguishing features, if indeed it existed, might
have been the use of texts in ritual.
(c) The third component of a discussion of Orphica is about those very
texts. Certain literary works were ascribed to Orpheus as a way of attaching
prophetic authority to the texts, and they featured certain mythical themes
that differed somewhat from the mainstream tradition. While the idea of an
Orphic religious community has long been debated, the existence of a tradi-
tion of Orphic texts is indisputable. Some of the texts are extant, such as the
eighty-​seven Orphic Hymns addressed to a wide variety of deities (possibly from
the second century ad)12 and the Orphic Argonautica, a 1,400-​line hexameter
poem in which Orpheus tells his own story (fourth century ad).13 But most of

on a sixth-​century relief sculpture depicting the Argonauts (Christopoulos 1991: 213n16; Robbins
1982: 5–​7).
9. Orpheus fails either because of his lack of heroic manliness, as in Plato’s Symposium
179d–​e, or because he looks back at Eurydice, as in later versions (Vergil, Georgics 4.457–​527; Ovid,
Metamorphoses 10.1–​85).
10. E.g., in Aristophanes, Frogs 1032; see Linforth 1941: 35–​38; Graf 1974: 22–​39.
11. E.g., Creuzer 1822; Macchioro 1930.
12. Ricciardelli 2000: xxx–​xxxi; Morand 2001: 35; Fayant 2014: xxix–​xxx.
13. Vian 1987.
 introducing orphic theogonies 5

the Orphic literary tradition exists now only in fragments, including theogonic
poetry ranging from the Derveni Papyrus (fourth century bc) to the Orphic
Rhapsodies (first century bc/​ad);14 a series of gold tablets inscribed with es-
chatological material and found in graves (fourth century bc to second century
ad);15 other Orphic works known to us by little more than their titles, such
as the Krater, Net, and Robe; and a katabasis of Orpheus that is believed to
have been circulating by the fifth century bc.16 Most of the theogonic fragments
are contained in commentaries of Platonic texts, written by Neoplatonic
philosophers (fourth to sixth centuries ad) who certainly did not identify them-
selves as “Orphic,” nor were they members of a sect called “Orphism,” but
they made frequent references to hexametric poetry about the gods, and they
said that the author of these poems was Orpheus, in the same way that they
referred to Homeric poetry and said the author was Homer.17 These authors
applied allegorical interpretations to the texts in ways that supported their
own philosophical views, so it is often difficult to disentangle one of their al-
legorical interpretations from the text that stood behind it, but it is because of
the Neoplatonists that most of our fragments of Orphic literature have been
preserved.
In this study, the word “Orphism” usually refers to a religious sect that,
whether or not it actually existed, was misrepresented by earlier generations
of modern scholars, and the word “Orphic” refers to either rituals or texts
whose origin or authorship was for some reason ascribed to Orpheus. The
word “Orphic” might also refer to an individual or group who used these texts
and rituals, or to the anonymous author of an Orphic poem, but this does not
necessarily imply membership in a sect called “Orphism.” If there ever was
such a thing as Orphism, its members would have practiced Orphic rituals in
which they used Orphic texts, and they might have called themselves Orphic.
But if there was never such a thing as Orphism, then there were still Greek
individuals who practiced Orphic rituals with the use of Orphic texts, and these

14. West (1983: 75–​79) and Betegh (2004: 61) date the Derveni Papyrus to the late fifth or early
fourth century bc. The date of the Rhapsodies is disputed, with suggestions ranging from the sixth
century bc to the second century ad (West 1983: 261; Bernabé 2004: 97).
15. For place, date, and text of each individual gold tablet, see Graf and Johnston 2013: 4–​47;
Bernabé and San Cristóbal 2008: 241–​272. Most of these were discovered in the nineteenth and
twentieth centuries ad, but more gold tablets continue to be discovered.
16. OF 409–​412 B (Krater), OF 403–​405 B (Net), OF 406–​407 B (Robe); see also Lyre (OF
417–​420 B) and Katabasis (OF 707–​717 B); Suda, s.v. “Ὀρφεύς” (3.564–​565 Adler); West 1983: 10–​13.
17. E.g., Proclus, in Plat. Remp. 2.74.26 Kroll (OF 159 B = 140 K): “the theologian Orpheus
taught/​handed down”; Proclus, in Plat. Remp. 2.207.23 Kroll (OF 176 B = 126 K): “Orpheus
says”; Olympiodorus, in Plat. Phaed. 1.3 (41 Westerink) (OF 190 ΙΙ B = 107, 220 K): “from
Orpheus . . . [they] are taught/​handed down.” Hermias, in Plat. Phaedr. 146.28 Couvr. (OF 128 II
B = 90 K) refers to both Homer and Orpheus as “inspired poets.” Orpheus was associated with
Homer and Hesiod as one of the great poets since the fifth and fourth centuries bc (Linforth
1941: 104). Brisson (1995: 53–​54) counts 176 references to Orphic texts in Proclus, 139 appearing
in his Timaeus commentary alone.
6 orphic tradition and the birth of the gods

people could be reasonably referred to as Orphics. Although there must have

been some common ground among the Orphics, the specific way in which
these texts were used was probably different to some extent in each individual
case, suited to the needs of each particular individual or group, with the re-
sult that a search for a coherently unified community is not likely to succeed.
However, it is worthwhile considering the nature and content of Orphic texts
and inquiring about how they were used in Orphic ritual, because whether or
not there were Orphic communities, this seems to have been what people were
doing with the texts.
Therefore, the “Orphic Question,” so to speak, is whether, to what extent,
and in what ways Orphic texts were used in Greek ritual. There were certain
ritual contexts such as mystery initiations, funeral arrangements, and acts of
personal devotion, in which Greeks at different times and places made use of
texts ascribed to Orpheus, either as individuals or in groups. On this basic point
most scholars would agree, but the question of what specific role these texts
had to play in ritual has sparked one of the greatest debates in modern schol-
arship on ancient Greek religion. The debate began in the 1820s with Friedrich
Creuzer and Christian August Lobeck. Creuzer viewed Orpheus as a major re-
former from the east who revolutionized Greek religion, but Lobeck took a more
cautious position with his monumental work Aglaophamus.18 The basic points
of their disagreement characterized the debate into the early twentieth cen-
tury, as scholars became divided between maximalists and minimalists, or as
they have been recently characterized, “PanOrphists” and “Orpheoskeptics.”19
Prominent representatives of the PanOrphists included Otto Kern, who saw
Orpheus as the prophet of a religious movement, and Macchioro, according to
whom Orphism was a religious community and a prototype of early Christian
communities.20 Two of the most important Orpheoskeptics were Wilamowitz,
who questioned the connection between Orphism and the Bacchic mysteries,
and Linforth, who in 1941 denied that there was ever a coherent sect known as
Orphism. The Greek word Ὀρφικά, as Linforth understood it, referred strictly
to materials belonging to a literary tradition.21 He essentially disproved the ex-
istence of Orphism as a distinct, definable religious community, leading Dodds
to admit a few years later that he had “lost a great deal of knowledge,” because
this “edifice reared by an ingenious scholarship” turned out to be a “house of
dreams.”22

18. Creuzer 1822; Lobeck 1829; see Graf and Johnston 2013: 51.
19. Edmonds 2011c: 4–​8.
20. Kern 1888: 52; Macchioro 1930: 100–​135.
21. Wilamowitz-​ Moellendorff (1932) 1959: 2:190–​ 205; Linforth 1941: ix–​
xiii, 169–​
173,
305–​306.
22. Dodds 1951: 147–​148.
 introducing orphic theogonies 7

Since then, scholars have been more cautious about attempting to define
Orphism or claiming that it had any strong affinities with early Christianity.
Recent studies by Herrero and Jourdan focus instead on the different ways
Christian apologists talked about Orphic texts, ranging from the appropriation
of ideas and images to the negative critique of Orphic myth.23 But with regard
to Orphism itself, the relationship between text and ritual remains an open
question. There are still those who tend toward a minimalist position, such as
Edmonds, who denies the existence of a religious community and expresses
skepticism about labeling the gold tablets “Orphic,” and those who tend toward
a maximalist position, such as Bernabé, who argues that the gold tablets “can
only be Orphic” because they belong to the same “religious movement,” which
therefore must have existed.24 To the less skeptical scholar today, there was
not so much a sect called Orphism as a collection of different scattered groups
or individuals who practised certain types of rituals, people who in some way
made use of Orphic texts. In general, most scholars aim for the middle road,25
rejecting the existence of Orphic communities but accepting that in some way
the texts ascribed to Orpheus were written for and used in a ritual context,
closely related to some of the mystery cults.
Since the time of Linforth, scholarly discussions of Orphic materials have
largely focused on the interpretation of new evidence that has come to light.
The Derveni Papyrus, Olbia bone tablets, and Orphic gold tablets are some of
the very few archaeological records of Orphic cult activity, but in each case the
precise nature of their creation and use remains tantalizingly enigmatic. Of
primary importance is the Derveni Papyrus, a partially burned papyrus scroll
that was discovered in the remains of a funeral pyre in 1962. It is a remark-
able text for many reasons: the earliest surviving papyrus from Greece (fourth
century bc), it preserves the earliest extant fragments of Orphic poetry (sixth
century bc). The Derveni author quotes an Orphic theogony that differs from
Hesiod’s account on a few important points, and he applies his own unique
version of Presocratic philosophy to an allegorical interpretation of the text.26
The Derveni Papyrus is the oldest surviving piece of Orphic literature, and it is
a puzzling but important text, so naturally it has been in the spotlight of schol-
arly attention for the last few decades. Another fascinating discovery was a set of
bone tablets found in an excavation at Olbia in 1978. The inscribed words “life
death life” and “Dio(nysos) Orphic [or Orphics]” on one of the tablets confirm
an association between Orpheus and Bacchic cult, and they reveal an interest

