8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/aesthetic-and-ethical-criticism-in-herodas-mimiamboi 1/95 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi BY Benjamin M. Slagowski Submitted to the graduate degree program in Classics and the raduate !acult" o# the $ni%ersit" o# &ansas in partial #ul#illment o# the reuirements #or the degree o# Master o# Arts. ((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( Chairperson )amela ordon ((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( Emma Scioli ((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( Michael Shaw *ate *e#ended+ April ,,- ,/0
95
Embed
Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
BY
Benjamin M. Slagowski
Submitted to the graduate degree program in Classics and the raduate !acult" o# the$ni%ersit" o# &ansas in partial #ul#illment o# the reuirements #or the degree o# Master
INFORMATION TO ALL USERSThe quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscriptand there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,
Chapter /+ Herodas and the 4ambic Connection to Ethical and Aesthetic Criticism .........5/./+ 4ntroduction................................................................................................................5/.,+ 1he Mimes o# Herodas...............................................................................................6
Chapter ,+ Aesthetic Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi ....................................................//,./+ Mimiamb Eight.........................................................................................................//,.,+ *ream 4nterpretation ............................................................................................./7,.,./+ Herodas and the Mouseion.................................................................................../6,.0+ 1he )rogrammatic Signi#icance o# Mimiamb Eight...............................................,0,.5+ Herodas as Hipponactean Aesthetic Critic in Mimiamb !our..............................,8,.9+ Contemporar" Criticism and Aesthetic :alues in Mimiamb !our........................,7,.9./+ &"nno and &okkale's 1echnical :ocabular" .......................................................00
,.9.,+ Mimiamb !our's 4nterest in :erisimilitude .......................................................05,.8+ &"nno and &okkale as Anti;Models #or how to <ead Herodas..............................5/,.=+ Aesthetic Criticism in Mimiamb Si2.......................................................................98,.7+ Conclusion...............................................................................................................8
Chapter 0+ Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi .......................................................8,0./+ 1he eneric 4nterest o# Iambos in Ethical Criticism..............................................8,0.,+ Ethical Statements in Herodas................................................................................8=0.,./+ Mimiamb 1hree and )arent;Child <elationships...............................................870.,.,+ Mimiamb !i%e and the Status o# Sla%es...............................................................=,0.,.0+ Mimiamb >ne and !emale !idelit".....................................................................=80.0+ Conclusion................................................................................................................=6
Chapter 1: Herodas and the Iambic Connection to Ethical and Aesthetic Criticism
1.1: Introduction
1he archaic genre o# iambos e2perienced a re%i%al among Hellenistic poets and
authors.1 Apollonius o# <hodes and other ancient scholars wrote works on the histor" o#
the genre as a whole- and collected- edited- and studied the poems o# indi%idual
iambographers- including Archilochus- Hippona2- and Semonides.2 1he meters and
themes o# archaic iambic poetr" were adopted and re;worked b" a %ariet" o# authors-
including Callimachus and Herodas- both o# whom will be discussed more #ull" below.3
># the canonical iambic poets- Hippona2 in particular recei%ed pre#erential treatment in
the Hellenistic age. Both Herodas and Callimachus openl" adopted Hippona2 as their
model- and a third poet- )hoeni2- was clearl" and hea%il" in#luenced b" the works o#
Hippona2. Callimachus and Herodas are especiall" deser%ing o# closer stud"- because
not onl" did the" both write choliambic poetr"- but the" also both claimed to ha%e been
directl" in#luenced b" Hippona2 and st"led themsel%es as his literar" descendants.
1he Hipponactean corpus- consisting o# poems composed in the 8th centur" BCE-
/ Scodel ,/ brie#l" discusses the re%i%al o# iambic poetr" and the general in#luence o# philosoph" onthe genre. She e2amines the sur%i%ing iamboi o# )hoeni2- Callimachus- and Cercidas in particular.
, See <otstein ,/- //,;/5= #or a detailed e2amination o# the reception and stud" o# iambic poetr"#rom the #i#th;centur" and be"ond. 1he grammarian *iomedes authored a stud" o# the iambic genre.
Apollonius o# <hodes produced a work on Archilochus. 1here is a re#erence to an edited edition o#Hippona2 b" Hermippus o# Sm"rna in a ,nd centur" CE source. See also <otstein ,6n/0 #or adiscussion o# the e%idence o# edited editions o# Archilochus- Hippona2- and Semonides produced inthe ,nd or 0rd centuries BCE.
0 E2amples o# Hellenistic iambic poets include ob%ious #igures such as Callimachus and Herodas- butalso more obscure indi%iduals. Cercidas wrote meliambs- a combination o# melic and iambic poetr".)hoeni2 o# Colophon- roughl" contemporar" with Callimachus- adopted Hippona2 as a model #or hisiambic poetr"D see Scodel ,/- ,9,; ,99 #or a brie# discussion o# )hoeni2' poetr". Macho wroteiambics with a moral and philosophical message. See also <otstein ,/- 9/;9= #or %er" brie#discussion o# se%eral other iambic poets.
8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
is un#ortunatel" ill preser%ed. Almost all sur%i%ing #ragments are in the choliambic
meter- which would later be adopted b" )hoeni2- Callimachus- and Herodas. !rom the
e2tant #ragments it is e%ident that Hippona2' poems were largel" concerned with con#lict
between the poetic persona and an FGI that o#ten resulted in a scathing- %iciousἐ
attack issued b" the poet.4 Hippona2 o#ten re#ers to himsel# b" name in his poems- and
tends to present himsel# as a %iolent drunkard.5 1he targets o# his in%ecti%e pieces are
%aried- but three names are o# special interest+ Boupalus- Athenis- and Mimnes.
Benjamin Acosta;Hughes has anal"@ed the treatment o# these three characters in
Hippona2- pa"ing particular attention to the #act that all three were artists.6 Clear
in%ecti%e attacks against Boupalus and Mimnes are preser%ed in #ragments- while
Athenis is mentioned onl" once in an unclear conte2t. 4n the case o# Mimnes- Hippona2'
poetic wrath was inspired b" the artist's #ailure to paint a ship properl".7 Athenis and
Boupalus are connected in a stor" that sur%i%es onl" in the testimonia to Hippona2' li#e-
in which it is related that the pair had sculpted a statue o# Hippona2 that o##ended him.8
4n response to the sculpture- he composed such %icious poetic attacks that the sculptors
chose to commit suicide. 3hile Athenis is mentioned onl" once in the e2tant #ragments
*egani !r. =- his #ellow sculptor- Boupalus- appears se%eral times as the subject o#
5 Bowie ,/- ,8 has identi#ied the #ollowing as general #eatures o# iambic poetr"+ Jnarrati%eDspeeches embedded in narrati%eD KLI %ituperation ND sel#;de#ence that naturall" led to criticism o#
othersD just occasionall" re#lection or e2hortation.O ># these #eatures- %ituperation and narrati%e areespeciall" prominent in Hippona2. E2amples o# sel#;de#ense are e%ident in his attacks on Athenis-Boupalus- and Mimnes. <osen /677- 0 identi#ies the Jantagonism between poetO and enem"- whichresults in a psogos- as the main #eature o# iambic poetr".
9 Bowie ,/- /;//.8 Hughes /668.= *egani !r. 06.7 Bowie ,/- 6;// o##ers a brie# account o# the con#lict- as does Hughes /668. <osen /677
identi#ies the se2ual connotation o# Boupalus' name and its importance to how Hippona2 portra"edBoupalus in his poems.
8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
in%ecti%e lines.9 Acosta;Hughes has persuasi%el" argued based on e%idence #rom the
testimonia and sur%i%ing #ragments #eaturing in%ecti%e %erses directed against these
artists that Hippona2 Jpresents himsel# as a critic o# aestheticsO and ethical beha%ior.10
As such a critic- Hippona2 will pro%e %er" in#luential on later Hellenistic iambographers.
