“Ceci n’est pas un fragment”: Identity, Intertextuality and Fictionality in Sappho’s “Brothers Poem”
2016; Taylor & Francis; Volume: 90; Issue: 1 Linguagem: Inglês
10.1080/00397679.2016.1253259
ISSN1502-7805
Autores Tópico(s)Linguistics and Discourse Analysis
ResumoAbstractIn this article, Sappho's Brothers Poem is re-evaluated and analysed from various perspectives that have not been addressed sufficiently in scholarship so far. First, some questions of principle regarding the role of the brothers and the Sapphic speaker are discussed. Secondly, the poem's communicative situation is examined, and different options for the identification of the person addressed as "you" are considered. Thirdly, it is demonstrated how the poem establishes an intertextual dialogue with the Homeric Odyssey on various levels, and how this dialogue affects the general understanding of the poem. Finally, the commonly held view that the five transmitted stanzas do not represent the entire poem is challenged. The article concludes with some wider considerations about some of the most common assumptions regarding the nature and the fragmentary state of the Brothers Poem.Keywords: Sappho"Brothers Poem""Ode to the Nereids"speakeraddresseeself-addressidentityfictionalityintertextualityOdysseyfragmentfragmentarisation AcknowledgementsThe nucleus of this article arose as my inaugural lecture at the University of Oslo (18 September 2014), a Norwegian translation of which was published in the journal Klassisk Forum (Bär Citation2015). A further developed version was presented in a lecture at the University of Gent (13 March 2015). Heartfelt thanks go to Anastasia Maravela and the two anonymous referees of this journal for reviewing my article and providing me with insightful comments and ideas, which helped me to improve my arguments significantly; to Kristoffel Demoen, Koen De Temmerman, André Lardinois, Kenneth Mauerhofer, Rolf Reber, Berenice Verhelst, Rudolf Wachter and Fabian Zogg for discussing various aspects of Sappho's newest fragments with me; and to Paula Furrer for her proficient assistance with retrieving bibliographical items that were out of my reach. The final polishing of the article was completed in the safe haven of the Fondation Hardt in Vandœuvres, the place where I enjoy hospitality, conviviality and amity like nowhere else.Notes† Walter Burkert zum Gedenken.1 Tim Whitmarsh in the Huffington Post, 30 January 2014 (Citation2014).2 Cf. BFO (Citation2014) and Obbink (Citation2016a, 22–23). The four fragments overlap with, and/or supplement, Sappho frr. 5, 9, 16, 16a, 17, 18, 18a Voigt. I follow the practice as implemented by BFO (Citation2014, 1, n. 1) of writing "Fr." (with capital letter) to refer to fragments from P.GC. inv. 105, whereas "fr." (with minuscule) is used to refer to Sappho's fragments in Voigt's (Citation1971) edition.3 Cf. Obbink (Citation2014c) and Obbink (Citation2016a, 25–26). A few months before this publication in ZPE, Obbink presented a summary of his discovery in the Times Literary Supplement, 5 February 2014 (Citation2014a), with a weblink to a preliminary online version of his ZPE edition/article (Citation2014b; this preliminary version deviated from the later definitive print version in certain details; the weblink is no longer active). Obbink's publication was soon followed by numerous scholarly publications, amongst which West (Citation2014), Ferrari (Citation2014), Dale (Citation2015) and Neri (Citation2015) are the most eminent since they consider questions relating to textual problems and the placement/arrangement of the fragments on both P.GC. inv. 105 and P.Sapph. Obbink. In addition to this, a useful overview, together with some ideas on further contextualisation, is provided by Lardinois (Citation2014). Furthermore, the new findings, and esp. the BP, were discussed in panels at the 146th Annual APA Meeting, New Orleans, 9 January 2015, and the 111th Annual CAMWS Meeting, Boulder, 27 March 2015, as well as at the core group meeting of the "Network for the Study of Archaic and Classical Greek Song" at the University of Basel, 26–28 June 2014, the results of which have been published in a volume edited by Anton Bierl and André Lardinois (Citation2016). This brand-new volume contains, inter alia, Obbink's re-edition of all the newest fragments along with a comprehensive critical apparatus and an English translation (Citation2016a), and a re-evaluation of the fragments' provenance, authenticity and arrangement (Obbink Citation2016b). Most importantly, Obbink has re-numbered the lines of the BP, beginning with line 5, based on the assumption that the poem's first stanza must be missing. Since I wish to challenge this assumption (cf. Section 5), I will be using the original numbering (lines 1–20), placing Obbink's re-numbering in square brackets (lines [5–24]). I provide my own translation of the ON and the BP in an Appendix at the end of this article.4 On the dating of the papyrus, cf. Obbink (Citation2014a, Citation2014c, 32, Citation2015a, 2–3, Citation2015b, 5–6). According to Obbink (Citation2015b, 5), the fragments were all "part of a critical edition of Sappho's work produced at Alexandria". It is generally assumed that a critical edition of Sappho's poems was produced by Alexandrian scholars, who arranged the poems in eight (or nine?) books according to metre, and that this remained the sole canonical edition of Sappho as late as the imperial period (cf. e.g. Lobel Citation1925, xiii–xiv; Page Citation1955, 112–116; Kirkwood Citation1974, 102–103). However, cf. the reservations expressed by Yatromanolakis (Citation1999, 180): The evidence about the number of books of Sappho is scant as well as perplexing. In analyzing this evidence we should attend to the possibility that the Alexandrian scholarly edition (assuming that there was only one, possibly by Aristarchus) was not necessarily the only edition that existed in later antiquity.On the circumstances of the discovery of P.Sapph. Obbink, its provenance and retrieval, cf. Obbink (Citation2015a, Citation2015b, 5–6, Citation2016b, 35–41). On ethical and legal issues related to these practical/material aspects, cf. the online publications by Mazza (Citation2014, Citation2015) and King (Citation2015a, Citation2015b, Citation2015c).5 Cf. Kirkwood (Citation1974, 102–103), Robbins (Citation2001, 46–47). Grenfell and Hunt (Citation1914, 20) already hypothesised that "Sappho's entire work may well have extended to something like 9,000 verses". An insightful sketch of the history and destiny of Sappho's text is provided by Williamson (Citation1995, 34–59).6 Before the discovery of P.Sapph. Obbink, the name of Charaxus had already been attested in Sappho fr. 213A b.7 Voigt (P.Oxy. XXIX 2506 fr. 42a.7), but without a context to be reconstructed. The name has further been conjectured in Sappho frr. 213A c.2, d.2, e.16, e.24, h.36 Voigt, but its reconstruction is not certain there.7 Hdt. 2.135.1: ἐς Αἴγυπτον ἀπίκετο Ξάνθεω τοῦ Σαμίου κομίσαντος μιν, ἀπικομένη δὲ κατ᾿ ἐργασίην ἐλύθη χρημάτων μεγάλων ὑπὸ ἀνδρὸς Μυτιληναίου χαράξου τοῦ Σκαμανδρωνύμου παιδός, ἀδελϕεοῦ δὲ Σαπϕοῦς τῆς μουσοποιοῦ. οὕτω δὴ ἡ Ῥοδῶπις ἐλευθερώθη καὶ κατέμεινέ τε ἐν Αἰγύπτῳ. 2.135.6: χάραξος δὲ ὡς λυσάμενος Ῥοδῶπιν ἀπενόστησε ἐς Μυτιλήνην, ἐν μέλεϊ Σαπϕὼ πολλὰ κατεκερτόμησέ μιν. On the passage, cf. Page (Citation1955, 48–51), Kurke (Citation1999, 175–178, 220–227), Lidov (Citation2002; cf. also my n. 14), Yatromanolakis (Citation2007, 312–337), Kivilo (Citation2010, 176–177), Raaflaub (Citation2016, 127–133), as well as Lloyd's commentary (Citation2007, 337–338). All translations from Greek are my own.8 Cf. Obbink (Citation2014c, 32, with n. 1, and 42) and Ferrari (Citation2014, 1).9 Cf. Obbink (Citation2014c, 45) and Ferrari (Citation2014, 1).10 Athen. 