23. Jourdan 2006, 2008; Herrero 2010.

24. Edmonds 1999: 35–​73; 2011b: 257–​270; Bernabé 2011: 68–​101.
25. E.g., Burkert 1982; Graf and Johnston 2013.
26. West 1983: 75–​79; Betegh 2004: 56–​134; Bernabé 2007b: 99–​133.
8 orphic tradition and the birth of the gods

in eschatology.27 The bone tablets supply important evidence on Orphic ritual,

but we still have no idea about their original purpose.
Although some of the Orphic gold tablets were first discovered in the early
nineteenth century, even now archaeologists continue to find gold tablets in
graves.28 Yet the reason why interest has been shown in them is not simply that
they are new discoveries, but that the content of the tablets is at the center of
the debate on Orphism. Since the first scholarly edition of the Petelia (OF 476
B) and Thurii (OF 487–​490 B) tablets was published by Smith and Comparetti
in 1882, the tablets have often been associated with Orphic and Bacchic cult,
and scholars have considered them as evidence of an eschatological concern
in Orphism.29 This view has been challenged by various scholars, including
Zuntz, who in 1971 argued that they were not Orphic but Pythagorean. Zuntz
pointed out that none of the tablets that had yet been discovered made any
reference to Dionysus, but Persephone appears in three of them (either by
name or as the “chthonian queen”), so he associated the tablets with the cult
of Persephone in southern Italy and Sicily.30 However, very soon after the pub-
lication of Zuntz’s Persephone, two tablets were discovered in Thessaly that
clearly demonstrated an association between Dionysus and one of the cults
that produced the tablets. The Hipponion tablet, discovered in 1973, promises
the dead initiate that she “will go along the sacred road on which other glo-
rious initiates and Bacchoi travel.” The ivy-​shaped Pelinna tablets, discovered
in 1987, instruct the initiate to “tell Persephone that the Bacchic one himself
has released you.”31 The discovery of these tablets raised again the possibility
that they were artifacts produced in an Orphic cult. As a result, the connection
between the gold tablets and Orpheus has been established as at least a strong
possibility in the Classical Period. This has led to extensive discussion of the
relevance of these texts to Orphic thought and practice.
Among the many reasons why the gold tablets have attracted so much
attention is that they seem to refer to two topics that are central to what
modern scholars have perceived as Orphism. First, there is eschatology: be-
cause Orpheus had gone to the underworld to rescue his wife, Eurydice, it was
believed that he had obtained special knowledge of the afterlife, and that this

27. West 1982: 17–​29; Betegh 2004: 344. According to Graf and Johnston (2013: 214–​215),
Tablet A reads βίος θάνατος βίος at the top and Διό(νυσος) Ὀρφικοί (or Ὀρφικόν—​they note that “the
edge is damaged”); cf. OF 463–​465 B.
28. The Petelia tablet was discovered in 1836, but not published until 1882 (Smith and
Comparetti 1882: 111). Most recently, eleven tablets from Roman Palestine (second century ad) have
been published by Graf and Johnston 2013: 208–​213.
29. Smith and Comparetti 1882: 111–​118.
30. Zuntz 1971: 277–​286, 381–​393; OF 488–​490 B (Zuntz A1–​3). Linforth never mentions
the tablets in his Arts of Orpheus (Linforth 1941), and West (1983: 26) and Edmonds (2004: 36–​37;
2011b: 257–​260) question their Orphic provenance.
31. OF 474.15–​16, 485.2 B; cf. OF 486.2 B. For more on these tablets, see Bernabé and San
Cristóbal 2008: 9–​94.
 introducing orphic theogonies 9

knowledge was preserved in his poetry. The Greeks associated Orpheus with
mystery cults as their legendary founder, so because a concern with the after-
life seemed important in mystery cults, scholars concluded that Orphism was
also concerned with the afterlife. The gold tablets appear to confirm this con-
clusion because they direct the initiate to take the proper route on his or her
journey through the underworld and to say the proper words to the guardians
by the spring of Memory when they arrive.32 Second, there is anthropogony,
for the statement “I am a child of Earth and starry Sky” on some of the gold
tablets (OF 474–​484 B) has been taken to refer to the origin of humanity out
of the ashes of the Titans, if the gold tablets are interpreted according to the
modern reconstruction of the myth of Dionysus Zagreus. This reconstruction
is as follows: the Titans lure Dionysus toward them with toys; they kill, boil,
roast, and eat him; but this angers Zeus, who strikes them with his lightning
bolt. After this punishment, human beings are created out of their ashes, while
Dionysus is brought back to life by the other gods. Thus we have a heavenly,
Dionysiac nature and an earthly, Titanic nature, and the point of initiation is to
overcome our Titanic nature. This is how Comparetti interpreted the statement
“I am a child of Earth and starry Sky” in the gold tablets—​“Earth” referring
to the Titanic nature and “starry Sky” referring to the Dionysiac—​and recent
scholars have continued to suggest this interpretation.33 But Edmonds has be-
come convinced that this concept of “original sin,” which seems inherent in
the idea of a Titanic nature in humanity, is an invention of modern scholars.
Edmonds argues that the myth of Dionysus Zagreus was not nearly as cen-
tral to Orphic thought as modern scholars have assumed, and largely on this
basis he rejects the notion that the gold tablets refer to the Zagreus myth. He
expresses doubts about whether the tablets had anything to do with Orpheus,
and he refers to them as “the so-​called Orphic gold tablets,” even placing
“Orphic” in quotation marks in his book title.34
It is to these two subjects—​ eschatology and the connection with
Dionysus—​that most scholarly attention has been paid in the Orphic debate
in recent years, even if (in some cases) only for the sake of deconstruction,
and this is largely a consequence of the way Orphism was described a century
ago. It was expected that Orphism, seen as a sort of proto-​Christianity, would
be concerned with such concepts as original sin and the afterlife, that mys-
tery cults would offer salvation from an afterlife of punishment, and that these

32. On the katabasis of Orpheus, see Clark 1979: 95–​124. On Orpheus as a poetic founder of
mysteries, see Graf 1974: 1–​39; Brisson 1995: 2870–​2872. On the gold tablets providing instructions
for the underworld journey, see Edmonds 2004: 29–​109; Bernabé and San Cristóbal 2008; Graf
and Johnston 2013: 94–​166.
33. Smith and Comparetti 1882: 116; Detienne 1979: 68–​72; Christopoulos 1991: 217–​218;
Bernabé and San Cristóbal 2008: 38–​47; Bernabé 2011: 77; Graf and Johnston 2013: 58–​61.
34. Edmonds 1999: 35–​73; 2009: 511–​532; 2013: 296–​390. He is expanding on the same point
made by Linforth (1941: 359–​362).
10 orphic tradition and the birth of the gods

ideas would revolve around the story of a god who is killed and brought back to
life. More recent scholars have rejected this conception of Orphism, and they
cautiously refer to the use of Orphic texts in rituals, but much of the discussion
has remained focused on eschatology and Dionysus. This has perhaps led to an
imbalance in the scholarship, since most Orphic evidence we have is actually
of a different nature: theogonic poetry, hymns to various deities, the legends of
the Argonauts, and a wide variety of other material.
Therefore, Edmonds has a valid point in arguing that the Zagreus myth
was not as central to Orphic myth as scholars once thought, and that it did not
contain an idea of original sin. It was not the central myth of a religious insti-
tution called Orphism, even though the fact remains that the most extensive
set of Orphic theogonic poetry, referred to as the Rhapsodies, seems to have
ended with the story of Dionysus and the Titans. Whether this episode has any
anthropogonic or eschatological significance is open to discussion, but first
and foremost, as I argue in ­chapter 6, the myth’s significance is theogonic.
Zeus sets up Dionysus as the last of a six-​generation succession of kings, but
before Dionysus can claim his rightful position, the Titans kill him and eat
him. However, Athena preserves his heart, Apollo gathers and buries his re-
mains, and Zeus brings him back to life. Dionysus takes his place of honour
among the Olympians, but Zeus remains the king of the gods.35 It appears that
this myth draws the succession myth to a close, putting an end to a series of
challenges to the royal power of Zeus. If this is the case, then the story might
have little to do with anthropogony, at least in the context of the Rhapsodic
narrative.
Whether or not it was central to Orphic doctrine (if indeed there was such
a thing as Orphic doctrine), the myth of Dionysus Zagreus was just one of the
episodes in the Rhapsodies—​one of the most important and climactic episodes,
to be sure—​but it was just one episode. The Rhapsodies themselves were just
one of a group of Orphic theogonic poems in which Dionysus may or may not
have played some kind of role. And theogonies were just one of the genres
represented in Orphic poetry. Likewise, although Dionysus is one of the most
frequently mentioned deities who appear in the Orphic Hymns, he is still just
one of many. He appears in typical Dionysiac roles in OH 45–​54: the reveling
wine god, raised at Nysa and returning from the east to establish his triennial
festivals, leading his company of maenads as he brandishes his thyrsus. There
are references to chthonic Dionysus as the son of Persephone in the Orphic
Hymns, and some of the Hymns have clear resonances with the presentation
of Dionysus in the Rhapsodies, but neither his dismemberment by the Titans

35. OF 280–​336 B. There seem to have been a few different versions of Dionysus’ resurrec-
tion, which may or may not include the following elements: Athena takes his heart (OF 315, 325 B);
Apollo gathers up Dionysus’ remains (OF 305 B); Zeus entrusts Apollo to bury Dionysus (OF 322
B); Zeus puts Dionysus’ heart into a statue (OF 325 B).
 introducing orphic theogonies 11

nor the name of Zagreus is explicitly mentioned.36 Some of the Orphic Hymns
are addressed to chthonic deities, and some fragments of the Rhapsodies deal
with the fate of souls and the underworld, but there is not as much emphasis
on eschatological matters in either the Orphic Hymns or the Rhapsodies as the
modern reconstruction of Orphism would lead one to expect.37 These topics
occupy a small portion of the fragments, while the vast majority of our sources
on Orphic literature concentrate on material that is quite different.
Nevertheless, scholars who lean toward more maximalist positions
argue that the Zagreus myth, although it did not contain an idea of original
sin, still existed from an early time and was one of the unifying themes of
Orphic doctrine. Fritz Graf argues that early Orphic ritual, although it was
“more diffuse” than in later periods, was “also reflected in a common myth
[i.e., the Zagreus myth], the result of mythical bricolage in the late sixth cen-
tury.”38 While acknowledging that there was no monolithic Orphic religion
and that other myths, such as Zeus swallowing Phanes, were just as impor-
tant to Orphic literary tradition as the Zagreus myth, Graf nevertheless argues
that Dionysus was one of the common threads by which Orphic beliefs and
practices “had clear contours and were much more than the weird and inco-
herent phenomena contemporary minimalists [i.e., Edmonds] claim them to
be.”39 Likewise, Alberto Bernabé collects fragments that seem to him to con-
tain doctrinae that agree with other Orphica, even if the ancient authors do
not specifically attest that they have an Orphic source. He does not think that
Orphism can be defined as a coherent set of doctrines, but he still argues that
doctrines are central to defining Orphism. Bernabé acknowledges that be-
cause of the variety of Orphic texts and practitioners, “the doctrines found in
different passages of the Orphic corpus will not be one and the same,” but
this is “counterweighed by the fact that the name of the mythical poet was
associated with specific themes.”40 In other words, the specific doctrines of
any two Orphic texts may not agree on every detail, but Orphism is defined by
a set of doctrinal topics, such as cosmogony, eschatology, and anthropogony.
More precisely, Bernabé and San Cristóbal see Orphism as the only explanation
for combining elements that can also be found in the Eleusinian and Bacchic