Hellenistic poets sei@ed on the Hipponactean persona as an authoritati%e %oice
#or ethical and aesthetic criticism. Herodas and Callimachus both st"led themsel%es as
the heirs o# Hippona2.11 3hile there is no declaration o# an e2plicit connection to
Hippona2- the poetr" o# )hoeni2 is also #illed with language and themes clearl"
borrowed #rom the earlier iambographer.12 E2amination o# the choliambic poems o#
Callimachus- )hoeni2- and Herodas re%eals that the iambic genre in general was suited
#or ethical and aesthetic criticism- and that appeals to the language- themes- and poetic
structures #ound in Hippona2 lent authorit" to ethical and aesthetic judgments made b"
Hellenistic poets. !or Herodas- in particular- the authorit" o# a Hipponactean persona
will be critical #or de#ining and de#ending his own poetr"D this will become e%ident in the
ne2t chapter. 4t is important to recogni@e that ele%ated criticism was %er" much a part o#
the iambic genre- and that iambic poems must not be dismissed as simple JlowO pieces
6 See *egani's inde2 #or #ragments where Boupalus appears. According to *egani- he is mentioned /,times. 1his is an impressi%e number when one considers the #ragmentar" nature o# the Hipponacteancorpus and the relati%el" small amount o# poems that ha%e come down to us.
/ Hughes /668- ,//;,/,. Hutchinson /677- 56 claims that Hippona2' poems were not inspired b" an" Jmoral indignation-O but were simpl" intended to entertain. He does- howe%er- note that later poets
writing iamboi did address moral issues. 4 belie%e Hutchinson is essentiall" correct in that the point o#
Hippona2' poem ma" not ha%e been moral or aesthetic criticism. Still- just b" issuing in%ecti%estatements #ocusing on an indi%idual's moral #ailings Hippona2 is embracing one set o# ethical %aluesand rejecting another. A help#ul %iew o# in%ecti%e poetr" is o##ered b" Pappa /666- who notes thatin%ecti%e poetr" is concerned primaril" with Jthe e2clusion o# certain indi%iduals- actions- groups- orualities- and there#ore it seeks to de#ine the communit" to which the speaker belongs.O
// See Callimachus' #irst and thirteenth iambs and Herodas' eighth mime. 4n all three poems clearre#erences are made to Hippona2. 4t can be no small coincidence that all three o# these poems are alsoimportant programmatic pieces in their respecti%e authors' corpora.
/, Scodel ,/- ,9,;,99 brie#l" touches on the e%ocation o# Hippona2 in the sur%i%ing poems o#)hoeni2.
8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
aimed at entertaining an audience or denigrating an opponent. A brie# look at two
iambic poems o# Callimachus will ser%e as e%idence #or this claim.
1he in#luence o# Hippona2 on Callimachus has alread" been well studied.13 His
name appears in the #irst o# Callimachus' iamboi, where he rises #rom the $nderworld to
speak to Callimachus' critics. 1he language o# the Callimachean Hippona2 is more
re#ined and less %ulgar than the original. 1he #igure o# Hippona2 himsel# highlights this
change- when he sa"s that he has not come to sing o# his battle with Boupalus QR Nἥ
TGRU VWXU WZU [\]U^Vἴ ὐ ἀ ^ Uὴ X_`[U- lines /;5- but declares that he has
instead come #or a much more striking and important reason+ to end stri#e and en%"
between the scholars he has summoned.14 Callimachus has chosen to #oreground
Hippona2 as a character in his poem to aid in de#ining the poetic program that he will
#ollow in his iambic poems- and to encourage an" potential critics to respond peace#ull"
to his poetr"- perhaps in anticipation o# the negati%e reactions he will later encounter.15
Herodas- too- will #eature Hippona2 in his eighth mime- but unlike Callimachus will do
so in response to criticism rather than in anticipation.
1here is another re#erence to Hippona2 in Callimachus' thirteenth iamb- where
the poetic persona presumabl" Callimachus himsel# twice re#ers to Ephesus- where
Hippona2 li%ed until being e2pelled- according to the Suda- as the homeland o#
choliambic %erses lines /0;/5 and 80;88. Another re#erence to Hippona2 ma" be #ound
/0 See Edmunds ,/D Hughes /668D &erkhecker /666 on 4ambs 4- :- and 444D Hutchinson /677-57##.D Acosta;Hughes ,,- ,/;/0.
/5 &erkhecker /666- 05;09. 1he reason #or Hippona2' coming is #ound in the Diegesis- and is not madee2plicit in the e2tant #ragments. Still- the authoritati%e %oice o# Hippona2 does shine through in thesur%i%ing #ragments. He commands the gathered crowd to be silent R` L[UTFR-ὴ line 0/ and to
write down his speech QV LG[F[ ̂ U U- ὶ ὴ ῥῆ line 0/./9 &erkhecker /666- 57.
8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
in line = i# Acosta;Hughes' reading o# ̂ WU[ U is accepted. ῖ 16 1he conte2t o# the
allusions to Hippona2 in this poem is again- as in the #irst iamb- that o# stri#e between
poets- probabl" Callimachus and his critics- whose disagreement had reached the point
o# ph"sical %iolence ] I I QTGVI ̂ [FfWR^Vἀ ὸ ἐ Q^TRU ] - lines 9,;90. !acingἀ ῷ
criticism- Callimachus appeals to Hippona2 as an iambic authorit"- just as Herodas will
later do himsel#. 1he elements o# aesthetic criticism in Hippona2' iamboi make him an
especiall" appropriate model #or Callimachus to use when de#ending his own poetr".
Such a de#ense must naturall" include aesthetic judgments o# his critics' own poetr" or
their aesthetic %alues. 1he peace#ul reception ad%ocated b" Hippona2 in Callimachus'
#irst iamb has not occurred- and so in the thirteenth iamb Callimachus naturall" returns
to the Hipponactean persona to %oice a response to his critics and a de#ense o# his own
works. 1he closing lines o# the thirteenth iamb ha%e a bite that is reminiscent o#
Hippona2' own in%ecti%e and largel" absent #rom Callimachus' other iambic poems. 17
1wo conclusions can be drawn #rom Callimachus' iamboi that will pro%e
important #or anal"sis o# Herodas' mimiamboi . !irst- it is clear #rom allusi%e language
and direct re#erences that Hippona2 was esteemed b" Callimachus as an iambic
authorit" and e2erted considerable in#luence on Callimachus' own iamboi . Second-
re#erences to Hippona2 and his poetr" were considered especiall" appropriate b"
Callimachus in the conte2t o# aesthetic criticism and de#ense o# his own poetr"./7
/8 Hughes /668- ,/0;,/9 argues that ̂ WU[ U should be read instead o# the traditional \WU[GWI. ῖ&erkhecker /666 does not seem to be aware o# this suggested reading. He #ollows )#ei##er's readingo# \WU[GWI.ὁ
/= &erkhecker /666- ,8= writes that beginning at line 80 Jthe #ocus narrows- and it becomes clear thatall the high;minded sermoni@ing has an 4ambic sting in its tail. 1his is- a#ter all- about sel#;de#ence-and it gi%es a certain mischie%ous pleasure to see Callimachus lea%e the moral high ground toestablish his own claims and make his ad%ersar" eat his words.O
/7 Callimachus is- howe%er- care#ul to clari#" that he is not a mere imitator o# Hippona2. 3hile he doesemplo" the Hipponactean persona as an authorit" #or his own programmatic poems interested in
8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
Callimachus accepted iambic poetr" in general and the Hipponactean strain in
particular as an appropriate genre #or aesthetic criticism. 1he pre%alence o# this #orm o#
criticism helps ensure that Callimachus' poems are raised #rom the t"pical JlowO subject
matter associated with iambic poetr" to a more ele%ated- philosophical le%el- and
demands that the audience take him and his poetr" more seriousl". 1his contrast
between a JlowO genre and serious contemplation o# art and ethics becomes e%en more
striking in Herodas- whose %ulgar characters and scenes are uite consistent with the
t"pical e2pectations o# iambic poetr" and mime- but are o#ten used to raise uestions o#
contemporar" art criticism and ethical dilemmas that seem out o# place in such a JlowO
genre.