10.425: Σαπϕώ τε ἡ καλὴ πολλαχοῦ Λάριχον τὸν ἀδελϕὸν ἐπαινεῖ ὡς οἰνοχοοῦντα ἐν τῷ πρυτανείῳ τοῖς Μυτιληναίοις.11 Concerning Larichus' age in relation to that of Sappho, Ferrari (Citation2014, 1, n. 2) notes: Che Larico fosse più giovane di Saffo non è esplicitamente dichiarato da alcuna fonte, ma si ricava con ragionevole sicurezza dal fatto che Saffo cantava di lui quando egli era ancora "coppiere" nel pritaneo di Mitilene ed è ora confermato dall'augurio che diventi "un oumo".In my view, Ferrari's argument is not conclusive; while Larichus' occupation as a cupbearer indeed suggests youthfulness, the fact that Sappho sings about him in this function does not provide evidence for her own age. For Charaxus as Sappho's oldest brother, cf. P.Oxy. XV 1800 fr. 1 col. i 8–9.12 The noun κασί⌈γν̣⌉ ⌊ητον was already restored by Blass (with the article τόν suggested by Diels and Wilamowitz) and is now unequivocally confirmed by G.GC. inv. 105. Cf. also the discussion in Section 3.13 Cf. Suda s.v. Σαπϕώ, which mentions Charaxus and Larichus as Sappho's brothers, alongside a third brother called Eurygius (107.4 Adler), and P.Oxy. XV 1800 fr. 1, which also names three brothers but is heavily damaged (cf. Kivilo Citation2010, 175–176, with n. 42).14 Lidov (Citation2002) hypothesises that Herodotus' phrase ἐν μέλεϊ Σαπϕὼ πολλὰ κατεκερτόμησέ μιν does not, in fact, point to an actual song composed by Sappho, but should rather be viewed as a reflex of Sappho as a character in early Athenian comedy. The matter is further complicated because it is not entirely clear whether or not μιν actually refers to Charaxus; it has also been suggested that the victim of Sappho's invective was Rhodopis (cf. Obbink Citation2014c, 41).15 On Amasis' reign, cf. Depuydt (Citation2006, 267–268). The ancient testimonies on Sappho's vital statistics are collected by Ferrari (Citation2014, 1, n. 1), who assumes that "Saffo […] nacque verso il 640/630"; cf. further MacLachlan (Citation1997, 156) and Kivilo (Citation2010, 195–198, with n. 174). One main crux lies in Suda s.v. Σαπϕώ, where the 42th Olympiad (612–609 BC) is mentioned (107.2–3 Adler: γεγονυῖα κατὰ τὴν μβ᾿ Ὀλυμπιάδα); however, this piece of information may refer to either Sappho's birth or the peak of her career as a poet. The latter is considered to be more probable in scholarship today (cf. Robbins Citation2001, 46; particularly in view of the Suda's synchronisation of the date with Alcaeus, Stesichorus and Pittacus, 107.3 Adler: ὅτε καὶ Ἀλκαῖος ἦν καὶ Στησίχορος καὶ Πιττακός); the former would lead to a dating of Sappho's life to c. 612–550 BC (cf. Saake Citation1972, 49) and thus make the Herodotean account more probable. For an overview of older discussions regarding Sappho's dating, cf. Saake (Citation1972, 37–50).16 On the anecdotal nature of the Rhodopis episode at Hdt. 2.135, cf. esp. Yatromanolakis (Citation2007, 312–337). It has to be acknowledged, though, that Herodotus may have (mis-?)identified Rhodopis with a woman called Doricha who appears in Sappho's poems (frr. 15.11 and [possibly] 7.1 Voigt). According to Strabo 17.1.33, this was the same person (ἣν Σαπϕὼ μὲν ἡ τῶν μελῶν ποιήτρια καλεῖ Δωρίχαν, […] ἄλλοι δ᾿ ὀνομάζουσι Ῥοδῶπιν, "whom Sappho the songmaker calls Doricha […], while others call her Rhodopis"); Poseid. 17 Gow/Page = 122 Austin/Bastianini and Athen. 