36. OH 24.10–​11, 29.8; cf. OH 30.6–​7. Morand 2001: 209–​217. Dionysus’ death is implied in
the epithet “thrice-​born” in OH 30.2. The Orphic Hymn to the Titans refers to them as “ancestors
of our fathers” (37.2), but this might refer to their typical position as the generation of deities that
precedes the Olympians.
37. OH 1 (Hecate), OH 18 (Plouton), OH 29 (Persephone), OH 53 (chthonic Dionysus), OH
57 (chthonic Hermes; cf. OH 28), OH 87 (Death); OF 337–​350 B. For more on eschatology and the
Orphic Hymns, see Morand 2001: 209–​230.
38. Graf and Johnston 2013: 191. The term “bricolage” is discussed in detail further below: Graf
sees the Zagreus myth as a single act of bricolage in the sixth century bc, but I present Orphic
theogonies as a series of different acts of bricolage over the course of a few centuries.
39. Graf and Johnston 2013: 192–​193.
40. Bernabé 2010: 422; cf. Bernabé 2004: vii–​x; Herrero 2010: 20–​24.
12 orphic tradition and the birth of the gods

mysteries and in Pythagoreanism.41 Thus Orphism would consist of a cluster

of loosely related mythical motifs and discussions of doctrinal topics.
On the minimalist side of the debate, Edmonds takes issue with scholars
who define Orphism as a set of doctrines. Rejecting the idea of an “Orphic
exception” to the general rule that ancient religion was not about beliefs, he
argues that a definition of Orphism on the basis of doctrines still relies on an
“implicit model of doctrinal Christianity.” This implicit model contradicts the
most basic principles of Greek myth and ritual, which were far more about
“loose thematic associations” and “collective ritual performances” than about
“systematic theology.” Edmonds attempts to construct a more “polythetic” def-
inition of Orphism that relies on “a loose collection of features, none of which
are necessary or sufficient,” rather than a static set of doctrines. Ancient authors
labeled a text or practice as Orphic because it shared in one or more of certain
features, not all of which were necessary, but all of which had different levels
of “cue validity” at different times. This means that the particular features of
Orphism that appear in ancient texts differ from one period to the next, with
shifting contexts and motivations. For example, “extra-​ordinary purity” was
an important cue for practitioners in the early period, but the “extreme antiq-
uity” of Orphic poetry was a more important cue to the later Neoplatonists.42
Edmonds suggests the following definition, claiming that it renders a more
accurate reflection of how things were labeled “Orphic” by ancient authors:

A text, a myth, a ritual, may be considered Orphic because it is explicitly

so labeled (by its author or by an ancient witness), but also because it
is marked as extra-​ordinary in the same ways as other things explicitly
connected with the name of Orpheus and grouped together with them
in the ancient evidence. The more marked something is by claims to
extra-​ordinary purity or sanctity, by claims to special divine connection
or extreme antiquity, or by features of extra-​ordinary strangeness,
perversity, or alien nature, the more likely it is to be labeled Orphic in
the ancient evidence.43

The features of “extra-​ordinary purity or sanctity” refer mostly to the orpheotelestai

and their clients in the Classical Period, who sought an enhanced state of purity
with the gods. The “claims to special divine connection or extreme antiquity”
have to do with the reasons why a text was attributed to Orpheus. From the
perspectives of the Neoplatonists and Christian apologists of late antiquity, the
divine connection and extreme antiquity of Orpheus were their justifications
for using Orphic texts to represent the entire Greek tradition. The “features of

41. Bernabé and San Cristóbal 2008: 179–​206.

42. Edmonds 2013: 68–​69, 71, 82.
43. Edmonds 2013: 71.
 introducing orphic theogonies 13

extra-​ordinary strangeness, perversity, or alien nature” are most relevant to the

content of the texts in Orphic literary tradition. According to Edmonds’ defini-
tion, Orphic texts, including theogonies, were labeled Orphic in part because
of their strange, perverse, and alien contents.
This proposed definition of “Orphica” has potential, but it needs to be re-
fined. It represents progress by moving beyond the doctrinal hypothesis, because
it does not rely on modern reconstructions based on Christian models and be-
cause it takes into account the wide range of features that characterized Orphic
texts and practices at different places and times. However, at least as far as it
concerns Orphic literature, one could produce more precise terms than “features
of extra-​ordinary strangeness, perversity, or alien nature.” In a forthcoming article,
Edmonds begins to address this problem by observing that Orphic poets added
certain types of material that was intended to make their poetry appear more au-
thoritative than Hesiod. They reduplicated the most shocking Hesiodic motifs;
for example, in the Rhapsodies Kronos castrates Ouranos but then is castrated
by Zeus. They added additional primordial deities to the beginning of the cos-
mogony, included more extreme and perverse acts of sexuality and violence in
certain episodes, and at the climax of the narratives assigned to Zeus a more ab-
solute power than he has in Hesiod. In other words, Edmonds takes his original
definition a step further, observing specific ways in which Orphic theogonies are
strange, perverse, or extra-​ordinary.44 I do not disagree with Edmonds (and in-
deed, I draw similar conclusions), but here I add a few more points to the discus-
sion by suggesting other features of Orphic literature that might have generated
differences from Hesiod. The obvious blending of Greek with Near Eastern
elements, the generic category of theogonic hymns, and the discourse between
Orphic myth and philosophy might help to explain the prominence of Phanes
and Night, the image of Zeus having the universe in his belly, and the well-​known
story of the death of Dionysus.
Compared to discussions of the gold tablets and the Derveni Papyrus, rela-
tively little has been written about Orphic theogonies in recent years. The most
recent edition of the Orphic fragments (Bernabé’s Poetae Epici Graeci) includes
the four major theogonies mentioned at the beginning of this chapter: Derveni,
Eudemian, Hieronyman, and Rhapsodic. The most comprehensive discussion
in English of Orphic theogonies continues to be Martin West’s The Orphic
Poems, but his analysis is problematic, partly because his list of theogonies
is not the same as Bernabé’s. West discusses most of the fragments in de-
tail and attempts to reconstruct not only the individual theogonies, but also
a stemma for the entire tradition of Orphic theogonies, suggesting that the
author of the Rhapsodies simply copied and compiled the material of three

44. Edmonds, forthcoming. Special thanks to Edmonds for sharing with me this unfinished
article.
14 orphic tradition and the birth of the gods

earlier Orphic theogonies, uniting them into one poem.45 West attempts to
demonstrate that there is a genealogical relationship between, for example, the
Derveni theogony, the Eudemian theogony, and the Rhapsodies, by suggesting
the existence of two more theogonies to fill in the gaps: the Protogonos and
Cyclic theogonies. However, West’s genealogical methodology relies upon a
lot of conjecture and disallows a level of originality and variety in the texts. His
approach has received criticism from other scholars, notably Luc Brisson, who
points out that West’s reconstruction assumes the existence of two theogonies
for which there is no evidence (Protogonos and Cyclic).46 Brisson prefers to
see only three theogonies (ancient, Rhapsodic, Hieronyman), and he suggests
that the best way to come to terms with the fragments is “to choose some sure
points of reference.”47 He chooses primordial deities as his main point of ref-
erence. Night is the primordial deity in “la version ancienne,” which to Brisson
consists of both the Derveni and Eudemian theogonies: he sees these as iden-
tical precisely because Night is the primordial deity in both. He suggests that
the figure of Chronos was introduced into the Rhapsodic and Hieronyman
theogonies to replace the figure of Night in the ancient version, perhaps in an
attempt to reconcile Orphic theogony with Stoic allegory and with Homer and
Hesiod.48 This suggests that the Rhapsodic and Hieronyman theogonies were
no mere compilations of previous Orphic poetry, but adaptations in which
changes were freely made to adjust the theogony to the author’s historical and
ideological context.
In a manner similar to West, Janko and Riedweg argue that the Orphic
gold tablets were derived from an original Orphic text about eschatology, and
they attempt to reconstruct this poem by assembling the individual items on
the gold tablets into one complete narrative. Despite the coherence of their
arguments, the results of their two investigations are not identical.49 As with
West’s method, their conclusions require some conjecture, so some scholars

45. West 1983: 69, 246–​249; see especially the diagram on page 264.
46. Brisson 1995: 398–​402. West (1983: 121–​126) suggests the Cyclic theogony to account for
certain points of divergence between Apollodorus and Orphic theogonies, but Brisson (1995: 405–​
406) argues that these points can be explained by reference to Hesiod. See also Calame (1991: 229),
who criticizes West’s attempts to reconstruct an “Urform.”
47. Brisson 1995: 390–​396, 413. Brisson’s chronology is followed by Fayant (2014: xx–​xxiii),
but West and Bernabé place the Hieronyman theogony before the Rhapsodies.
48. Brisson 1995: 390, 410–​412. He argues that the Hieronyman theogony attempts to rec-
oncile Orphic theogony with Homer and Hesiod (Brisson 1995: 395), and that the inclusion of
Chronos in the Rhapsodies (and thus later in the Hieronyman theogony) is due to the influence of
Mithraism (Brisson 1995: 37–​55, 2887). However, the appearance of Chronos in a theogony might
go back to Pherecydes (sixth century bc), who equated Chronos with Kronos and depicted him as
a primordial deity who initiates cosmogony (Pherecydes, fr. 14, 60 Schibli = 7 A1, A8 D-​K; Schibli
1990: 135–​139).
49. Janko 1984: 89–​100; Riedweg 1998: 359–​398; 2011: 219–​256. The view that the gold tablets
were taken from an Orphic poem is as old as Smith and Comparetti (1882: 117). Bernabé and San
Cristóbal (2008: 180–​181) find Riedweg’s reconstruction “highly convincing.”
 introducing orphic theogonies 15

have applied a different model of interpretation to the gold tablets. Graf and
Johnston view the gold tablets as vital evidence of Orphic ritual, and Edmonds
remains skeptical about whether they should even be considered Orphic, but
all three agree that in each individual case, the gold tablets are products of bri-
colage, based on the theories of Claude Lévi-​Strauss.50 In its simplest terms,
bricolage in this context means that the individual practitioner who produced
any given tablet chose different elements of texts or rituals or both, out of the
wider field of current possibilities offered by ritual and myth, and put them to-
gether in an imaginative and original way that was relevant to the specific time
and place of the burial in question. In this sense, the production of gold tablets
was no different from any other Greek myth or ritual, for indeed bricolage
was the basic mode of production for all Greek religion, which was in no way
uniform from one city or deity to the next. But this simply confirms the nec-
essary result of such an action, which is that, despite the overarching thematic
similarity of the gold tablets, each one is different in some way or another.
Whether the texts of the gold tablets were composed on the basis of a written
text, memories of ritual actions, the original imagination of the author, or a
mixture of these (which is the most likely scenario), each one is the unique,
creative product of the efforts of an individual bricoleur.
In the case of Orphic theogonies, rather than attempting to trace a
stemma of successive generations of texts, a better method of analysis would
be to approach each fragment of each theogony, or even each element or epi-
sode included in a theogony—​anything that Brisson’s method might consider
a sure point of reference—​as an individual product or element of bricolage.
Lévi-​Strauss used the concept of bricolage to explain “mythical thought” by
means of an analogy with the bricoleur who creates art “on the technical
plane.” Unlike an artisan or engineer, the bricoleur’s “universe of instruments
is closed,” so he or she must always “make do with ‘whatever is at hand,’ that
is to say with a set of tools and materials which is always finite and is also het-
erogeneous.”51 The bricoleur is always limited by a set of “constraints imposed
by a particular state of civilization,” so the creations of bricolage “always really
consist of a new arrangement of elements.” These elements are “an already
existent set” of “odds and ends,” with which the bricoleur engages “in a sort of
dialogue,” by rearranging them in order to “find them a meaning” by the crea-
tion of new structures.52 Lévi-​Strauss concludes that “the significant images of
myth, the materials of the bricoleur, are elements which can be defined by two
criteria: they have had a use, as words in a piece of discourse which mythical
thought ‘detaches’ in the same way as a bricoleur . . . detaches the cogwheels