1.2: The imes of Herodas
4t is now time to consider directl" the mimes o# Herodas. 1hroughout the late /6th
and earl" ,th centuries most scholarship presented Herodas' mimes as %ulgar- comic
sketches intended primaril" #or entertainment./6 1his %iew has continued to e2ist due in
no small part to the #ailure to recogni@e that the same concern with aesthetics and ethics
#ound in Callimachus is also present in Herodas. 1his interest should not be surprising i#
one recogni@es that both Herodas and Callimachus adopt Hippona2 as their model. 1he
aesthetics- he also is sure to emphasi@e the uniueness o# his own brand o# iambos. See Acosta;Hughes ,,- 76;6/ #or a succinct summar" o# the %iew o# Callimachus that emerges #rom the #irstand thirteenth iambs. Brie#l"- in Acosta;Hughes' %iew the #irst iamb Jcon#irms Callimachus as aHipponactean %oice-O while the thirteenth iamb is an Ja##irmation o# his di##erent- distanced iambic
%oice.O/6 !or an e2treme e2ample o# this %iew- see *a%enport /67/- i2;2i%- who imagines the mimes being
per#ormed on the street with the help o# props. 4n his %iew- Herodas' mimes Jare not comedies- butcomic moments-O and his characters J#ools.O >n the tone o# the mime- Pairn /65- 2i writes that the" are J%ulgar- sordid- e%en %icious.O
8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
perception o# Hippona2 as an aesthetic and ethical critic has alread" been adeuatel"
demonstrated b" Acosta;Hughes- as discussed abo%e. 4# Herodas openl" adopts
Hippona2 as his model- and it will soon become clear that he does- in #act- do so- then
the presence o# aesthetic and ethical criticism in his mimes is not onl" appropriate- but
should perhaps e%en be e2pected.20
Ha%ing considered the literar" tradition #rom which Herodas' mimiamboi
descend- 4 will now look at elements o# aesthetic criticism in his mimes. M" anal"sis will
proceed #rom the assumption that it is accepted that the importance o# aesthetic and
ethical criticism is inherent in the iambic genre- as discussed abo%e. 4n the case o# a
skeptical reader who does not accept this assumption- howe%er- 4 hope to show that
aesthetic criticism #eatures prominentl" in the sur%i%ing mimes o# Herodas- e%en i# one
does not accept that this is an e2pected element o# the iambic genre within which he
works. 4 will #irst begin with anal"sis o# the eighth mimiamb- in which Herodas makes
clear his connection to Hippona2 and consciousl" locates his poetr" in relation to
traditional classi#ication categories. 4 will then mo%e to mimes in which aesthetic
criticism is clearl" present- primaril" mimes #our- si2- and se%en.
, Hughes /668- ,8 clearl" recogni@es that the mimes o# Herodas #it into the Jtradition o# ethical andcritical commentar"-O but chooses to #ocus on the iamboi o# Callimachus. Hughes' identi#ication o#elements o# aesthetic and ethical criticism in iambic poetr" and his o##hand re#erence to Herodasinspired the general direction o# this paper.
8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
obser%ations can be made. 1he narrator appears to ha%e been engaged in a con#lict with
some goatherds V `- line ,. A man appears dressed in a spotted #awnskinἰ
^Q^ῆI U[XGῦ VU]\ - line 0- wearing a cluster o# i%" QG_WXV ... Q\'- line 0,ῳ
and boots QFGU_- line 00. Most modern scholars assume this man to be *ion"sus-
as his st"le o# dress is consistent with depictions and descriptions o# the god in other
sources. ?ines 00;06 are poorl" preser%ed- but there is a clear re#erence to >d"sseus and
Aeolus' gi#t to him o# the bag o# winds _ ] GU- line 0=. 1he speaker thenἰ ῶ
e2plains how he competed in the askoliasmos, and seems to ha%e emerged %ictorious
5;5=. ?ines 57;9= are completel" missing.
3hen the narrati%e resumes at line 97- a new character has appeared+ an old man
threatening to strike the narrator with his sta## ^ XV^ZG\ῇ ῃ QKR- line 8. 1he
narrator addresses the crowd assembled in his dream `VG[U^[I- line 8/D these areὦ
presumabl" the goatherds #rom line , unless a new group o# characters has been
introduced and calls on the "oung man again- presumabl" *ion"sus to witness the old
man's aggression. 1here is a brie# pause in the description o# the dream lines 89;88-
and then the narrator presents his interpretation lines 8=;=6. 1he lines o##ering the
interpretation present some di##iculties- but this passage will ne%ertheless pro%e to be
especiall" important. He predicts that man" among the Muses will pluck his corpus and
labors ^ WT[V ̀ QG^V ̂ I W I WF_I ̂ [ U U fὰ ὶ ὺ ἐ ὺ ῦ ἐ ῃU- lines =,.21
He claims to ha%e won a pri@e ^ [FU- line =0 competing in theὸ ἄ askoliasmos,
although he accomplished it together with the angr" old man Q ^ LTGU^ fU `GZ'ἠ ῷ ἔ
,/ 4 ha%e taken the translation o# corpus #or ^ WT[V #rom anker ,6. 1his best captures the dualὰsense o# the word WT[V as both a ph"sical bod" and the poetic bod" o# work.
8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
GUFTU^- line =9. He mentionsὀ QTI line =8- though the conte2t is not entirel" clear.
!inall" he makes the claim that he has learned to sing choliambic poetr" #ollowing
Hippona2 W[^ ``UVQ^V ̂ U `VV ^ Qf [\][U- lines =7;=6. Here the narrati%eἸ ὸ ὰ ἀ
o# the mime ends and uestions o# interpretation begin.
1he eighth mime has long been %iewed as Herodas' attempt to de#ine the new
genre he has in%ented and de#end his poetr" #rom criticism.22 1here ha%e been no
serious e##orts to debunk this %iew. An" scholarl" disputes in%ol%ing this mime tend to
#ocus on subtle di##erences in interpretation. As 4 am interested primaril" in the
elements o# aesthetic criticism and connections to Hippona2 that are e%ident in this
poem- 4 will largel" sidestep such debate- e2cept where directl" rele%ant to
understanding the aesthetic stance adopted b" Herodas in this mime.
1he narrati%e structure o# the mime an indi%idual recounting a dream in which
he encounters an earlier poet or the Muses was a common literar" topos among
Hellenistic poets.23 An educated audience- whether readers or %iewers- would ha%e
understood the dream setting as an earl" signal that this particular mimambos will in
some wa" e2amine Herodas as a poet and his work. 4t is- there#ore- appropriate to
e2plore the s"mbolic meanings o# the characters- scenes- and objects in the mime. 1he
narrator- in the guise o# a simple rustic character- can be identi#ied with Herodas.24 1he
goatherds who ha%e attacked him he claims to ha%e been beaten+ RWV- line /6ἔ
,, See Cunningham /6=/- /65D <osen /66,D <ist /66=D !ountoulakis ,,D anker ,6- ,,5;,,8 and ,00;,09D Mastromarco /675.
,0 1he most notable Hellenistic e2ample is Callimachus. 1his topos ma" be traced back to Hesiod. Aninteresting <oman parallel is #ound in Ennius- who claims to ha%e been inspired in a dream b"Homer. A dream also appears in 1heocritus- Idyll ,/. Bion's dream !r. /- ow /686 #eaturesinteraction between the persona and Eros. >n this see ut@willer ,=- 68.
,5 1his identi#ication has long been accepted. See Headlam and &no2 /6,,- lii;l%iD Cunningham /6=/-/65D anker ,6- ,,5;,8 and ,00;09.
8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
should be identi#ied with the critics o# his poetr". Attempts ha%e been made to connect
the goatherds to speci#ic contemporar" poets- such as Callimachus or 1heocritus- or
their #ollowers- but such postulations are impossible to con#irm. 1he ne2t character to
appear is easil" identi#ied as *ion"sus- or at least a representati%e o# the god- b" the
clothing he is wearing- o# which his st"le o# #ootwear- the QFGUI- will pro%e
particularl" important in making this connection. Herodas and the goatherds then
engage in the askoliasmos- a rite associated with the rural *ion"sia.25
A clear connection to *ion"sus and dramatic per#ormance is e%ident throughout
the dream. 1he goat the narrator is dragging- the appearance o# *ion"sus in general and
the speci#ic re#erence to him wearing the QFGUI- a st"le o# boot representati%e o#
traged"- and the per#ormance o# a *ion"sian ritual- the askoliasmos- all point to a
dramatic conte2t or connection.26 1he re#erences to the goat and the QFGUI o#
*ion"sus are ma"be indicati%e o# a tragic connection speci#icall"- not just a general
dramatic connection.,= Andreas !ountoulakis has proposed that Herodas is tr"ing to
con%ince his audience that the origins o# mime are connected to poetr" sanctioned b"
*ion"sus- and in doing so Jin%est his poetr" with the authorit" and prestigeO granted to
dramatic poetr".28 1his is necessar" because mime was t"picall" considered a low #orm
,9 ones ,5- /5,;/55.,8 !urther e%idence o# a connection to *ion"sus can be #ound in the narrator's interpretation o# the
dream- when he re#ers to goatherds %iolentl" cutting up the goat Q X\ZI ]V^G[ U^- line 86. 4tἐ ἐ ῦ has been proposed that this ma" be a re#erence to the sparagmos associated with *ion"sus- as seen inEuripides' Bacchae. <ist /66=- 09= rejects this interpretation correctl" in m" opinion. 4 do-howe%er- belie%e that the scene still has clear connections to *ion"sus. Herodas considers the cuttingo# the goat a per#ormance o# rites ^ UF[V ̂ [[ U^[I- line =- which is supporti%e o# a ritual conte2t.ὰ ἔ ῦ
,= See &irb" ,5- /=/ #or both a brie# summar" o# popular proposals concerning the linguisticconnections between the words tragos goat and tragoedia traged"- and also other possibilitiese2plaining the origins o# the word tragoedia. See Headlam and &no2 /6,,- on line 00 #or discussiono# the QFGUI and its connection to *ion"sus.