13.596 mention the same anecdote, but only the name of Doricha. It is difficult to determine whether or not Rhodopis and Doricha were the same (historical or fictional) persons, but if they were not and Herodotus was the first to confuse them, the chronological problem discussed vanishes. Recent discussions of this issue are offered by Nagy (Citation2015), Martin (Citation2016, 118–120), Raaflaub (Citation2016, 127–133), Lardinois (Citation2016, 169–173).17 On the ancient genre of biographies and the common practice of extrapolating biographical information about authors from their works, cf. esp. the seminal study by Lefkowitz (Citation1981); on Sappho in particular, cf. the extensive treatment by Kivilo (Citation2010, 167–200), further (more briefly) Stein (Citation1990, 96–100) and Zellner (Citation2010, 5–8). On the lack of differentiation between author and narrator in ancient literary criticism, cf. Whitmarsh (Citation2009).18 On the "I" in so-called "personal poetry" of the archaic period, cf. e.g. the synopses provided by Jarcho (Citation1990), Slings (Citation1990), MacLachlan (Citation1997), Kurke (Citation2007).19 In twentieth-century scholarship, the idea of Sappho's poetry as a reflex of the author's biography and her social environment essentially originates from Wilamowitz (Citation1912, Citation1913), who also coined the famous phrase of Sappho as the head of a "Mädchenpensionat", a boarding school for girls (Wilamowitz Citation1912, 41). This hypothesis has been very influential, but has also been met with heavy criticism (for the latter cf. esp. Parker Citation1993 and Stehle Citation1997, 262–318; summary in Ferrari Citation2010, 33–37). In a narrower sense, the pragmatic approach argues that Sappho's poetry has a performative and communicative function within a concrete, non-fictional, and orally performed context; this approach was most prominently represented in a series of publications by Gentili (Citation1966, 1985 [Citation1988], Citation1990) and Rösler (Citation1980a, Citation1980b, Citation1984, Citation1985, Citation1990) and was, more recently, revived in a publication by Bierl (Citation2003). Other pragmatic approaches suggest a contextualisation of Sappho's poetry within symposiastic contexts (cf. e.g. Parker Citation1993 and, more recently, Schlesier Citation2014) or within choral lyric (viz. "Sappho as an instructor of young women's choruses", Lardinois Citation1994, 80; cf. also Lardinois Citation1996 and Calame Citation1997 [1977], 210–214). For an overview of the pragmatic approach(es), cf. Latacz (Citation1985b, 34–45); see further, more recently, Schmitz (Citation2002, 52–53, with nn. 4–7), Bierl (Citation2003, 98–99, nn. 29–30), Rudolph (Citation2009, 332–333, n. 4). An overview of the different stances regarding Sappho and her "circle" is provided by Klinck (Citation2008, 15–17). The literary approach was originally a reaction by Joachim Latacz to the pragmatic school, esp. to Wolfgang Rösler's extreme idea that fictionality was a concept not yet known to the archaic lyric poets (cf. Latacz Citation1985a, Citation1985b, 34–47, Citation1986); specifically literary stances were further taken by Weißenberger (Citation1991), Schmitz (Citation2002, Citation2013), Radke (Citation2005). Further references in Radke (Citation2005, 8–14, with nn. 8–26), Rudolph (Citation2009, 331, n. 3).20 "[W]ir wissen nicht einmal, ob Sappho als Person existierte oder ihr Name eine konventionelle persona war, die von einer Reihe von Dichterinnen (und Dichtern?) benutzt werden konnte." Along those lines is, for example, the feminist approach taken by Skinner (Citation1993).21 "[G]erade aus einer literaturwissenschaftlichen Perspektive ist eine solche Zuspitzung nicht zwingend."22 Cf. Zuntz (Citation1951, 13–14). The etymology of the name Σαπϕώ/Ψαπϕώ itself has given rise to considerable research and speculation. It is commonly considered to be of non-Greek (maybe Hittite) origin; cf. esp. Zuntz (Citation1951) and Brown (Citation1991). On various other spelling variations of the name on vases and coins, cf. Yatromanolakis (Citation2007, 102–103).23 On this technique, cf. Fisch (Citation2010, 287): "Durch signifikante Verfremdung seines Namens oder die originelle Neubildung eines Pseudonyms kann sich der Autor gegenüber dem Leser in ein bestimmtes Repräsentationsverhältnis setzen."24 The most natural assumption is that the addressee was specified in the lost first stanza; but cf. Section 5 on the voidability of the poem's fragmentary state.25 In the meantime, further suggestions have been made, such as Larichus (Stehle Citation2016, 268–271; independently, the same hypothesis was communicated to me by Rudolf Wachter via private email communication), Sappho's third brother Eurygius (Lardinois Citation2014, 191; Caciagli Citation2016, 435–437), or Sappho's father (Caciagli Citation2016, 435). For an overview of all suggestions, cf. Neri (Citation2015, 58–59, with nn. 29–40).26 Cf. also West (Citation2014, 9), supported by Obbink (Citation2015b, 2), who argues that the Greek word for "mother" may be supplemented in line 2 of P.Oxy. XXI 2289 fr. 5, a papyrus scrap with which P.Sapph. Obbink partly overlaps (viz. lines 3–6 of POxy 2289 fr. 5 overlap in small bits with the first four lines of the BP, cf. Obbink Citation2015b, 1). However, the evidence is not conclusive: the remnants of this line reveal as little as ..]σεμα̣[, and although West (Citation2014, 9) considers it "tempting to look for σέ, μᾶ[τερ", he concedes that "the space before it seems impossibly narrow to accommodate two syllables, and if there was only one the alpha has to be short" (cf. also the discussion in Section 5).27 For the first meaning, LSJ mentions Aristoph. Equ. 348 τὴν νύκτα θρυλῶν καὶ λαλῶν ἐν ταῖς ὁδοῖς σεαυτῷ and Theocr. Id. 2.142 ὡς καί τοι μὴ μακρὰ ϕίλα θρυλέοιμι Σελάνα; for the second, Eur. El. 909–910 οὔποτ᾿ ἐξελίμπανον / θρυλοῦσ᾿ ἅ γ᾿ εἰπεῖν ἤθελον κατ᾿ ὄμμα σόν and Plat. Phd. 65b τά γε τοιαῦτα καὶ οἱ ποιηταὶ ἡμῖν ἀεὶ θρυλοῦσιν (further passages include Isocr. 12.237, Demosth. 1.7, 19.156, 21.160). In addition to this, derivative nouns and adjectives exist (cf. all LSJ s.v.): τὸ θρύλημα "common talk, by-word" (LXX Jb 17.6), θρυλητός "generally talked of" (Tzetz. Hom. 12.36), ὁ θρῦλος "noise as of many voices, murmur" (Batr. 135 et al.). Cf. also Beekes (Citation2010) s.v. θρῦλος, who suggests an etymological connection with θόρυβος, and Kurke (Citation2016, 239, n. 7) for further occurrences.28 Cf. Hall (Citation2015): "[T]he verb […] implies incessant repetition, along with a shade of disparagement that evokes gossip or tittle-tattle." Cf. also Ferrari (Citation2014, 3) and Lidov (Citation2016, 102–104).29 Obbink contradicts his own interpretation by (rightly) stating elsewhere that the verb θρυλέω is "[d]erogatory, implying either a confused babbling or unharmonious chattering" (Citation2014c, 41).30 "[Ein durchgehendes Charakteristikum dieser Ammen besteht in ihrer] lebenslangen, bedingungslosen Treue zu ihren Pflegekindern, denen sie auch als Erwachsene noch Rat, Lob und Tadel zuteil werden lassen können."31 The phrase is used only once more (at Od. 20.129) by Telemachus, who also addresses Eurycleia.32 Od. 23.15 (Penelope to Eurycleia): τίπτε με λώβευεις πολυπενθέα θυμὸν ἔχουσαν; ("Why are you humiliating me – me who has a heart full of grief?").33 Od. 23.11–14 (Penelope to Eurycleia): μαῖα ϕίλη, μάργην σε θεοὶ θέσαν, οἵ τε δύνανται / ἄϕρονα ποιῆσαι καὶ ἐπίϕρονά περ μάλ᾿ ἐόντα, / καί τε χαλιϕρονέοντα σαοϕροσύνης ἐπέβησαν / οἵ σέ περ ἔβλαψαν· πρὶν δὲ ϕρένας αἰσίμη ἦσθα. ("My dear gammer! The gods have turned you mad – they who are able / to make [anyone] mindless, even [someone] who