50. Edmonds 2004: 4, 27, 238; Graf and Johnston 2013: 73–​93, 184; Lévi-​Strauss 1966: 16–​36.
51. Lévi-​Strauss 1966: 17.
52. Lévi-​Strauss 1966: 18–​22.
16 orphic tradition and the birth of the gods

of an old alarm clock; and they can be used again either for the same purpose
or for a different one if they are at all diverted from their previous function.”53
By viewing the Orphic pseudepigraphers who wrote theogonic poetry as
bricoleurs who rearranged the “odds and ends” of mythical events at their dis-
posal into a new arrangement of structures, I approach Orphic theogonies as
products of bricolage. This approach is in accord with how the concept of bri-
colage has been applied to the gold tablets, and it is beneficial to an interpre-
tation of Orphic theogonies in three ways. First, since scholars have become
more receptive to the idea that Orphism was never a coherent, definable reli-
gious community, a useful approach will be one that allows more possibilities
for diversity. Brisson has taken the first step by rejecting West’s stemma and
suggesting points of reference, but one can go further by exploring how these
points of reference were rearranged in their individual contexts as the “odds and
ends” of bricolage. Second, a bricoleur takes elements from a “finite” but “het-
erogeneous” field of possibilities, which opens the door to a wide but limited
range of sources and influences that could have contributed to the individual
works in question. Not all of these are typically considered Orphic: among the
possible sources for an Orphic mythical motif are Near Eastern myths, Hesiod
and other mainstream literary texts (e.g., Pindar, Aeschylus, Aristophanes),
and material from other overlapping categories and elements that are typically
associated with Orphic myth and ritual, such as those derived from Eleusinian,
Dionysiac, or Pythagorean contexts; in other words, they are derived from
more sources than just earlier Orphic theogonies. Third, if we apply the con-
cept of bricolage to the ancient sources themselves—​that is, to the ancient
authors who quoted the theogonies, such as the Derveni author, Plato, the
Neoplatonists, and the Christian apologists—​then it becomes clear that their
own decisions about what material to include and how to interpret this mate-
rial were also exercises in bricolage.
One result of my reading of Orphic theogonies as products of bricolage
is that, in most cases, it appears that Orphic theogonies may not have been
lengthy, comprehensive narratives like Hesiod’s Theogony, as modern scholars
such as West and Bernabé have assumed. Rather, they were shorter poems,
analogous to the Homeric Hymns, which concentrate on one deity and how
he or she came to a position of honour within the Greek pantheon. On this
point, again I attempt to improve upon Edmonds’ recent efforts to redefine an-
cient Orphism, since he has argued that the Sacred Discourse in 24 Rhapsodies
consisted of a collection of shorter poems that was divided into twenty-​four
books, rather than “one complex theogonical poem that combines the length
of the Iliad and the Odyssey,” as Graf and Johnston have recently suggested.54
Comparing the Rhapsodies to the Sibylline Oracles, Edmonds argues that “the

53. Lévi-​Strauss 1966: 35.

54. Graf and Johnston 2013: 188–​189.
Other documents randomly have
different content
The text on this page is estimated to be only 24.25%
accurate

182 LIST OF AUTHOES, ETC. DECRETALE, B. vi. 1. 106.

DEUCALION'S FLOOD, . . . . B. n. 1. 447-530. DONATE, B. v. 1. 3377.
EBRON (HEBRON), VALE OF, . . $. 1. 1. 73. EGYPT, B. 1. 1. 148, 940,
954-976. EGYPT (PLAGUES OF), B. n. 1. 531-620. EGYSTUS, KING, .
. . . B. 1. 1. 953 ; B. n. 1. 972. ENDYNE, B. ix. Prol. 1. 4. ENOCH,
HIS BOOKS LOST, B. n. 1. 157-158. EPHESON, CITY OF, . . . . B. 1.
1. 1047. ETHIOPIA, B. 1. 1. 147. EVE, HER FORMATION, . . . B. I. 1.
79-90. EWFRATES, EIVER, . . . . B. 1. 1. 132, 153, 867. EWROPE,
ACCOUNT OF, ... B. 1. 1. 985, 1114, 1181-1334. EWXYA, CITY OF,
.... B. 1. 1. 949. FRANCE, KINRIK OF, - . . B. 1. 1. 1321-1330.
FRAWNS, GESTIS OF, . . . . B. vi. 1. 287. FRYGY, LES, B. 1. 1. 1068.
FRYGYA, MARE, . . . . B. 1. 1. 1054. GADMWS, SON OF AGENOR, . .
B. 1. 1. 971. GALACHIA, B. 1. 1. 1066. GALE, A BEAST, . . . . B. 1. 1.
753-770. GALYEIN THE MEDYCYNARE, . . B. v. 1. 1425. GANEMEDE,
B. n. 1. 1036. GANGES, EIVER OF, . . . . B. 1. 1. 131, 134, 725.
GANGES, CREATURES IN, . . . B. 1. 1. 809-828. GARNYANYS,
ACCOUNT OF, . . B. 1. 1. 643-646. GERMANY, B. 1. 1. 1205-1226.
GETLAND, B. 1. 1. 1197. GIANTS (GEAWNDYS), ;./ . . B. 1. 1. 303-
370. GOG AND MAGOG, ACCOUNT OF, . . B. 1. 1. 583-590.
GOMORAH, . . . . ; . B. I. 1. 918. GREECE, .... , > . B. i. 1. 1248-
1262. GREGOR, ST. See GREGORY, ST.
The text on this page is estimated to be only 24.83%
accurate

LIST OF AUTHOKS, ETC. 183 GREGORY, SAINT, . . . . B. v.

1. 39, 5437. GUIDO DE COLUMPNA, . . . B. i. Prol. 1. 15.
HAWTELOG, B. 1. 1. 1050. HENRY, TIME OR LIFE OF PRINCE, . B.
vn. 1. 948. HERMES, RIVER, . . . ' . B. 1. 1. 1077. HOMER. See
OMERE. HORACE. See GRACE. HUCHOWN, B. v. HUNGARY, B. i.
HUNYA, B. i. HYKARY, LAND OF, . . . . B. i. HYRKANY, B. i. YMAGO
MUNDI, B. i. INDUS, WATER OF, . . . . B. i. YNGLIS STORYS
(ENGLISH HISTORIES), B. i. IRELAND, ITS HISTORY, . . . B. n
ISAAC, POSTERITY OF, ... B. n ITALY, ACCOUNT OF, . . . . B. i.
JEROME, ST., B. v JHERUSALEM, B. i. JHON, SAINT, EVANGELIST, . .
B. i. JORDANE, B. I. JOSEPH, HISTORY OF, ... B. n JOSEPHUS, B. i.
JOSHUA, B. ii JUDE (JUDAH) KINGDOM OF, . . B. i. JUPITER AND
OTHER DIVINITIES, . B. i. JUSTYNE. See POMPEYUS. KAYIN. See
CAIN. KOLCOS, B. 1. 1. 993. KRYN, ISLE OF, DESCRIBED, . . B. i. L
570-578. LAURENCE'S, ST., LEGEND OF ST. SIXT, B. v. 1. 2331.
LYBANE, HILL OF, . . . . B. 1. 1. 903. LYCYA, LAND OF, .... B. 1. 1.
1095. 1. 4293. 1. 1240. L 1004. 1. 1076. 1. 1000. 1. 1414. 1. 550.
Prol. 1. 120. . 1. 773-858. . 1. 183-238. 1. 1283-1315. 1. 3381 ; B.
vn. Prol. 1. 1. 1. 909. L 1051. L904. . 1. 301-418. 1. 243. 1. 1067-
1206. L907. 1. 1499-1566.
The text on this page is estimated to be only 22.85%
accurate

184 LIST OF AUTHOES, ETC. LYDYS, . . *,•*.?•- .. B. i. L

1081. LYKAON, LAND OF, . . . . B. 1. 1. 1076. LYBY, B. 1. 1. 942.
LYVYUS, B. in. 1. 698. MAKROBITYS, ACCOUNT OF, . . B. 1. 1. 663-
670. MANTICORA, A BEAST, . . . B. i. 1. 771-786.
MARTYNE(FRERE,ORMARTINUSPOLONUS), B. i. Prol. 1. 119; B. ii.
Prol. 1. 18 ; B. v. 1. 2530, 4309 ; B. vi. 1. 447, 628, 1147, 1476.
MASSAGETYS, B. 1. 1. 994. MEDITERRANEAN SEA, . . .. B. 1. 1.
1249. MEDUS, KING, B. i. 1..844. MEDY, LAND OF, .... B. 1. 1. 843.
MELCHYSEDEK, . . . . . B. 1. 1. 484 ; B. n. 1. 163. MESOPOTAMYA,
B. 1. 1. 870. MONOCEROS, A BEAST, . . . B. i. 1. 789-808. MORYS,
SAINT, B. 1. 1. 970. MOYSES, B. in. Prol. 1. 1. MYKYLLSEA, . . . . . B.
1. 1. 152, 1237. MYNERVA, .... B. n. 1. 265-280. MYNODAURE, . . . .
. B. n. 1. 1251-1360. NAZARETH, B. 1. 1. 912. NEMBROT (NIMROD),
. . . B. 1. 1. 878, 1489. NOE (NOAH), ACCOUNT OF, . . B. 1. 1. 371-
474. NOE, SONS OF, AND THEIR POSTERITY, B. I. 1. 475-524.
NYCEA, CITY, . . \ . ' . . B. 1. 1. 1058. NYLE, KIVER OF, CALLED
GYON, . B. 1. 1. 133, 966. NYNUS, . . . . . . B. i. 1. 872 ; B. n. 1. 5-
42. NYNYAS, KING, . ' ."' '* . . B. n. 1. 122-130. NYNYUE, . . . . '. , w'
B. 1. 1. 871. OMERE (HOMER), . . . . B. i. Prol. 1. 16 ; B. n. 1. 1582 ;
B. in. 1. 703. ORAS, GRACE (HORACE), . * '" « B. iv. 1. 2485.
ORASTAS, ACCOUNT OF, . fr . B. 1. 1. 643-646. OROSIUS, . . . . • '.'.
. B.I. Prol. 1.119 ; B. n. Prol. 1.9, 18, 22, 29 ; B. v. Prol. 1. 25, 1209.
The text on this page is estimated to be only 24.47%
accurate