,7 !ountoulakis ,,- 0/.
8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
been taken o# Herodas' poetr" i# he could not con%ince his audience o# connections to a
more respected genre- such as traged".29 E%en i# !ountoulakis' interpretation is rejected-
it seems clear that Herodas in%okes *ion"sus primaril" to earn credibilit" #or himsel#D
whether this is because mime has *ion"siac origins is not a critical issue. 1hat *ion"sus
sanctions his poetr" is clear both #rom Herodas' re#erring to the goat- which is
understood to be representati%e o# his poetr"-30 as a gi#t #rom *ion"sus ] GU Qῶ ἐ
RUf_- line 87- and the claim that he recei%ed a pri@e [FU- line =0 #or hisἄ
success in the askoliasmos.
3hile the presence o# *ion"sus is intended to grant authorit" to Herodas' poetr"-
the uarrel with the unnamed LTGRU presents a more di##icult challenge. 1he #irst
uestion that must be answered concerns the identit" o# the old man- who #irst appears
and speaks in the e2tant te2t at line 96 and is again mentioned near the end o# the
mime at line =9. *oubtlessl" he would ha%e #irst appeared somewhere in the lines
preceding his speech 57;9=- but these are missing. Scholarl" consensus is hea%il" in
#a%or o# identi#"ing the old man as Hippona2- though Archilochus has also been
proposed as a possibilit".31 1he strongest piece o# e%idence encouraging the
,6 anker ,6- ,09n6 #inds this proposal Jattracti%eO but sa"s that more e%idence is needed to showthat there was a connection between *ion"sus and mime in the 0 rd centur". 3hile 4 belie%e anker iscorrect in holding some reser%ations- !ountoulakis is %er" clear in stating that it was Herodas' goal to
con%ince his audience o# this connection- not that the connection had earlier been made or won widespread appro%al. 1hat the %iew e%entuall" won out is shown b" !ountoulakis ,,- 0//;/0.
0 See <ist /66=- 097D !ountoulakis ,,- 00D <osen /66,- ,8D Cunningham /6=/- /60.0/ See <ist /66= #or the argument in #a%or o# Archilochus. 4 am largel" uncon%inced b" her claims-
which are predicated on the belie# that be#ore writing choliambic poetr" Herodas had written iambicin%ecti%e in the st"le o# Archilochus. 3hile this is certainl" possible- it makes little sense to include are#erence to Archilochus in a piece dedicated to de#ining the poetic programs o# his choliambic mimes.1he list o# scholars who support identi#"ing the old man with Hippona2 is length"- but see &no2/6,9 and anker ,6 #or both an earl" and late %iew o# such an identi#ication. &no2 is largel"responding to Her@og /6,5.
8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
identi#ication with Hippona2 is the use o# a phrase at the end o# line 8 ̂ XV^ZG\ῇ ῃ
QKR that parallels a sur%i%ing #ragment o# the iambic poet ^ XVQ^ZG\ QKV-ῇ ῃ
*egani !r. 7- 3est !r. ,.32 1he description o# the old man as angered GUFTU^- lineὀ
=9 lends some additional support to this identi#ication- as Hippona2 was generall"
regarded as a cantankerous- %iolent old man in the Hellenistic age.33
1here is- howe%er- a problem with this identi#ication that was recogni@ed b"
Cunningham.34 3h" does Hippona2 uarrel with Herodas- who %iews himsel# as a
#ollower o# the iambographer 1he answer ma" lie in the dual nature o# the new genre.
Herodas is not writing choliambic poetr" directl" deri%ed or descended #rom Hippona2'
in%ecti%e- but a new #orm o# poetr" that has resulted #rom #using together mimos and
iambos. Hippona2 is e%identl" displeased with the resulting mimiambos- and so
%iolentl" attacks the "ounger Herodas.35 1he narrator addresses the onlookers ὦ
`VG[U^[I- line 8/ and then calls upon the "oung man *ion"sus to witness his
treatment at the hands o# the old man WVG^fGWV ] ^ U U[ZU\ZU- line 80. 1heὲ ὸ
language here is reminiscent o# the ancient custom o# calling on b"standers to obser%e a
crime- so as to secure witnesses #or a trial.36 Such language is appropriate here as the old
man and Herodas are about to be judged b" *ion"sus.37
0, anker ,6- ,0/ e2plains Herodas' e2clusion o# the kappa as a Jlearned rationali@ation o# the shortV in Hippona2' XVQ^ZG\ .O Cunningham /6=/ o##ers a similar e2planation.ῃ
00 *egani /675.
05 Cunningham /6=/- /65.09 !or rele%ant discussion see <osen /66,- ,/,- who makes a similar point. !ountoulakis ,,- 0/
responds to <osen b" arguing that Hippona2 would not be angr" with Herodas #or mi2ing iambicpoetr" with dramatic poetr"- since drama was a well respected genre. 4nstead- Hippona2 is angr"
because Herodas has combined iambic poetr" with mime- which was held in low esteem.08 !ountoulakis ,- ,7.0= >ne pu@@ling aspect that 4 ha%e not seen addressed is the uestion o# wh" Herodas would call on the
goatherds- who ha%e been understood as his ri%als- as potential supporters in the e%ent o# a trial. Arethe goatherds and Herodas reconciled a#ter his success#ul e##orts in the askoliasmos Has hecon%inced them o# his poetic skills
8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
!ull understanding o# the judgment o# *ion"sus at line 85 ] [ `[U WR ̂ Uὀ ἶ ἄ ὸ
]GTV ... is just barel" out o# our grasp. 1he end o# the line is missing- as are the details
#rom the ten lines preceding Hippona2' speech 57;9=. 1he ke" to making sense o# the
"oung man's judgment is probabl" a missing %erb that takes ]GTV- which can be
interpreted two wa"s- as its object. 1his noun is either best translated as Jthe skinnerO or
Jthe #la"erO #rom ]G[fI-38 or as a #orm o# ]G- JskinO or Jhide.O39 4 will %er" cautiousl"
argue #or the second option.40 4# this %iew is adopted- the passage would be translated as+
JAnd he said that we both missing verbq the hide.O An in#initi%e o# some sort would
then be e2pected- probabl" suggesting that the hide was to be gi%en to or shared b" both
the narrator and the old man. 4 ha%e adopted this %iew based on the narrator's
interpretation o# the dream in lines 8=;86. He sa"s that he alone o# all those trampling
the wine skin had won the pri@e =;=/- e%en i# he had accomplished it together with the
old man Q ^ LTGU ̂ fU `GZV- line =9. 1his statement suggests that the" had aἠ ῷ ἔ
shared accomplishment. 4# the ]GTV mentioned at line 85 is understood as the skin
gi%en as a pri@e- then the narrator's remark at line =9 is clari#ied.41 1he shared
accomplishment mentioned b" the narrator is a re#erence to their poetic success. Both
07 anker ,6 translates it as #la"er- interpreting it as a nomen agentis. 4t is translated as Jthe o##icerOin the /6,, Headlam and &no2 edition- which is e2plained b" a note ad loc.