is very clever; / and they also led [many a] simpleton to soundness of mind. / Indeed, they've damaged you, too – and you used to be destined to reason!") Od. 23.81–82 (dito): μαῖα ϕίλη, χαλεπόν σε θεῶν αἰειγενετάων / δήνεα εἴρυσθαι, μάλα περ πολύιδριν ἐοῦσαν. ("My dear gammer! It is difficult to get a grip on the counsels / of the everlasting gods, even [for you who] is very knowledgeable.")34 Bettenworth's conclusion, though, is solely pragmatic (Citation2014, 18): Nicht zuletzt liefert eine Identifizierung der zweiten Person mit der Amme eine plausible Antwort auf die […] Frage, warum gerade die Ich-Sprecherin (,Sappho'), nicht aber die angeredete Person […] die Gebete am Heratempel verrichten sollte. […] So läßt sich nicht sagen, in welchem Gesundheitszustand sich Sapphos Mutter befindet oder wie viele Personen für das Gebet am Heratempel benötigt werden […]. Setzt man dagegen die Amme als Gesprächspartnerin an, so werden keine zusätzlichen Informationen benötigt, um zu erklären, warum nicht sie, sondern die Sprecherin zum Heratempel gehen soll. Die Ich-Sprecherin wäre die unmittelbare Verwandte des vermißten Charaxos und auch unmittelbar von den Konsequenzen seines Ausbleibens betroffen, ihre Gesprächspartnerin dagegen eine zwar besorgte, aber schließlich doch nachgeordnete Dienerin. Aus diesem Grund kommt das Gebet am Heratempel zunächst der Sprecherin zu.35 Cf. BFO (Citation2014, 24). On the restoration of the word κασί⌈γν̣⌉ ⌊ητον in line 2, now confirmed by G.GC. inv. 105, cf. n. 12 above. On the interpretation of the names of Charaxus and Larichus as speaking names, cf. also Section 4.36 Cf. Obbink (Citation2014c, 34), West (Citation2014, 1–2), Obbink (Citation2015a, 3, with image 8). According to West (Citation2014, 7–8) and Obbink (Citation2016b, 49), fr. 9 Voigt stood in between the ON and the BP, whereas Dale (Citation2015, 23–25) argues that fr. 1 Voigt may have stood there.37 Cf. n. 4 above on the question of the canonical value of the Alexandrian edition(s) of Sappho in the imperial period, and Section 5 on the alphabetical arrangement according to first letters in Book 1 of the Sappho edition, whence the newest fragments come.38 In addition to this, linguistic correspondences between the two poems reinforce their sense of unity. Line 2 of the ON τυίδ᾿ ἴκεσθ⌋[ι is echoed in line 7 [11] of the BP ἐξίκεσθαι τυίδε. Furthermore, the verb λύειν is used to express the idea of being released from what is pressing at the moment in both poems: ON line 5: πάντα λῦσα⌋[ι – BP line 20 [24]: αἶψα λύθειμεν. Finally, adjectives denoting safety and intactness pervade both poems: ON line 1: ἀβλάβη⌋[ν – BP line 7 [11]: σάαν, and line 9 [13]: ἀρτ̣ε̣μέας. (Cf. also Obbink Citation2014c, 34, 45.)39 The noun κασιγ⌈νή̣⌉ ⌊ταν was already restored by Blass (with the article τάν suggested by Diels and Wilamowitz) and is now unequivocally confirmed by G.GC. inv. 105, as is τὸν κασί⌈γν̣⌉ ⌊ητον in line 2 (cf. n. 12 above).40 Cf. BFO (Citation2014, 24): Perhaps the connotation here is "even more honor than previously" (or more honor than he did when he wronged her?), or perhaps simply "more" in the sense of "further" or "continuing" honor. This could presumably only be made possible by the brother's safe return, and thus forms part of the prayer.41 Cf. also Bettenworth (Citation2014, 18).42 On the ancient testimonies about Sappho's family, cf. Kivilo (Citation2010, 173–183), Lardinois (Citation2016, 169–173).43 The coronis above Fr. 3 col. ii 10 unmistakably reveals that this is the beginning of the poem; cf. BFO (Citation2014, 11, 23–24). The epithet πότνιαι confirms the suggestion by Diels and Wilamowitz, while Earle's hitherto accepted restoration Κύπρι καὶ (printed in the editions by Lobel/Page and by Voigt) has been proven