LIST OF AUTHORS, ETC. 185 OSKOBARES, HYLLE OP, OVID

(OVYDE), PALAFAT (PALJEFATUS DE INCREDIBILIBUS), PALESTYN,
TOWN OP, ... PAMPHYLIA, PANNONIA, PARADYS, DESCRIPTION OF,
PARTHIA, PAUL, APOSTLE, .... PERSEUS, KING, .... PERSEUS,
PHENYS, PHYLOMENE, PIGMAVEIS (PIGMIES), POLYS, REGION OF, .
POMPEYUS TROGUS (whose History, according to Wyntoun, was
abridged by Justin). PRIMOTHEUS, KING OF CAUCASUS, PROGNAS,
REDE SEA, REGISTER, THE, .... RHODES, ACCOUNT OF, ... ROME,
ROMULUS, SARACENYS, NATION OF, . SARVYA, SATURN AND HIS
CHILDREN, SCOTS, THEIR ORIGIN, SCOTTIS STORYS (SCOTTISH
HISTORIES), SCYPIO, A SAYING OF, ... SEM (SHEM), His
POSTERITY, SEMIRAMIS, SETH, ACCOUNT OF, . B. 1. 1. 137.
B.I.L1101; B. n. 1. 1034, 1251. B. n. 1. 1237. B. i. L 905. B. i. 1.
1096. B. i. 1. 1239. B. 1. 1. 105-156. B. 1. 1. 830. B. 1. 1. 1093 ; B.
iv. Prol. 1. 14. B. 1. 1. 846. B. n. 1. 1223. B. i. 1. 901. B. n. 1. 1013.
B. 1. 1. 647-662. B. i. 1. 1097. B. n. Prol. 1. 17; B. v. 1. 1429, 1437.
B. n. 1. 419-434. B. n. 1. 1013. B. i. 1. 146. B. VIT. 1. 2064. B. n. 1.
281-300. B. i. 1. 1289-1300. B. 1. 1. 1289. B. i. 1. 893. B. i. 1. 993.
B. i. 1. 1491-1630. B. n. 1. 633-772. B. i. Prol. 1. 120 ; B. iv. 1.
1811. B. viii. 1. 3460. B. i. 1. 475-524, 1683-1730. B. ii. 1. 43-120.
B. I. 1. 266-286.
The text on this page is estimated to be only 23.52%
accurate

186 LIST OF AUTHOKS, ETC. SEVYNTY CLERKIS (OR

INTERPRETERS), SEXTUS, POPE. See LAURENCE, ST. SMYRNA, CITY,
.... SODOM, SOLYNUS, STANE, THE KYNGYS, STATIUS, SYDON,
SYDY, COUNTRY OF, . SYLVESTERE, POPE, .... SYLYCYA, SYNAY,
MOUNT, .... SYTHYA, SYTHYA, NETHER, .... TABOR, HILL OF, ....
TAPERBANE, ISLE OF, ... TARSUS, CITY, TAWRUS, TEBYS,
TENELAUS, KING, . . . TEREUS, TRACYA, LAND OF, TRITOLOMUS,
TROYE, CITY, . . . * . TROY, SIEGE OF, .... TROYWS, KING, .....
TULLYUS (ClCERO), . . . . TURKY, LANDS OF, . . . • . TYGER, KIVER
OF, .... TYRE, . . . . ' . VALERIUS MAXIMUS, . - . . VINCENT,
VIRGYLE, . . . •"''••! B. in. 1. 655. B. 1. 1. 1065. B. 1. 1. 918. B. i. 1.
1343. B. n. 1. 961-964. B. n. 1. 1055. B. 1. 1. 902. B. i. 1. 1096. B. i.
1. 1061. B. 1. 1. 1089. B. 1. 1. 885. B. i. 1. 833, 1003. B. 1. 1. 1189-
1198. B. i. 1. 917. B. i. 1. 562. B. i. 1. 1092. B. 1. 1. 1091. B. 1. 1.
969. B. ii. 1. 981. B. ii. 1. 1011. B. 1. 1. 1241. B. n. 1. 435-438. B. i.
1. 1072. B. n. 1. 1575-1684. B. 1. 1. 1071. B. iv. Prol. 1. 1. B. 1. 1.
1067. B. i. 1. 132, 153, 866-867. B. 1. 1. 902. B. ix. 1. 1925. B. v. 1.
2530, 4309. B. i. Prol. 1. 16.
The text on this page is estimated to be only 26.46%
accurate

LIST OF AUTHORS, ETC. 187 WALATS (WALLACE, SIR

WILLIAM), GESTIS OF, B. VIIL 1. 2300. WERSOZES, KING, . . . . B.
n. L 1361-1410. YBERY, LANDS OF, .... B. 1. 1. 1017. YND (INDIA),
KINGDOM OF, . . B. 1. 1. 551-560. YSAWRYA, B. i. L 1085. Ysis, B. n.
L 251-264. ZORASTAS, ( B. i. L 858; B. n. 1. 25-30. These, unless I
may have omitted some in the suppressed part of the Chronicle, of
which I am not quite certain, are all the authorities mentioned by
Wyntoun; and of these few some were evidently known to him only
by name. On the other hand he has had the perusal of some works,
the authors of which he does not expressly name, e.g. a translation
mentioned in the passage quoted in p. xxxi, note; the Life of
Alexander the Great (perhaps the work of Adam Davie, written about
1312, and much esteemed in Wyntourfs time), and probably some
others, which would be apparent to a reader better acquainted with
the literature of the middle ages than I am. This short Catalogue,
with that of the authorities quoted by Fordun and Bower, may
furnish some materials for a History of the Literature, of Scotland. D.
M. I may add, that Mr. E. Price, in the Notes to his excellent edition
of Warton's History of English Poetry, clearly proves that the Metrical
Life of Alexander the Great was erroneously attributed to Adam
Davie. — D. L.
The text on this page is estimated to be only 26.95%
accurate

188 EXPLANATION OF CONTRACTIONS. MACPHERSON'S

EXPLANATION OF THE CONTRACTIONS USED IN THE GLOSSARY,
NOTES, ETC. Lond. 1795. N.B. — Authors not mentioned here are
sufficiently distinguished where they are quoted. a. Anno, used in
quoting Annals and Chronicles. Acts. Actis, etc., of the Realme of
Scotland. Edinburgh, 12th October 1566, fol. Acts edit. Murray. Acts
of Parliament, published by Sir Thomas Murray. Edinburgh, 1681, fol.
(adj.) Adjective. (adv.) Adverb. Ailred. Ailredus Abbas Rievallensis,
inter Scriptores decem : he is also called Aelredus, Ethelredus, etc.,
and by Fordun, Baldredus. Al. Alemannic language. And. Diplo.
Anderson's Diplomata et Numismata Scotise. Edinburgh, 1739, fol.
Annals. Annals of Scotland, by Sir David Dalrymple, Lord Hailes. 2
vols. Edinburgh, 1776, 1779, 4to. Ann. Hit. Annales Ultonienses, ab
anno 431 ad annum 1303, MS. in the British Museum, (No. 4795 of
Ayscough's Catalogue.) Arm. Armoric, or language of Bretagne. A.-S.
Anglo-Saxon language, (aux. v.) Auxiliary verb. B. Book. 6. Belgic.
N.B. — In this language V sounds nearly as F. Barb. Life of Robert
Bruce, by John Barbour. Edinburgh, 1758, 4to. Bedce Hist. Eccles.
Bedse Historia Ecclesiastica. Benson. Vocabularium Anglo-Saxonicum
Thomae Benson. Oxon. 1701, 8vo. B. Harry. Acts of Sir W. Wallace,
by Blind Harry. Edinburgh, 1758, 4to. Boeth. Scotorum Historia
Hectoris Boethii [Boece, or Boyse]. Paris, 1527, fol. Br. British, or
Language of Wales. Bromton. Chronicon Johannis Bromton, inter
Scriptores X. Bullet. Memoires sur la Langue Celtique, par J. B.
Bullet, 1754. 3 vols. fol. 0. Caput. cfr. confer, (collate or compare.)
The text on this page is estimated to be only 25.68%
accurate

EXPLANATION OF CONTRACTIONS. 189 Ch. Chaucer, ch.