06 See Cunningham /6=/- ad loc.5 <osen /66, and )isani /69, both support this reading.5/ >ne other proposal is put #orth in Headlam and &no2 that ma" make some sense- but can- 4 belie%e-
be dismissed. 1he noun ]GTV can be translated as J#la"erO as discussed abo%e- and in this sense ma"
re#er to a whipping. 1he legal nature o# the scene signaled b" `VG[U^[I and WVG^fGWV mightὦencourage such a translation. See Headlam and &no2 /6,,- 065;69 #or discussion o# the legallanguage. 1he major problem with this reading is that the remaining lines o# the poem make nore#erence to the old man and Herodas sharing in an" sort o# a whipping or punishment. 1he onl" actthe" ha%e shared in has a positi%e connotation- and is much more likel" to re#er to their shared successin either the askoliasmos or their sharing o# *ion"sus' appro%al. Since the end o# the poem is #airl"
well preser%ed with onl" a #ew endings to certain lines missing- there is no possible place at the end o#the poem where a punishment scene could ha%e occurred. ># course- the scene need not actuall" takeplace in the dream- as the narrator has woken up- but an allusion to it would be e2pected somewherein the remaining lines o# the mime.
8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
were awarded the hide b" *ion"sus- signaling that both ha%e his appro%al. 1he
importance o# securing *ion"sus' appro%al has been discussed abo%e- but to restate it
simpl"- the awarding o# a pri@e b" *ion"sus grants authorit" to Herodas' poetr" and
%alidates the new genre. 1his %alidation is critical to de#ending himsel# #rom his
detractors' attacks.
2.2: "ream Interpretation
!ollowing the judgment o# *ion"sus is the interpretation o# the dream. 1he
narrator recalls again that he had dragged a goat #rom a ra%ine V LV ^ I GVLLI ἶ ῆ
[ QU- line 8=- and calls it a gi#t #rom *ion"sus ] GU Q RUf_. 1he goat- asἐ ῖ ῶ ἐ
mentioned abo%e- has been interpreted as representing Herodas' poetr".42 1his same
goat is %iolentl" cut up Q X\ZI ]V̂ G[ U^- line = and consumed ]V\U_U^- lineἐ ἐ ῦ ἐ
=- b" the goatherds- who are described as per#orming rites ^ UF[V ̂ [[ U^[I- lineὰ ἔ ῦ
=. 1hough not per#ectl" clear due to a missing word in the manuscript- Herodas seems
to compare this beha%ior to how his mimes will be treated. He sa"s that man" among
the Muses will pluck ^[ U U fZU- line =, his works. 1hese lines ha%eῦ ἐ
generall" been interpreted in a negati%e wa"+ critics will Jtear apartO his poetr"- much
like the goatherds %iolentl" took and cut up his goat earlier in the dream. 4 would-
howe%er- like to propose another possible reading.
5, >ne possible metaphor 4 ha%e not seen discussed is the GVL- the ra%ine. 1his is mentioned twice+at line 8=- and earlier at line /8. 1he dragging o# the goat out o# the ra%ine ma" be re#erring to thein%ention o# a new poetic genre. 1he long ra%ine GVLLI N WVQG I- lines /8;/= ma" re#er to theῆlong tradition o# poetr" in general- or perhaps e%en iambs in particular.
8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
4 belie%e the man" re#erences to speci#ic poetic genres in the interpretation part
o# the dream also point to a clear connection to the acti%ities o# the Mouseion- whose
members were interested in categori@ing poetr". 1he word WTI line =/ is generall"
used to re#er to l"ric poetr"- a genre distinct #rom epic and traged".47 Herodas also uses
the term `[V line =8- which is most o#ten used o# epic poetr" but here o# his iambicἔ
poems.48 >ne #inds a direct re#erence to iambic poetr" in general at line == WXRU- andἰ
to per#ormance o# choliambic poetr" speci#icall" at line =6- when he mentions singing
sca@ons ^ Qf [\][U.ὰ ἀ 4 belie%e that the hea%" concentration o# these generic terms
in the #inal ten lines o# the poem suggests that Herodas is concerned with how his poetr"
will be classi#ied and recei%ed. Such a concern is natural #or the poet o# a new genre
writing at a time when there was great scholarl" interest in classi#ication o# poetr". He
recogni@es that his poems ma" be or perhaps more likel"- alread" ha%e been met with
skepticism or criticism since the" are so inno%ati%e- and accordingl" stri%es to place
himsel# in an alread" established tradition. 4n the #inal #our lines o# the poem he %er"
care#ull" engages in classi#ication himsel#. He mo%es #rom the broad categor" o# `[V toἔ
the more narrow genre o# iambos. ># course- as he is #ollowing a Hipponactean model-
he then must #urther de#ine his poems as choliambic poetr" Q_.
4 would like to argue that he takes this sel#;classi#ication one step #urther-
assuming one accepts a re#erence in line =6 to Callimachus' thirteenth iamb. Herodas
writes that he will sing his choliambs to the #uture descendants o# the sons o# outhos
5= )lato makes a clear distinction between epic- tragic- and l"ric poetr" in the !epublic. See 0=6a and8=a.
57 See anker ,6 and Cunningham /6=/ on line =8. Both cite a comic #ragment #ound in )age/65/- 0,5. 1he #ragment uses `[V in a broad sense similar to how Herodas uses it.ἔ
8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
2.#: The $rogrammatic %ignificance of Mimiamb Eight
>ne additional wa" in which Herodas signals his debt to the iambic genre is
e%ident in the %er" structure o# the poem. 1he #irst se%en mimes are largel" dri%en b"
dialogue between two characters.53 4n all but the second mime dialogue between two or
more characters makes up the #ull content o# the mime. 4n #act- the eighth mime is the
onl" sur%i%ing mime in which there is just a single speaking part- since when the "oung
man and the old man speak it is reported b" the narrator.95 1he eighth mime is- then-
one long- mostl" uninterrupted narrati%e. Herodas ma" well ha%e chosen to cra#t his
poetic statement in such a #ashion to re#lect his awareness o# the iambic genre- in which
narrati%e pla"ed a crucial role.55 1his is just one more subtle wa" in which Herodas links
himsel# to the iambic tradition.
1he mime appears to end with a claim that he will win #ame #or his poetr" QTI-
line =8. $n#ortunatel"- the condition o# the pap"rus does not uite allow us to
understand precisel" how he la"s claim to this #uture #ame. Pe%ertheless- this boast#ul
claim contributes to his e##orts to %alidate his poetr" and de#end it #rom criticism. B"
asserting to his audience that he will win #uture #ame he is justi#"ing the creation o# a
new genre.
4# the order o# the mimes preser%ed in the manuscripts corresponds to the
original order in which Herodas composed and circulated the mimes- then it would
90 1he e2ception to this is the second mime- which consists entirel" o# Battaros' speech- uninterruptede2cept b" two lines. 4t ma" be that Herodas wrote more mimes like the second- but the limitede%idence that we ha%e suggests that the majorit" o# his mimes consisted primaril" o# dialogue betweenat least two characters.
95 1his ma" e%en be an e2ample o# Jmeta;mime-O especiall" i# one #a%ors solo recitation as theper#ormance mode o# the mimes.
99 See Bowie ,/.
8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
women with speaking roles making an o##ering at a temple to Asclepius and %iewing and
critiuing the pieces o# art in and around the temple.8 1he tendenc" in past scholarship
has generall" been to dismiss the women as unsophisticated %iewers who #ail to
appreciate and properl" critiue the pieces o# art.8/ !ollowing such a %iew- Herodas' goal
is to make his audience laugh b" making sport o# uneducated- lower class indi%iduals. 4#
this is true- it is a clear e2ample o# Herodas pla"ing the role o# aesthetic critic. He takes
aim at the aesthetic %alues o# a particular class and holds them up #or mocker". 4mplicit
in this act is a rejection o# the %alues %oiced b" the women and- presumabl"- support #or
another set o# aesthetic %alues that he does not make apparent in the poem.8,
Such a reading o# the #ourth mime is- 4 belie%e- largel" correct- but does not #ull"
appreciate the comple2it" o# this particular mimiamb. 4 will propose that the #ourth
mime be interpreted as a sort o# metaphor #or the wa" in which Herodas' own mimes
were %iewed and an instructi%e piece demonstrating how not to %iew his poetr". ust as
8 1he temple is o#ten identi#ied as the Asclepion on the island o# &os- though the accurac" o# thisassertion is o# no great importance #or this paper. See Sherwin;3hite /6=7- 09;9, #or e%idence thatthe #ourth mime takes place in the Asclepion on &os. Cunningham /6=/ disagrees with thisassociation- belie%ing that none o# the works known to ha%e been in the temple at &os are mentionedin this mime. anker ,6- /5;/7 and /,,;/,6 rejects Cunningham's claim and o##ers support #orSherwin;3hite's %iew. He #ollows Sherwin;3hite in proposing that the #ourth mime ma"- in #act- ha%e
been composed to mark the reno%ations to the temple and increase in cult acti%ities. He sees a parallelto this in 1heocritus Idyll /9- which ma" ha%e been composed #or the Adonia.