wrong; cf. BFO (Citation2014, 23).44 Lobel (Citation1921, 164); a statement made in defence of the restoration Κύπρι καὶ (cf. the preceding note).45 Therefore, it is not necessary to follow West (Citation2014, 5) who suggests that πότνιαι be corrected to πόντιαι (a restoration already proposed by Jurenka) because of the seemingly inappropriate "august status" which the Nereids are granted here. Cf. also Ferrari (Citation2014, 6) in defence of the transmission.46 Cf. Nünlist (Citation2014, 13): "Dem Wunsch nach ökonomischem Erfolg wird der letztlich wichtigere Wunsch nach einer sicheren Überfahrt entgegengehalten, wobei diese jenen nicht zwingend ausschließt."47 For further literature on the topic of self-regulation and second-person self-talk, cf. e.g. Senay, Albarracín, and Noguchi (Citation2010), Zell, Warriner, and Albarracín (Citation2012).48 For the idea of a "split personality", cf. also Sappho fr. 51 Voigt: οὐκ οἶδ᾿ ὄττι θέω· δύο μοι τὰ νοήματα. ("I don't know what I shall do: I have two minds.")49 On Odysseus' "barking heart", cf. esp. the treatment by Gill (Citation1996, 183–190); on the singularity of Od. 20.18 within the Homeric epics, cf. Pelliccia (Citation1995, 175–178). For further examples of self-address in the second person or to one's own heart in ancient poetry, cf. e.g. Theogn. 1029; Theocr. Id. 11.72; Ter. Andr. 206; Catull. 8, 51.13–16, 52 (cf. West Citation1966, 169, commentary on Hes. Theog. 36). An extensive discussion of the topic in a wider context is provided by Gill (Citation1996, 175–239).50 On the relation of "you" and "me" in these lines, cf. also Lidov (Citation2016, 57–59). Bowie (Citation2016, 157–163) suggests emending ἔμε to ἔμα ("my stuff").51 This aspect again ties in with the question of the performative nature of Sappho's poetry and its Sitz im Leben (cf. Section 3, with n. 19). Nagy (Citation2016) has recently argued for a decidedly pragmatic approach in light of the newest fragments.52 On the forms of addresses and the nature of the addressees in Sappho's poetry, cf. Schlesier (Citation2015).53 The Odyssey as an intertext for the BP is also suggested by Mueller (Citation2016) who, inter alia, argues that the BP be read as a lyric response to Nestor's unspectacular homecoming as reported briefly at Od. 3.168–175, and that Sappho in so doing "inserts herself and her island into a vibrant network of epic geography and nostoi songs" (43).54 If we wish to adhere to Bettenworth's nurse hypothesis (cf. Section 3), we have to bear in mind that Eurycleia was the nurse of Odysseus and Telemachus, but not that of Penelope. Nevertheless, her authority over Penelope is considerable; cf. Karydas (Citation1998, 19–20): Eurykleia respects but does not fear her mistress. Although Penelope has the institutional authority over her as a master over a slave/servant, still, Eurykleia also has her own authority over Penelope, which is certainly very different but still very important: as an old and experienced female member of the household holding two responsible roles, as the housekeeper and, more important, the Nurse of both the older and the younger master, she can advise her younger mistress, as if she were her own Nurse. She has the cleverness, the skill, and, more important, the power to persuade her what to do (wash, change, and pray) and what not to do (tell Laertes). At the same time, she prepares Penelope to accept the fact that her son has grown up. In advising Penelope, Eurykleia uses the hierarchical authority inherent in Greek poetics in the education of younger female figures by an older experienced woman.Viewed from this perspective, the shift from factual to structural congruity applies here, too; in short, it is not relevant whose nurse the Sapphic speaker addresses, but, rather, that