Chapter. Chr. Mel. Chronica de Melros, MS. Bib. Cott. Faustina, B. ix.
Another MS. imperfect and partly burnt, erroneously called Epitome
Historic R. Hoveduni, Bib. Cott. Otto, D. iv. Editio inter Scriptores
Rerum Anglicarum, a Gale. Chr. Pict. Chronicon Pictorum, published
in Innes's Critical Essay. Chr. S. Crucis. Chronicon Sanctse Crucis
[Holyrood Abbey] apud Wharton, in Anglia Sacra, (conj.)
Conjunction, contr. contracted, contraction, corr. corrupted,
corruption. D. Danish Language. Dalr. Sir James Dalrymple's
Collections concerning Scottish History. Edin. 1703, 8vo. Davies.
Davies, John, Dictionarium Cambro-Britannicum. 1632, folio. Dugd.
Bar. Dugdale's Baronage of England. 1675. Dugd. Mon. Dugdale's
Monasticon Anglicanum. 1655. Eadmer. Eadmeri Historia Novorum,
Seldeni. Lond. 1623. ed. Edition. Eng. English Language, er. Error,
erroneous, erroneously, expl. explained, explains. /. forte [i.e.
perhaps]. Feed. Foedera Angliae. 20 vols. fol. Ford. Johannis de
Fordun Scotichronicon genuinum. Ed. Hearne. 1722. 5 vols. 8vo. Fr.
French Language. fris. Frisian dialect of the Belgic. Ga. Gaelic of the
Highlands of Scotland. Gale. Scriptores Rerum Anglicarum, opera
Thomae Gale, etc. 3 vols. fol. G. D. Gawin Douglas's translation of
Virgil's ^Eneis. Edinburgh, 1710, fol. Geb. Le Monde Primitif, par
Gebelin. 1773-1782. 9 vols. 4to. Ger. German Language. (N.B. — ch
sounds as k, and z as is.) Ger. Dorob. Gervasius Dorobornensis, inter
Scriptores X. Gloss. Glossary. Gr. Greek Language. Henry Htfnt.
Henry of Huntingdon, inter Scriptores post Bedam. Higd. Polychron.
Higdeni Polychronicon, inter Scriptores Rerum Anglicarum, a Gale.
The text on this page is estimated to be only 24.85%
accurate

190 Hickes. EXPLANATION OF CONTRACTIONS. Linguarum

Septentrionalium Thesaurus, Geo. Hickes. 1705. 3 vols. fol.
Hoveden. Annales Kog. Hovedeni, inter Scriptores post Bedam. Hire.
Joh. Glossarium Sui Gothicum. 1769. 2 vols. fol. imp. imperative.
Innes. Essay on the Antient Inhabitants of Scotland. Lond. 1729. Ir.
Irish Language. Isl. Islandic (or Icelandic) Language. It. Italian
Language. J. Hag. Historia Johannis Hagustaldensis, inter Scriptores
X. Keith. Catalogue of the Bishops of Scotland, by Kobert Keith.
1753, 4to. Knyghton. Chronica inter Scriptores X. Knox. History of
the Reformation in Scotland, by John Knox. Edinburgh, 1731, fol. 1.
Liber. L. Latin Language. I. line. L.b. Barbarous Latin. Lei. Lelandi de
Rebus Britannicis Collectanea. 1715. 5 vols. 8vo. Lesley. De Origine
Moribus et rebus Gestis Scotorum. Romae, 1578, 4to. Lhuyd.
Archaeologia Britannica. Lond. 1707, fol. Mag. Hist. Historia majoris
Britannise, per Joan. Majorem [Mair]. Edin. 1740,4to. Mat. Par.
Mathsei Paris Historia. Edit. Will. Wats. Lond. 1640, fol. Mat. Westm.
Mathsei Westmonasteriensis Flores Historiarum. Francf. 1601, fol.
Mart. Martinus Polonus (whom Wyntown calls Frere Martyne). M.-G.
Moeso-Gothic Language, as preserved in Ulfila's translation of the
Gospels. 'mod. modern, (n.) Noun. Nisbet. Heraldry of Scotland. 2
vols. Edinburgh. 1 722, 1 742, fol. o. obsolete or old. O.D. Old
Danish Language, called also Cimbric and Runic. (part.) Participle.
Paul. JEmyl. Paulus ^Bmylius de rebus gestis Francorum, Basil.
1601, fol. Percy's Eeliques of Ancient English Poetry, 3 vols. Lond.
1767, 8vo. Pers. Persian Language,
The text on this page is estimated to be only 25.30%
accurate

EXPLANATION OF CONTRACTIONS. 191 Pitscottie. History

of Scotland, by Rob. Lindsay of Pitscottie. Edin. 1778, 12mo. pi.
plural. Platina. De Vitis et Gestis Summorum Pontificum. 1664,
12mo. Polychronicon. See Higd. Polychronicon. pr. pronounced. Prec.
Precopensian dialect of the Gothic, (prep.) Preposition, pret. pret.
Preterite. Prynne. The History of King John, K. Henry in., and K.
Edward i. Lond. 1670, foL Prompt. Parv. Promptuarium Parvulorum
(MS. Harl. No. 221). (pron.) Pronoun. Q. Quaere, or this is doubtful,
q. id. quod idem (which is the same), qu. qu. quoted in or by. q. v.
quod vide (which see). B. Brunne. Translation of Peter Langtoft's
Chronicle, by R. B. 2 vols. 8vo. Beg. S. And. Registrum Prioratus S.
Andreae. B. Gloc. Robert of Glocester's Chronicle. 2 vols. 8vo. B.
Hag. Historia Ricardi Hagustaldensis, inter Scriptores X. Boss.
Fortunate Shepherdess, by A. Ross. Aberdeen, 1778, 8vo. Budd.
Ruddiman's Glossary to Douglas's Virgil, 1710. Budd. Diss.
Dissertation on the competition between Bruce and Balliol, by
Thomas Ruddiman, 1748. Sc. Scotland, Scottish, Scots. S.L. Scottish
Language. Sc. Chr. Joannis de Fordun Scotichronicon, cum
supplementis et coQtinuatione Walteri Boweri : cura Walteri Goodall.
2 vols. Edin. 1759, fol. Script. X. Historiae Anglicanae Scriptores
Decem, edit. Sir Roger Twysden. 1652. Savik. Rerum Anglicarum
Scriptores post Bedam, edit. H. Savile. Lond. 1596, foL Seren.
English and Swedish Dictionary, by Jacob Serenius. Sim. Dun.
Historia Simeonis Dunelmensis, inter Scriptores X. Sim. Dun. Hist.
Symeonis Dunhelmensis Libellus de Dunhelmensi Eccles. Dun.
Ecclesia, edit. Th. Bedford. 1732, 8vo. Skene. De Verborum
Significatione (by Sir John Skene). 1597. Sp. Spanish Language.
Speed's Hist. Historic of Great Britaine, by John Speed. 1632, fol.
Spelman. Glossarium Archaoologicum. 1664, fol. Stow. Annales of
England, by John Stow. 1600, 4to.
The text on this page is estimated to be only 25.97%
accurate

192 EXPLANATION OF CONTRACTIONS. Stow's London.

Survey of London, by John Stow. 1618, 4to. subst. substantive.
Suth. Case. Additional Case of Elizabeth claiming the title of
Countess of Sutherland. 1770. Sw. Swedish Language. Tacit. Taciti
Opera. Thorn, de la More. Vita Edwardi IL, inter Camdeni Anglica,
Normanica, etc. Francf. 1603, fol. Trivet. Annales sex Begum Anglise.
Tyrwhitt. Glossary to Chaucer, by Tho. Tyrwhitt. Usser. Britannicarum
Ecclesiarum Antiquitates, collectore Jacobo Usserio [Usher]. Dublin,
1639, 4to. Vol. Volume. v. vide (see). (v.) Verb. Vallancey.
Collectanea de Eebus Hibernicis, by Colonel Vallancey. 1786, etc. vo.
voce (in the word or article). V. E. The Various Eeadings of Wyntoun.
Wachter. Glossarium Germanicum. fol. Wals. Hist. Historia, vel
Chronica ) per Th. Walsingham, inter Wals. Ypod. Ypodigma
Neustriae ) Camdeni Anglica, etc. Warton. History of English Poetry,
by Tho. Warton. 1774, etc. Will. Gemet. W. Gemeticensis de Ducibus
Normannis, inter Camdeni Anglica, etc. * W. Malmesb. Willielmus
Malmesburiensis, inter Scriptores post Bedam.
The text on this page is estimated to be only 26.84%
accurate

[ 193 ] NOTES ON WYNTOUN'S CHRONICLE. VOL. I.—

NOTES ON THE FIRST BOOK. Page 3. — PROLOGUE. — From the
description of the early Manuscripts of the Chronicle given in the
present volume, it will be seen that, with two exceptions, they do
not contain Wyntoun's Prologue entire. It was fortunate therefore to
find that the Wemyss MS. contained it; and as this differed in various
points from the text of the Royal MS., instead of giving detached
Various Readings, I preferred repeating the whole of the Prologue
and next two chapters in a distinct form, at the previous pages 165-
169. — L. Page 3, 1. 15.— GWIDO DE COLUMPNA, or GUIDO. This
author was connected with the Italian family of Colonna, and
distinguished himself as an historian and poet. He flourished during
the Pontificate of Nicholas V. (1288-1292), and is mentioned by
Dante. He styled himself Judex Messanientis (or Messina) in Sicily,
where, it is known, he continued to reside as a Judge, and also
where he died. His principal work, Historia de Bello Trojana, was
very popular during the middle ages, while Homer's Iliad was known
only by name. It was completed in the year 1287, and dedicated to
Matthias de Porta, Archbishop of Salerno. Warton, in his chapter on
Lydgate's " Troy Boke, or the Destruction of Troy," says, " This poem
is professedly a translation or paraphrase of Guido de Colonna's
romance, entitled Historia Trojana" and adds, " But whether from
Colonna's VOL. III. N
The text on this page is estimated to be only 27.50%
accurate

194 NOTES ON THE [VOL. i. original Latin, or from a French

version mentioned in Lydgate's Prologue, and which existed soon
after the year 1300, I cannot ascertain. I have before observed, that
Colonna formed his Trojan History from Dares' PTirygms and Dictys'
Cretensis, who perpetually occur as authorities in Lydgate's
translation. Homer is however referred to in this work ; particularly
in the catalogue or enumeration of the ships which brought the
several Grecian leaders with their forces to the Trojan coast. It
begins thus, on the testimony of Colonna — ' Myne auctor telleth
how Agamamnon, The worthi kynge, an hundred shippis brought.'
And is closed with these lines — ' Full many shippes was in this
navye, More than Guido maketh rehersayle, Towards Troye with
Grekes for to sayle : For as Homer in his discrypcion Of Grekes
shippes maketh mencion, Shortly affyrminge the man was never
borne That such a nombre of shippes sawe to forne.' Yet Lydgate,
having finished his version, says — ' I have no more of Latin to
translate, After Dytes, Dares, and Guydo.'"— W. Of the early editions
and translations of the work itself, the first known is dated 1477; but
there are others of an early period, which have neither place of
printing nor date. Warton also refers to the popularity of the work,
and translates a few lines from Colonna's Prologue and Postscript,
which may here be quoted. " These things, originally written by the
Grecian Dictys and the Phrygian Dares (who were present in the
Trojan war, and faithful relators of what they saw), are transferred
into this book by Guido, of Colonna, a judge; and although a certain
Roman, Cornelius by name, the nephew of the great Sallustius,
translated Dares and Dictys into Latin, yet, attempting to be concise,
he has very improperly omitted those particulars of the history,
which would have proved most agreeable to the reader.
The text on this page is estimated to be only 27.17%
accurate