8/ oldhill /665- ,,, sees the pronouncements o# the women as J#ar remo%ed #rom the Hellenisticsophos.O He echoes this sentiment in a more recent article ,=- stating that he belie%es the womenare mocked. *uBois ,=- 57 belie%es that the women are painted as Jridiculous and ignorant-O andthat the" primaril" act as a J#oilO #or knowledgeable %iewers. Skinner ,/ o##ers a di##erent %iew o#
the women in the #ourth mime. She sees the women as representati%e o# a uniue #emale %iewing st"lede%eloped in the poems o# Erinna- Possis- and An"te. 1he #ourth mime is an attempt b" Herodas toJdiscreditq the poetic e##ortsO o# these #emale authors p. ,,,.
8, Yacobi ,- =/8 belie%es that when a reader determines that a narrator in this case the two women- &"nno and &okkale is unreliable the" are at the same time deciding that the author disagrees with the narrator and supports an alternati%e %iewpoint. Herodas' e##orts to make the women anobject o# mocker" is %er" similar to what is done b" the speaker in in%ecti%e poems. B" attacking anindi%idual #or their %iews or actions the speaker is rejecting those %alues and promoting their own. SeePappa /666- who is interested in Catullus' in%ecti%e poems- but makes man" good points rele%ant toin%ecti%e poetr" in general.
8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
the interpretation o# the dream in the eighth mime is instructi%e- so too is the %iewing
e2perience o# the women in the #ourth mime. Herodas encourages his audience to reject
the women in the #ourth mime as ideal %iewers- and to learn the proper wa" o#
consuming his poetr"- using the two women as an anti;model. 4t will become apparent
b" the end o# this discussion that the #ourth mime demonstrates keen awareness o#
Hellenistic aesthetic %alues that were applicable to both literature and ph"sical pieces o#
art- and that Herodas e2pects his audience to recogni@e these %alues. Herodas
presupposes a parallel between %iewing %isual art and reading or listening to poetr".80
2.(: Contemporar) Criticism and Aesthetic *alues in Mimiamb 'our
raham anker sees the %er" structure o# the #ourth mime as e%idence #or
Herodas' close engagement and #amiliarit" with contemporar" Hellenistic art criticism
and popular aesthetic ualities. 4n his ,5 book #ocused on the act o# %iewing in
Hellenistic poetr" and %isual arts- he discusses the trend in both literature and the
plastic arts o# encouraging readers or %iewers to supplement details #or a gi%en scene.85
1he act o# supplementation draws a reader into the work and encourages deeper
re#lection on the work's meaning. Herodas demands his audience members supplement
%arious details throughout the #ourth mime as the women mo%e throughout the temple
comple2 o##ering brie# commentar" on %arious pieces o# art that capture their attention.
E%idence o# this techniue is seen in the demonstrati%es used b" the women when
80 Modern scholars ha%e noticed this parallel as well. See !owler /676 and anker ,5.85 See anker ,5- =,;/,. He o##ers numerous e2amples o# this trend in both the %isual arts and
literar" works.
8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
pointing to di##erent objects.89 1he women do not gi%e #ull descriptions o# the objects
%iewed- but short snippets that reuire the audience to #ill in the gaps using their own
knowledge.88 4n emplo"ing this supplementation techniue Herodas signals his own
#amiliarit" with contemporar" artistic techniues- skill#ull" incorporating a techniue
popular in the %isual arts into his own literar" art.
Be#ore #urther discussion it will be bene#icial to outline brie#l" the JplotO o# the
#ourth mime. As has been stated- mime #our #eatures two women at an Asclepion
making a thank o##ering to Asclepius #or curing a sickness. 1he names o# these two
women are debated- but 4 will settle on &"nno and &okkale.8= 1he mime opens with
&"nno greeting %arious gods associated with Asclepius- apologi@ing #or the meager
o##ering she has brought a rooster- and ordering her #riend &okkale to set down a
%oti%e tablet lines /;,. 1he pair then begins to inspect and comment on %arious pieces
o# art- including a statue #rom the sons o# )ra2iteles lines ,;,8- a girl looking at an
apple lines ,=;,6- a bo" strangling a goose lines 0;05- and #inall" a statue o# a
woman named Battale- with whom the women are #amiliar lines 09;07. 1heir
e2amination o# the art objects is then interrupted b" an e2tended scene o# %erbal sla%e
abuse prompted b" &"nno's #rustration at her sla%e &"dilla's #ailure to obe" her orders
89 anker ,8- 08=.88 anker ,6- /,5 recogni@es that the act o# supplementation would ha%e been #ar easier #or
Herodas' ancient audience than it is #or a modern reader o# his poems. 4# the Asclepion described inthe #ourth mime is- in #act- real- it is uite likel" that at least some o# Herodas' audience had at some
point seen the temple and the actual objects described in the poem- making the act o#supplementation e%en easier. !or those who had not- #amiliarit" with similar temples and pieces o# art
would ha%e enabled them to imagine a le%el o# detail not accessible to a modern audience.8= anker ,6 identi#ies these as the names o# the characters in the mime- #ollowing Headlam and
&no2 /6,,. See anker's note on page /5. Cunningham /6=/ belie%es &okkale to be the name o# asla%e accompan"ing &"nno based on the tone o# the order at lines /6;,. He belie%es that her #riend isnamed )hile- who is not introduced until line ,=. Cunningham's ,5 1eubner te2t #ollows the samepart distribution as his earlier commentar". 3hate%er names one adopts- it is clear #rom the te2t that&"nno has been to the temple pre%iousl" and is #amiliar with the artwork- while &okkale or )hile is
%isiting #or the #irst time.
8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
to #etch the temple attendant- and the entrance o# the women into the pronaos lines 06;
98. 1he women resume e2amining the art- with &okkale commenting on %arious #igures
in a painting 98;=/ and &"nno praising the talent o# Apelles lines =,;=7. 1he mime
concludes with the temple attendant entering and the women making their #inal
o##erings to the god lines =6;69.
3hile 4 wish to pa" the most attention to the language o# the assessments o##ered
b" the women o# %arious pieces o# art- it is use#ul to consider brie#l" the atmosphere
created b" the passages o# the poem that surround lines /;, and =6;69 and interrupt
lines 06;98 their contemplation o# the artwork. 4t is in these parts o# the poem that
Herodas helps guide the wa" in which his audience will %iew the two women and
emphasi@es their low;class status.87 1he o##ering o# a rooster TQ^GIἀ - line /,- the
meagerness o# which is emphasi@ed b" re#erring to it as merel" a second course
^ `\]G`Vἀ - line /0- is the #irst hint o# their status.86 &"nno's ele%ated language at this
part o# the poem is comicall" epic. 4n her e"es- this is no ordinar" rooster that she will
o##er to the god- but the herald o# the walls o# her home U^U Q\ZI ^\RU QvG_QV# ἰ
FfR- lines //;/,.= 4# Herodas intends this line to produce laughter- as 4 belie%e is the
case- it ma" be indicati%e o# the general attitude he e2pects his audience to adopt
towards &"nno and &okkale. ?ines ,/;07 #eature the women %iewing pieces o# art- but is
87 Yacobi ,- =/,##. argues that Junreliabilit"O is not a character trait o# a narrator the role o#
which &"nno and &okkale pla" in the #ourth mime- but that it is a Jh"pothesis that readers make.O1his h"pothesis is #le2ible and can be re#ormed at %arious points in the te2ts. Herodas' e##orts toemphasi@e the low;class status o# the women is intended to in#luence his elite audience to in#er thatthe women's statements lack reliabilit".