she addresses a nurse-figure and thus conjures up the structural power dynamic as embodied in the paradigmatic relation between Penelope and Eurycleia.55 On Penelope as the literary prototype of the "waiting wife", cf. van Zyl Smit (Citation2008).56 The term δαίμων as used in the BP (lines 10 [14] and 14 [18]) is to be understood as a synonym of θεός; cf. n. 91 below.57 ἀρτεμέεσσι is to be understood predicatively rather than as an attribute here (cf. Hoekstra Citation1989, 166, commentary ad loc.) and necessarily also includes Penelope although she is distinguished separately. In the Iliad, the adjective ἀρτεμής is used in an iterative verse, Il. 5.515 = 7.308 ὡς εἶδον ζωόν τε καὶ ἀρτεμέα προσιόντα ("when they saw him come – alive, and safe and sound"), which is once applied to Aeneas, once to Hector. The contexts of these passages are, in my view, too different to constitute an intertextual connection to BP line 9 [13] (pace Lardinois Citation2014, 189–190; Kurke Citation2016, 249–250, n. 34); however, Lardinois (Citation2016, 176) may be right in saying that this "is another example of Sappho's use of martial and heroic language to describe her own, non-martial situation".58 Nünlist (Citation2014, 13–14) and Kurke (Citation2016, 249–251) also mention the parallel between BP line 9 [13] and Od. 13.43, but without fully exploiting its intertextual implications.59 On the reception of Homer in Sappho's poetry, cf. esp. Rissman (Citation1983); for further references, cf. Steinrück (Citation1999, 139, nn. 1–2) and Larson (Citation2010, 175–176, n. 1). With regard to Penelope, the article by Larson (Citation2010) is of particular interest, as she argues that Penelope acts as an intertextual role-model for the speaker (whom she identifies with the departing girl) in Sappho fr. 94. On the Odyssean Penelope as a feminist weaver writing against the androcentric world view of/in the Odyssey, cf. esp. the publications by Winkler (Citation1990, 129–161), Felson-Rubin (Citation1994, Citation1996), Clayton (Citation2004); for a survey of different scholarly attitudes towards the character of the Odyssean Penelope, cf., extensively, Clayton (Citation2004, 1–19), and the brief overview provided by Larson (Citation2010, 177–179). I reject extreme feminist stances such as that of Clayton (Citation2004, 19), who argues that a decidedly "Penelopean poetics […] challenges" the Odyssey's "phallocentric principles", but I agree that the character of Penelope provides a gendered counterpoint to an otherwise male-dominated world of epic heroism. Viewed from this perspective, Sappho's BP can be regarded as an accordingly gendered zoom into (and out of) this specifically female aspect of the Odyssey (along those lines, cf. also Mueller Citation2016, 32–35).60 For textual parallels of this metaphor in Greek poetry, cf. Obbink (Citation2014c, 45).61 Cf. also Lidov (Citation2016, 83): "The notion of holding up one's head has the connotation of manly, combative behavior. It is a boxer's stance, and a noble one."62 The adverb αἶψα emphasises that Larichus' Mannwerdung is not regarded as the result of a process, but, rather, as a specific point in the future, and is thus comparable to the moment in the assembly when Telemachus becomes a man after having spoken up. Mueller (Citation2016, 39) makes the astute observation that Larichus' "head-lifting can be viewed as mirroring in reverse Zeus's traditional bowing of his head toward the ground, which is how (in epic) the god wills something to happen" (cf. Il. 1.528, 17.209). By way of this association, the authoritative force of Larichus' gesture is further emphasised.63 Cf. Orph. Arg. 372 κῦμα χαράσσειν; Nonn. Dion. 3.46 ὕδωρ ἐχάρασσον ἐρετμοῖς, 40.446 χαράξατε νῶτα θαλάσσης,
Referência(s)