VOL. L] FIBST BOOK. 195 In my own book, therefore,

every article belonging to the Trojan story will be comprehended."
And in his Postscript : "And I Guido de Colonna have followed the
said Dictys in every particular ; for this reason, because Dictys made
his work perfect and complete in everything. And I should have
decorated this history with more metaphors and ornaments of style,
and by incidental digressions, which are the pictures of composition.
But deterred by the difficulty of the work, etc." Guido has indeed
made Dictys nothing more than the groundwork of his story. Among
the various works on the subject of the Bellum Trojanum, besides
that by Guido de Columna, there is an earlier Hysteria Trojana ; and
a similar early English alliterative romance, entitled "The Gest
Histor'iale of the Destruction of Troy," has been printed from an
unpublished MS. in the Hunterian Library, Glasgow, for the Early
English Text Society, Lond. 1869, 1874, 8vo. The editors, the late
Eev. George A. Panton and Mr. D. Donaldson, concluding that it was
derived from Guide's work, they argued that it was translated by the
Scottish poet Huchowne, whom "Wyntoun commemorates in Book V.
ch. xii. In the opinion, however, of some members of the English
Text Society, the editors were considered to have drawn a wrong
conclusion, and that it was a Metrical Eomance translated from the
French by a Northumbrian poet. See the Note on the following page.
— L. Page 3, 1. 1 6. — Omere and Vyrgylle. The Iliad of Homer was
but little known during the middle ages. The jfineid of Virgil, as
written in Latin, had a much more extensive reputation. But
Wyntoun, it is apparent, was indebted at second-hand to writers of a
later period, for some of the materials which he employed in
compiling his Chronicle. — L. Page 4, 1. 21. — DARES OF FRYGY.
Dares Phi-ygius and Dictys Cretensis, two ancient Greek authors who
wrote the History of Troy. Their work, which only exists in an
abridged form by Justin, is said to have furnished Guido de Colonna
and John Lydgate, the English poet, with the chief materials for their
" Troy Book, or the Destruction of Troy."— L.
The text on this page is estimated to be only 26.34%
accurate

196 NOTES ON THE [VOL. I. Dictys of Crete (Cretensis) and

Dares of Phrygia, two ancient authors, are said to have written the
History of the War of Troy, which, as already stated, furnished
materials to later writers. The work published in their name passed
through many editions, and was translated into various languages.
The one by Guido de- Columna, Historia Trojana, is best known as
having proved the fruitful source of such histories and romances. Of
these, the first to be mentioned is the Roman de Troie, by Benoit de
Sainte-Maure, an AngloNorman poet, in hexameter verse in six feet,
which remained unpublished till a recent period. This poet lived in
the reign of Henry II. of England (1154-1189), and the French
romance was written between the years 1175 and 1185. His original
French metrical romance extends to 30,408 lines. It was first printed
at Caen in 1870, and has the following title : — " Benoit de Sainte-
More, et Le Eoman de Troie, ou les Metamorphoses d'Homere et de
I'£lpop6e Gre"co-Latine au Moyen-Age. Par A. Joly. Paris, Librairie A.
Franck. 1870." 4to. The Editor has prefixed a learned dissertation of
109 ' pages, in which he considers at full length the question
respecting the authorship of " Le Eoman de Troie " and his other
works. There is no doubt that this Benoit de Sainte-More was an
Anglo-Norman Trouv6re, and is to be distinguished from another
Anglo-Norman poet who composed, at the desire of Henry II., King
of England (A.D. 1154-1189), as shown by the learned editor, "
Histoire en vers des Dues de Normandie." This work, edited by M.
Francisque Michel, is included in the series of " Documents inedits de
V Histoire de France. — Benoit. Chronique des Dues de Normandie."
1836-1844. 3 vols. 4to.— L. Page 4, 1. 30. — Off Latyne, etc.
Wyntoun is here very modest in referring to his qualifications for
compiling his Chronicle, as having chiefly derived his materials from
the Latin. — L. Page 5, 1. 57. — THE FAMILY OF WEMYS. — It may
be agreeable to the reader to know something of the man to whom
we are indebted for the Chronicle composed by Wyntown. Schir
Jhon, the chief of the family of Wemys, which sprung from the
celebrated Macduff the first Earl of Fife, was the great 
The text on this page is estimated to be only 26.99%
accurate

VOL. i.] FIBST BOOK. 197 great-grandson of Schir Davy,

who was sent to Norway to bring over the young Queen Margaret ;
in testimony of which honourable employment a silver bason,
presented to him by the King of Norway, is still preserved by his
family. Schir Jhon, after filling several offices of dignity in the service
of his country, died in an advanced age 1482. Sir John, the ninth in
descent from him, was created Earl of Wemys by King Charles I. ;
and the present Earl is the fifth in descent from him. (v. infra Note
on B. vni. 1. 87.) A younger son of this family settled in the Venetian
territories about 1600, where the author of the Journey through
Great Britain, 1723, saw a copy of Wyntown's work in the possession
of one of his descendants. (Journey through Scotland, p. viii.) A part
of G. Douglas's Preface to his Virgil (p. 4) is very like this passage of
Wyntown's Prologue. — M. Page G, 1. 94. — Between the
Lomownde and Bennarty. — This refers to the parish of Portmoak, in
Kinross-shire, lying betwixt Lochleven and Fifeshire. It forms a rich
landscape stretching along the banks of the Loch, comprehending
West Lomond Hill and Benartie, and opposite St. Serfe's Inch. It is
sometimes stated that Portmoak could also boast of its Priory. For
this there is no good authority ; but having a church in early times,
and an old place of sepulture, as I shall have occasion elsewhere to
describe at greater length, it may not unlikely have been used by the
monks of St. Serf or Servanus for that purpose.— L. Page 7, 1. 117.
— PERYS COMESTOR (PETRUS). "Petrus cognomine Comestor, sive
Manducator," because it was said he devoured the Scriptures. He
died 1 2 kal. Novembris 1 1 78. He addressed his great work,
Historia Scholastica, to William, Archbishop of Senonens, or Sens, in
the year 1175. In mentioning the work, Warton (Hist. English Poetry)
calls it " a sort of Breviary of the Old and New Testament,
accompanied with elaborate expositions from Josephus and many
Pagan writers. It was compiled at Paris about the year 1175 ; and it
was so popular as not only to be taught in schools, but even to be
publicly read
The text on this page is estimated to be only 25.24%
accurate

198 NOTES ON THE [VOL. i. in the churches with its

glosses." The earliest edition appeared in 1473.— L. Page 7, 1. 126.
— We have an explanation of the mystic meaning of this line by no
less a commentator than Pope Alexander III. " Flos iste (the rose)
Christum regem exprimit ac designat, qui de seipso loquitur dicens,
Ego flos campi, et lilium convallium" To which his Holiness with equal
propriety adds several other texts, which, with some further
information concerning the mystic rose, may be seen in the note on
Will. Newbrig. L. in. c. iiii., or C6r6monies Beligieuses, par B. Picart,
vol. n. p. 15. — M. Page 9, Chap. I. In honowre of "the Ordrys nyne
off haly Angelys," the author, in place of Seven Books or Divisions,
latterly extended his Chronicle into Nine. Wyntoun here refers to
(Lib. n. Homilia xxxiv.) one of the Homilies on the Gospels of St.
Gregory, in which, describing the Nine Orders of Angels, where he
says : " Novem ver6 Angelorum ordines diximus : quia videlicet esse,
testante sacro eloquio, scimus Angelos, Archangelos, Virtutes,
Potestates, Principatus, Dominationes, Thronos, Cherubim, atque
Seraphim. Esse namque Angelos et Archangelos, pene omnes sacri
eloquii paginse testantur. Cherubim ver6 atque Seraphim ssepe, ut
notum est, libri Prophetarum loquuntur. Quatuor quoque ordinum
nomina Paulus Apostolus ad Ephesios enumerat, dicens ; supra
omnem etc. (Sancti Gregorii Papae I. Magni Opera, Tom. i. p. 1603.)
" Angelorum quippe et hominum naturam ad cognoscendum se
Dominus condidit : quam dum consistere ad seternitatem voluit, cam
proculdubio ad suam similitudinem creavit." — P. Page 10, 1. 39. —
SAINT GREGOR in ane Omely. Gregory the First, surnamed the
Great, was elected Pope in the year 590, and died in the year 604.
Wyntoun here alludes to one of his Homilies on the Gospel. In the
edition of " Homilise quadraginta Beati Gregorii Papae de diversis
lectionibus Evangelii," printed at Antwerp 1509, 4to, it occurs as "
Lectio Sancti Evangelii secundum Lucam xv.," with this title, "
Homilia lectionis ejusdem habita ad populum in basilica beatorum
Johannis et Pauli, , Dominica tertia post Trinitate, Homilia xxxiiij." It
also forms
The text on this page is estimated to be only 25.25%
accurate

VOL. L] EIKST BOOK. 199 Homilia xxxiv. of Book Second in

the Benedictine edition of the Works of Sancti Gregorii, Papae I.,
cognomento Magni, Opera Omnia, vol. i. p. 1600. Parisiis, 1705,
folio. In Book V. (vol. ii. page 46), Wyntoun devotes Chap. XIII. to
St. Gregory, or, to use his own words — This Chapiter tellis of Saynt
Gregor, That quhylome wes the Gret Doctor. — L. Page 11,1. 71.—
That in the felde of Damask fayre. " Kemansit homo in loco ubi
factus est in agro, scilicet Damascene/'— (Petri Comestoris Historia
Scholastica, p. 7.) — F. Page 16, 1. 185. — Cayinis, occasionally
written Kayiu, Kaynys (for Cain), and Tubulkayn (Tubal Cain). Other
words and Scripture names, owing to the peculiar orthography of the
Royal MS., are sometimes not very intelligible, such as — Froyte
(fruit), swn, swnnys (son, sons), wauys, wawis (waves), hawyn
(haven, harbour), wowelle (wool). — L. Page 16,1. 204.— And wytht
that schot he Kayin slewe. " Casu interfecit Caym inter frutetac
estimans feram."(Petrus C&mestvr, p. 12.)— P. Page 17, 1. 226. —
The passage here quoted from Josephus of the first invention of
Music, is contained in Chapter Second of the Antiquities of the Jews.
The reference is there made by the Jewish historian to Jubal having
erected two inscribed pillars, which may be quoted from W.
Whiston's translation : — "And that their inventions might not be lost
before they were sufficiently known, upon Adam's prediction that the
world was to be destroyed at one time by the force of fire, and at
another time by the violence and quantity of water, they made two
pillars ; the one of brick, the other of stone ; they inscribed their
discoveries on them both : that in case the pillar of brick should be
destroyed by the flood, the pillar of stone might remain, and exhibit
those discoveries to mankind : and also
The text on this page is estimated to be only 25.49%
accurate