86 See anker ,6- Cunningham /6=/ and Headlam and &no2 /6,, on lines /, and /0. All pointout the connotation o# `\]G`V and comment on the humble nature o# this o##ering. anker notesἐthat a rooster was the onl" o##ering that could be a##orded b" the lower classes.
= &"nno has alread" earlier used the nouns ̂ [ I and Q\V at line = in a distinctl" epic conte2t when ῖ ἰmaking re#erence to )odaleirios and Machaon- two warriors who #ought at 1ro". 1he contrast betweenthese two passages is humorous. See Headlam and &no2 /6,,- ad. loc.
8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
statements made b" the women to illustrate their use o# technical %ocabular" and to
elucidate which particular ualities the" #ind appealing in the works o# art.
2.(.1: +)nno and +okkale!s Technical *ocabular)
1he use o# technical %ocabular" is eas" to document. A#ter setting down the %oti%e
tablet- &okkale turns her attention to the statues o# the %arious gods that &"nno has just
pointed out. She re#ers to them speci#icall" as LVWV line ,/-ἄ a term reser%ed #or
statues o# di%ine #igures.=,
1he speci#icit" o# the term used #or the statues o# the gods is
emphasi@ed se%eral lines later- when &okkale turns to another statue o# a woman named
Batale- with whom she is e%identl" #amiliar. Here she uses the term U]GI line 08-ἀ
which is reser%ed #or human subjects.=0 A#ter their %iewing o# the objects is interrupted
b" the sla%e abuse scene- the" turn again to %iewing some sculptures and remark that
Athena hersel# seems to ha%e chiseled them ^V ^ G[ I FZUV\ZU LfKV ^ QVῦ ἐ ῖ % ὰ -
lines 9=;97. 1he %erb emplo"ed here- LfR- is another technical term used o#
sculptors.=5 More technical terms are used in their discussion o# the painting o# Apelles.
&"nno sa"s that his lines are true ZFUV\- \Z- L G V [\_ [ G[I I ̀ U ̂ἀ ὰ ἰ & ῖ ἐ
`[TR LGWWV^% - lines =,;=0. Both the adjecti%e ZFUI and the noun LGWWV ha%eἀ
speci#ic- technical meanings applicable to art.=9 4 will discuss ZFUI #urther below.ἀ 4t
=, See anker ,6- ad. loc and anker ,5- /5/;/50. Both Headlam and &no2 /6,, and
Cunningham /6=/- ad. loc. comment on the accusati%e #orm o# \FI that appears with the #emininearticle in the same line as the #orm o# LVWVἄ line ,/. 1his #orm ma" be o# some importance. 4n Atticreek the #eminine #orm o# \FI re#ers to worked or precious stones. Herodas o#ten slips Attic #ormsand constructions into his mimes- as might ha%e happened hereD see anker ,6- =;// andCunningham /6=/- ,//;/= #or help on Herodas' dialect. Headlam and &no2 /6,,- 22i2 write thatJthe cast and construction o# his sentences is #or the most part #luent Attic.O
=0 anker ,6- ad. loc.=5 anker ,6- ad. loc. Headlam and &no2 /6,, note that the term is limited to relie# sculpture-
whereas the %erb `R is used o# sculpture in the round. =9 !or discussion o# the adjecti%e ZFUI see el@er /679-ἀ and anker ,6- ad. loc. See )ollitt
8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
is #airl" ob%ious #rom these e2amples that &"nno and &okkale possess and emplo" a
technical %ocabular" in their critiues o# the %arious pieces o# art. 3hether the audience
is to be induced to agree with their assessments b" the authoritati%e weight o# the
technical %ocabular" remains to be seen.
2.(.2: Mimiamb 'our!s Interest in *erisimilitude
># more interest than the use o# technical terms are the aesthetic ualities on
which the two women #ocus their attention. As will become clear in the %arious e2amples
#rom the te2t that 4 will soon discuss- &"nno and &okkale #ocus especiall" on the realistic
ualities o# the %arious pieces at which the" are looking. 1he" are drawn to pieces that
Jha%e the look o# li#e and da".O=8 An interest in and appreciation o# common subjects is
apparent in not onl" the literature o# Herodas' contemporaries- but also the plastic
arts.== :iewers had a particular interest in li#elike art. 4n literar" descriptions o# art
ekphraseis agalmaton readers and listeners had a great appreciation #or accounts that
were #illed with J%isual %i%idness-O #or which the" used the term enargeia UGL[V.ἐ =7
?iterar" accounts that possessed this ualit" o# %i%idness seemed almost to come ali%e to
/6=5 on technical usage o# LGWWV.=8 anker ,6 translates line 87 U XT`_ Q WTGZU `U^[Iὐ ὶ ὴ ἠ in this wa". So- too- do
Cunningham /6=/ and Headlam and &no2 /6,, interpret it- and take Iliad /7.8/ as its source.== 1heocritus' Idylls are an e2cellent e2ample. 1he" #eature #or the most part lowl" herdsman in scenes
set outside the cit". Some- such as Idyll /9- are set in the cit" and #eature scenes o# e%er"da" li#e and
common characters. See Burton /669 #or a treatment o# these so;called urban mimes. Sculptors-painters- and other artists who worked in ph"sical mediums mo%ed #rom the ideali@ed subject mattero# Classical reek art to more mundane scenes #eaturing a %ariet" o# e%er"da" subjects- such as#isherman- old women- and animals. See !owler /676 #or an e2cellent introductor" summar" o# thethemes popular in art both literar" and ph"sical in the Hellenistic period. anker ,5 o##ers asimilar stud"- though he is mostl" interested in how art was %iewed. >nians /6=6 also pro%ides ause#ul stud" in artistic pre#erences o# the Hellenistic audience.
=7 See anker ,5- 6. He #ollows an earlier stud" b" ra# /669- who in turn cites *io Chr"sostom/,.99;70. 3ebb /666 also notes the importance o# enargeia in ekphrasis. 3ebb ,6- 7=;/8has an entire chapter dedicated to the use o# enargeia in ancient ekphrases.
8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
the %iewer- and were mirrored b" realist depictions o# scenes and characters in the
plastic arts. Se%eral e2amples o# this appreciation #or li#elike ualities in art are e%ident
in the #ourth mime.
Be#ore looking at speci#ic e2amples o# how the women describe the works o# art in
the temple- 4 would like to discuss the speci#ic ekphrastic tradition on which Herodas
seems to be drawing. Man" o# the most popular ekphraseis #rom antiuit" are #ound in
epic poems- with Homer's ekphrasis o# the shield o# Achilles being one o# the best known
e2amples. 1he ekphraseis in Herodas- howe%er- seem to owe a debt to another popular
tradition- that o# ekphrastic epigram. Hellenistic ekphrastic epigram was an e2tremel"
popular genre- o# which thousands o# lines b" man" poets still sur%i%e.=6 >ne popular
theme o# Hellenistic epigram is to ri## on dedicator" epigrams #rom the Classical and
pre;Classical periods that were inscribed on objects dedicated in temples. 4n Hellenistic
epigrams- howe%er- the object to which the epigram re#ers need not be realD the poem
can e2ist merel" as a literar" te2t- without detracting #rom a reader's abilit" to
understand the content o# the epigram.7 Man" o# the ekphrastic passages in Herodas'
#ourth mime e2hibit this same ualit" the women re#er to objects in a temple with
which Herodas' audience ma" or ma" not ha%e been #amiliar. Another ke" di##erence
between Hellenistic epigram and its earlier #orebears is the #ocus on the lower classes
and mundane scenes o# li#e.7/ A #eature o# such epigrams is humor and in%ecti%e- which
=6 Bruss ,/- //7 estimates 5-= lines b" 8 or more poets #rom the %arland o# Meleager alone.)hilip o# 1hessalonica's %arland adds thousands o# additional lines #rom poets working in the period
between Meleager and )hilip's own time.7 Bruss ,/- /,/.7/ Bruss ,/- /0, remarks that earlier epigram #ocused on the li%es o# the elite classes and Jre#lectedq
the interests and ideolog" o# a part o# the population wealth" enough to commission poems and themonuments to inscribe them on.O An"te's collection o# epigrams to pets is an e2ample o# the moremundane subject matters o# interest to the Hellenistic audience.
