MYTHOLOGY AND MONUMENTS OF ANCIENT ATHENS / ΜΥΘΟΛΟΓΙΑ ΚΑΙ ΜΝΗΜΕΙΑ ΤΗΣ...
Embed Size (px)
Transcript of MYTHOLOGY AND MONUMENTS OF ANCIENT ATHENS / ΜΥΘΟΛΟΓΙΑ ΚΑΙ ΜΝΗΜΕΙΑ ΤΗΣ...
MYTHOLOGY AND MONUMENTS
MYTHOLOGY & MONUMENTSOF
ANCIENT ATHENSBEING A TRANSLATION OF A PORTION OF THE'ATTICA' OF PAD SAN I ASBY
WITH INTRODUCTORY ESSAY AND ARCH/EOLOGICAL COMMENTARYliY
JANEMYTHS OF THE'
MACMILLAN ANDAND NEW YORKI
All rights reserved
WHO HAVE TAUGHT MEI
THIS BOOKJ. E.
ADDENDA ET CORRIGENDAPagexlvi, line
and coinage' read
and cu Itus.'
'I believe him to be the symbol of Poseidon's spring.
This idea was suggested tosupport ofJahrbiich.it
Mr. Cecil Smith.in
be stated by him
a paper shortly to appear
Page 444 and passim
Cephu^us' read the
After 'do' read 'so.'
taken in part from Dr. Baumgarten'salterations
gang durch Athen, but with many
of the Dipylon from the Guide Joanne, Athhtes
the plan of the theatre
from Baumeister's Denkmdler, but with the addition of the orchestra.
Inscriptions are facsimiled only
they appear in the plates.
chosen to express the exact purportfirst
to elucidate the
Mythology of Athens, and with this intent its Monuments, taking Pausanias as a guide.
I am anxious to make this clear, because to produce an adequate archaeological edition even of one book of Pausanias would have been in some respects beyond my scope. Such
who should bepetence, atfirst
philologist, topographer, epigraphist,
architect, as well as mythologist
and mythographist. My comconfined to the last two branches ofbeen ratherown.
as regards the other departments has
to weigh the opinions of others than to originate
addressed, not to the professional archaeologist,I
but to the student, whose needs mind. On the other hand, inventure to hope the specialistcriticism.
have constantly borne inthe
worthy of his
regards this Essay,
laid special stress
on threenovel to
points, the first of
may be somewhat
the English readerFirst, I
have dealt specially with vase-paintings asall,
study of vase-paintings at
so long seriously pursued
by (ierman archaeologists,their study as sourcesis
in its infancy.
are accustomed to
turn to the pages of epic poets and tragedians as evidence for the date of a myth ; we make little use of the contemporary
prior sources of art,
myth has not appeared on a vase-painting of the fifth century B.C., to conclude offhand that the myth was not current at the time. To employtheir evidence atall, the mythologist must have a thorough of ceramography in general, of the principles of knowledge typography, and the conditions under which it developed.
use of vase-paintings as sources It does not do, because a difficulties.
admit, beset with
not learnt in a day.is
hazard as an illustration
in the mythologist's
In the matter of suggestion, in raising mind which from literary ver-
never have occurred, lies, I think, their chief This I hope to have abundantly shown in
the myths of Triptolemos, of Procne
and Philomela, of Prokris
and Kephalos.I have tried, in dealing with literary sources, to with the greatest care early and late versions, and distinguish to disentangle the often almost hopelessly intricate web that
In our logographers and Latin -poets have woven for us. or our Smith a myth is given in its final form, Lempriere always as a connected story, with occasional references toties
Homer, Sophocles, Ovid, Hyginus, as if they were all authoriof equal value and contemporaneous date. No attempt is made to arrive at primitive form and trace its development, to formulate and eliminate constantly -recurring factors, tocontaminatio," to trace in the modification of myth either the political purpose of the statesman or the personal tendency of a Euripides or a Pindar. In fact, mythology is treated as if it were a crystallised form, almostdetect
PREFACEa dogma, instead of the mostgrowths.vital
Third, I have tried everywhere to get at, where possible, the cult as the explanation of the legend. My belief is that in many, even in the large majority of cases ritual practiceI hope to misunderstood explains the elaboration of myth. have given salient instances of this in the myths of Erich-
of Aletis, and of Kephalos. Some of the loveliest Greeks have left us will be seen to have taken their
not in poetic imagination, but in primitive, often savage, In this matter in think, always practical ritual.
regarding the myth-making Greek as a practical savage rather I follow, quam longo intervallo, than a poet or philosopher in the steps of Eusebius, Lobeck, Mannhardt, and Mr. Andrew
The nomina numina methodbecauseI
have utterly discarded
and second, because, philologist whatever partial success may await it in the future, a method That I so long over- driven may well lie by for a time.to
have been unable, except for occasional illustration, to apply my examination of cults the comparative method is matter
of deep regret to me,conviction.I
to lack of time, not lack of
may perhaps be allowed to ask that my present be only taken as prolegomena to a more systematic attemptsstudy.
have attempted the examination of Athenian local cults only. It may surprise some that in an essay on such a subject no place is given to Athene. The reason is simply thisI
Athene was not the object of a merely local cult, as Cecrops was. She reigned at Athens as one of the orthodox Olympianhierarchy nay, more, there is constant and abundant evidence of her forcible propagandist entrance, of her suppression of Poseidon, her affiliation of Erechtheus. Any examination of
Athene's mythology would include the Homeric system, and far wider scope than the analysis of a local cult. Athene
her place on the Acropolis, just as Dionysos
treated of in his templesrule throughout has
and theatre, Asklepios in his hieron. to examine the stranger gods
only as they occur in the text of Pausanias, and to reserve all thorough investigation of local mythology for the Essay. In this matter of the distinction between popular local cults with theirendless diversity and the orthodox and ultimately dominant Olympian hierarchy I should be ungrateful if I did not acknow-
deep debt to Sir Charles LyalPs fascinating Asiatic book that shows a marvellous insight into the"
of classic polytheism.
Olympian gods have so imposed themselves upon our modern imagination that it is perhaps only those who, like Sir CharlescanLyall in India, have watched mythology in the making realise a classical world peopled, not by the stately
plastic figures of Zeus, Hera, Artemis, Apollo, Athene, and Hephaistos, but by a motley gathering of demi-gods and deifiedsaints,
household gods, tribal gods, local gods, and can note these live on as an undercurrent even after the regular
hierarchy, with its fixed attributes and definite departments, has been superimposed by some dominant system. With respect to the Commentary, my definitely mythological
aim has been
to discuss in full detail every topographical
point that could bear
upon mythology, and, for the