200 NOTES ON THE [VOL. i. inform them that there was

another pillar of brick erected by them. Now this remains in the land
of Siriad to this day."— L. Page 17,1. 243 — Josephus sayis, in tyll
his buke. — (See Antiq. of the Jews, Book i. c. ii.) Page 19, 1. 279.—
Of Enoch . . . In tyll hys tyme bukys he wrate That drownyde ware
in Noey's " spate." Spait or spate, which usually signifies a flood or
inundation, is here applied to the Universal Deluge. Enoch, the
seventh of the antediluvian patriarchs, was born B.C. 3378, in the
year of Creation 1122. His name occurs in Genesis v. 24,
Ecclesiasticus xliv. 16, Hebrews xi. 5. In the General Epistle of Jude,
mention is made of prophecies uttered by Enoch ; and among the
apocryphal writings discovered in Abyssinia, there was published at
Oxford in 1821, and again in 1838, The Book of Enoch The Prophet,
by the Rev. Dr. Eichard Laurence, afterwards Archbishop of Castel,
who died in December 1838. — L. Page 19, L 283.— Tharfor he is
yhit quyk lywand, Bydand the Antecry styes come. " In fine Mundi
redebunt ad communem vitam Henech et Elias, ut Antichristo per
conciones deputationes et miracula de optenantj ideoque ab
Antichristo martyrio omcientur . . . Ita passim Patres hii et in Apocal.
c. ii. est que communis hie fidelium sensus et traditio." — (Corn, a
Lapide Comm. in Gen., p. 104, ed. Oxford, 1648.)— F. Page 20, 1.
323.— The Grekys in thar langage all Geos the Erde thai oysyd to
call. "Sic dicitur a Geos quod est Terrse." — (Petrus Comestor, p. 13.)
— P.
The text on this page is estimated to be only 24.44%
accurate

VOL. i.] FIKST BOOK. 201 Page 21, 1. 335.— Thai past and
spred fra land to land, And Brwyt in Bretayne of thaim fand.
Wyntoun here quotes Geoffrey of Monmouth, Book I. c. xii-xvi. — P.
Page 21, 11. 336-351. — It is rather singular that Macpherson, in his
extracts from the earlier Chapters, should have overlooked this
account (although not of much importance) of the first arrival of
Brutus in Britain, and of the giant Coryne and other geawyndys or
giants, who then had possession of the land. — L. Page 26, 1. 483.—
Sum that oysyde of hym to spek Sayde he wes that Melchysedek. "
Hebrsei, teste S. Hieromyo hie in quest, voluit Melchisedec fuisse
Sem filium Noe : vixit enim Sem usque ad tempora Abrje et
Melchisedec." — (Corn, a Lapide Comm. in Gen., p. 156.) — F. Page
26,1. 501.— And the foure Kynrykys pryncypalle. Martinus Polonus
states them differently, "Babylonicum ab Oriente, quod inccepit a
Nino, tempore Abrahse. Carthaginiense : a Meridie quod inccepit
tempore Judicum. Sub Thola duce, quando Carthago condita est.
Macedonium a Septentrione quod inccepit ab Alexandro, tempore
Machbaeorum. Eomanum ab Occidente, quod ccepit a Romulo." —
(Mart. Polon., 3. 20.) — F. Page 36, 1. 809.— In to the wattyre of
Gangys. C. Jul. Solinus, in Cap. LXV. of his Polyhistor, devoted to
India, among the wonders of the Indian rivers, says : — " Aquae
etiam gignunt miracula non minora. Anguillas ad tricenos pedes
longas educat Ganges, quern Statius Sebosus inter praecipua
miracula ait uermibus abundare, cceruleis nomine, et colore. Hi bina
habent brachia longitudinis cubitorum non minus senum, adeo
robustis vribus, ut Elephantos ad potum ventitantes, mordicus
comprehensos, ipsorum manu rapiant in profundum." — (Coloniw,
1520, 4to, fol. 84, vel. Lugduni, 1538, 8vo., p. 152.) Page 36, 1. 828.
— Account of the "Wonders in the Yndis Se.
The text on this page is estimated to be only 26.26%
accurate

202 NOTES ON THE [VOL. I. Great Eels in the AVaters of

the Ganges, etc., Translatyde welle in oure langage." It is somewhat
uncertain to what book Wyntoun refers for the Ferly's of Inde, as no
English translation of his time is known of the Imago Mundi, but one
of the books which issued from the press of William Caxton
professes to have been translated from the French, is entitled, " The
Myrrour of the Worlde," and printed in the Abbey of Westminster in
the year 1481, folio, and passed through two editions. Extracts from
this work, somewhat resembling Wyntoun's account of " geauntes
and other mervalles," are given in Dibdin's Bibliotheca Spenceriana,
vol. iv. pp. 231-244, but they are too long for quotation. — L. Page
41, 1. 969.— The land off Tebys in it lyis, And off it lord was Saynt
Morys. See Honorii Imago Mundi. — P. Page 42, 1. 986. — The
legend of the Amazons, " Thai war wemen wyld and wycht," as a
nation of female warriors, fierce and brave, and peculiar in their
institutions, is of great antiquity. Every one is familiar how much the
Greeks credited the Amazonian legend, and how their figures are
represented in the finest remains of ancient Greek sculpture, armed
with a lance, and wearing a helmet, with long hair ; the right breast
uncovered, and their short kirtles displaying the symmetry of their
figures. There is, however, a striking contrast in the figures of other
Amazonian warriors, who still flourish in Africa. Captain R. F. Burton,
in his work, entitled " A Mission to Gelele, King of Dahome/' with
notices of the so-called " Amazons," etc., London, 2 vols. 8vo., 1864,
gives an amusing description of their manners and customs, a
reference to which is sufficient. — L. Page 43, 1. 1024. — A clerk
that tretys off this matere. — F. (No reference is here added to this
line.) Page 53, 1. 1343. — The reader will no doubt recollect that the
exuberant fertility ascribed to Britain by Wyntown, who has had it at
second-hand, probably from Henry of Huntindon (/. 171, a), is by
Solinus \c. 34] appropriated to Ireland. A similar account is given of
the Balearic Islands. (Justin. L. xnv. c. xiv.) — M.
The text on this page is estimated to be only 25.21%
accurate

VOL. i.] FIRST BOOK. 203 Page 54, 1. 1373. — v. Bedce.

Hist. Ecdes. L. I. c. L; though Wyntown's author seems to have been
Henry Hunt. [/. 171 (2d) 6], whose work was probably common in
Scotland, as Huntington was during most of his time under Scottish
Princes. — M. Page 54, 1. 1382. — Fordun (p. 285) and Wyntown
seem to have copied this story from Huntindon (/. 1 7 1 (2d) J),
who, for ought that appears, may be the original author of it. Yet,
notwithstanding the wonder he expresses at the vanishing of the
Pichts, the name was retained by the people of Galloway in his own
time. (Compare /. Hag. col. 261, 262, 264 ; R. Hag. col. 322 ; Ailred.
col. 342, 343; Bromton. col. 1027.)— M. Page 54, 1. 1383. —
Bertane, and sometimes Bartany are used promiscuously with
Bretane and Britain by the common metathesis or transposition of r
with its neighbouring vowel. — M. Page 55, 1. 1414. — Ymago
Mundi. See previous note to page 36, line 828. The work here
referred to is not much known, but may be identified with one De
Imagine Mundi, that was popular during the Middle Ages. It is
preserved in various old MSS., and was first printed, without place or
date, but probably at Nuremberg, about the year 1472, with this
title, " Christianus ad Solitarium quendam de Ymagino Mundi." (See
Brunet, under the name Christianus, Hain, Repertorium, No. 8800.)
In the Nouvelle Biographie Gen^rale, tome xxv. p. 79, the writer
says, — " Imago Mundi, abre"g6 de Cosmographie d'Histoire, qui a
e"t6 longtemps dans toutes les mains. Les exemplaires manuscrits
en sont, en effet, tres-nombreux, et Ton en compte sept editions."
Wyntoun had certainly a copy of the book in his hands, and he made
copious use of it in his Notes on General History, as well as on the
succession of the Popes from the times of the Apostles. In the
Contenta hoc Honorii Opere we find De Mundi Imagine Libri III. —
Lib. I. De Mundo Supero et Infero seu de Sphaera. II. De Temporum
differentiis. III. De Temporum volubilitate, seu Chronologia. De
Mundi Philosophia, Libri IV., etc. The author Honorius Augustodunsis,
Presbyter et Scholas 
The text on this page is estimated to be only 24.05%
accurate

204 NOTES ON THE [VoL. I. ticus (a Presbyter of the

Diocese of Autunois, an ancient province of France), is said to have
nourished under the Emperor Henry v., who died in the year 1124.
According to Fabricius (Bibliotheca Latina Med. et Inf. Aetatis), he
assigns the date of 1300. A collected edition of the works of
Honorius is contained in the Maxima Bibliotheca Feterum Patrum et
Antiquorum Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum, vol. xx. Lugduni, 1677,
folio. The Summa totius et Imagine Mundi, or first portion, is divided
into three books, and each of them into numerous chapters. The
reader who has access to it may also consult the great National
work, published by the late learned Chevalier Pertz, Monumenta
Germanice Historia, vol. xii. p. 125. — L. Page 56, 1. 1445. — This
Nembrot stalwart wes of pytht. " Nemroth qui ccepit primus potens
esse in terra : et robustus venator hominum coram domino." — (P.
Comestor, p. 18.) — F. Page 57, 1. 1469.Comestor sayis in this
chawngyng God made na wrocht, na wnkouth thyng. " In hac
divisione nihil novi, fecit Deus : quia voces Esedern sunt apud omnes
gentes sed dicendi modos et formas diversis gentibus dicunt." — (P.
Comestor, p. 16.) — P. Page 58,1. 1491.— Off this Nembrot, the swn
off Cus, Frere Martyne cald hym Saturnus. " Eodem tempore
Nembroth, qui et Saturnus, a Jove filio suo eunuchisatus, ad
prsedictum jam regnum pervenit." — (Martinus Polonius, 6. 38, also
4. 16.) " Julii Anno super annotate qui quidem dies in hujus
venerande translacionis memoria in presens colitur et veneratur." —
F. Page 61. — According to Ovid (Metamorph. Lib. 1. 1. 89) the
Golden Age and Saturn, Aurea prima fata est cetas, might be said to
represent the time of Adam in Paradise. — L. Page 62, 1. 1634.—
The Iron Age.— See Ovidii Metamorph. Lib. I. 1. 127. De duro est
ultima ferro. — L.
Welcome to our website – the ideal destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. With a mission to inspire endlessly, we offer a
vast collection of books, ranging from classic literary works to
specialized publications, self-development books, and children's
literature. Each book is a new journey of discovery, expanding
knowledge and enriching the soul of the reade

Our website is not just a platform for buying books, but a bridge
connecting readers to the timeless values of culture and wisdom. With
an elegant, user-friendly interface and an intelligent search system,
we are committed to providing a quick and convenient shopping
experience. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery
services ensure that you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and

personal growth!

textbookfull.com