8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
suggests a debt to the genres o# comed" and iambos.7, Herodas himsel# owes a debt to
these %er" same genres- and #eatures scenes depicting lower class characters and their
concerns. <ecogni@ing the parallels in the ekphrastic passages in the #ourth mime and
Hellenistic epigram allows us to draw on a %ast corpus that helps to understand how
Herodas intended his audience to react to &"nno and &okkale- and how a sophisticated
%iewer would respond to %isual objects o# art.
4 would like to look at just one particular e2ample #rom Herodas where a debt to
Hellenistic ekphrastic epigram is e%ident- although most o# the ekphrastic passages in
the #ourth mime e2hibit similar ualities. !ollowing their praise #or the statue b"
)ra2iteles' sons discussed abo%e- &"nno directs &okkale's attention to another piece o#
art- presumabl" a statue+70
GZ- \Z- ̂ U ̀ V ]V ̂ U UR Q[\UZU# ὴ ῖ ὴ ἄXT`_VU I ̂ W Ux Q G[ I V ^vUἐ ὸ ῆ ὐ ἐ ῖ ὐ U W X ^ W U Q ^V Kf[UD' ὴ ῃ ὸ ῆ ἐ
?ook- #riend- at the girl- that one looking upat the apple. 3ould "ou not sa" that she will soon #aint i# she does not grab the apple
?ines ,=;,6
Se%eral things are noteworth". !irst is the use o# a %erb o# speech G[ I #ollowed b" aἐ ῖ
statement that re#lects on the li#elike ualit" o# the piece o# art. 1his #ormula will be
repeated elsewhere in the #ourth mime. 1he use o# a second person %erb- particularl" an
imperati%e GZ-# here directed at &okkale- is paralleled in man" Hellenistic epigrams-
7, Bruss ,/- /,6 and /05 notes this debt.70 4t is possible that this was a #amiliar scene in ancient art. Headlam and &no2 /6,, ad. loc. cite two
%ases one b" Assteas and another b" Sotades that contain an image o# a girl in the arden o# theHesperides. Cunningham /6=/- ad. loc. belie%es Jthere is no reason to suppose a close connection
between these other imagesq and what is here described.O anker ,6- cites a %ariet" o# scholars in#a%or o# pushing such a connection- including ?ehman /659- 50;0 and 3ebster /685- /97;6 and50,.
8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
in which the %iewer- or perhaps more aptl"- the reader- is addressed b" the imagined
object. ># course- in literar" Hellenistic epigram ri##ing on dedicator" epigram the
narrati%e %oice is the object itsel#- while in the #ourth mime it is a character who e2ists
within the poem. Another similarit" to Hellenistic epigram is the interest in what might
happen were the inanimate object actuall" ali%e. 1he women in mime #our do this when
the" in%ent a narrati%e outside o# the scene depicted b" the statue- imagining the girl
#ainting. 1his is t"pical o# a Hellenistic %iewer- who was interested in ps"chological
portraiture- according to raham anker.75 Man" e2amples o# this are e%ident in the
thirt";si2 poems #rom the Antholog" #ocusing on M"ron's Hei#ers- which will be
discussed in more detail below.
1he women then mo%e #rom the girl looking at the apple to a bo" strangling a
goose ^ U ZUV`[QV I ̂ `V]\U ̀ U\L[ὴ ( ὸ - line 0/.79 &"nno's comments on this
statue are reminiscent o# her earlier statement regarding the girl and the apple. >nce
again she comments on how the statue is almost ali%e- remarking that one might be led
to belie%e it would speak were it not a stone `G ^ U `] U L U [ ^ W \FI-ὸ ῶ ῶ ῦ ἴ ὴ
^ GLU- G[ I- Vv[- lines 0,;00.ὔ ἐ ῖ ust as she imagines an e2tended narrati%e
#ainting #or the girl looking at the apple- so does she imagine that the statue o# the bo"
is on the cusp o# speaking. 1hough both are clearl" car%ed out o# inanimate material-
the" ha%e been worked in a realistic st"le such that the women can easil" imagine them
75 anker ,5- 88;=/. )ollitt /678- 96##. traces the de%elopment in the #ield o# portraiture o# theinterest in showing a subject's personalit" and ps"chological state.
79 1his particular piece has been associated with the :atican's JBo" with an Eg"ptian oose.O See anker,6 ad. loc. and p. /,8. Headlam and &no2 /6,, belie%e that this is the piece mentioned in )lin" &' 05.75 #rom the sculptor Boethus. Cunningham /6=/- ad. loc. rejects this %iew- citing the worko# Her@og- who #ound that Boethus' piece should be dated to the ,nd centur" BCE. See also <idgwa",8 #or anal"sis o# this statue- including brie# discussion o# the re#erence to the statue in Herodas'#ourth mime.
8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
coming to li#e. 1his is stated almost e2plicitl" in &"nno's ne2t line- when she states that
soon humans will put li#e into stones W - GU Q^ UFGR` Q I ̂ I \F_I _) ῳ * ἠ ὺ +
^ U U F[ UV-ὴ ὴ ῖ lines 00;05.
&okkale then shi#ts the con%ersation to the li#elike ualities o# another statue-
that o# Batale- daughter o# M"ttes. !rom these names it has been deduced that she was a
hetaira.78 )articular attention is drawn to how she is standing Q G I- y_UU - QRIὐ ὀ ῇ ῖ #
XTXZQ[U- lines 09;08. 4t is possible that she is in a pose consistent with a woman o# her
pro#ession.7= 3hate%er Batale's pro#ession and position- &okkale's #inal comments on
this statue are o# great interest. She emphasi@es the realistic depiction o# Batale b"
claiming that an"one who has seen this statue has no need o# seeing the real Batale
XTKVI I ̂ ^ ̂ [ QUWV W ^fWZI ][\FR. lines 0=;07. 1he statue is so li#elikeἐ ῦ ὸ ἰ ὴ ἐ
that it can stand as a replacement #or the real woman- e%en i# someone has not seen her
[ Wv ̂ I _^ἰ ἀ ὴ U [ ][ zV^ZU- line 0=. ἶ 1he adjecti%e ^ἔ _WI line 07 highlights the
Hellenistic appreciation o# realistic depictions o# indi%iduals and JthingsO in general. 4
will discuss this adjecti%e in more detail #urther below- but #or now it is enough to note
simpl" that the Hellenstic %iewer %alued art that was true to li#e- and it is on this trait
that &"nno and &okkale sei@e.
1he objects on which the women ha%e commented at this point in the mime are
onl" loosel" connected to the religious conte2t o# the Asclepion and the reasons #or the
78 Cunningham /6=/ ad. loc. sa"s o# the #ull name that it one Jno respectable woman would bear.OBatale is related to the %erb XV^^VG\R to stammer. , anker ,6 ad. loc. help#ull" adds thatstammering was considered e##eminate. >n the name JM"ttesO he notes that it is connected to thenoun Wf^I- which Jdenoted a man with an unbridled se2ual appetite.O
7= Headlam and &no2 /6,, belie%e her pose to be re#lecti%e o# her character. >ne sees here an e2ampleo# the Hellenistic audience and artist's interest in capturing the personalit" o# a subject. See noteabo%e.
8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
women's own %isit b" the #act that the" are in the sanctuar". Besides the LWV^Vἀ
treated in the #irst ,8 lines- the ne2t three pieces the girl looking at the apple- the bo"
strangling the goose- and the %oti%e statue o# Batale are JsecularO objects as much as
this term can be applied to an" object in a temple. 4 will return to this point later- but
#or now it is enough to note that the women do not o##er an" commentar" on the
possible religious conte2t o# these pieces. Such commentar" is particularl" conspicuous
in their discussion o# the statue o# Batale. 1his statue was surel" dedicated as a thank
o##ering to Asclepius- presumabl" #or curing her o# some unspeci#ied illness.77 1he girl
looking at the apple ma" also ha%e had a religious connection to the temple that the
women #ail to notice. 4t is has been proposed that the statue o# the Jirl under the Apple
1reeO in Pew York $ni%ersit"'s 4nstitute o# !ine Arts is a cop" o# the statue mentioned in
Herodas. 4n this cop" there is a snake wrapped around a tree. 1he snake is the s"mbol o#
the doctor's guild- which was closel" connected to Asclepius.76 1he religious conte2t o#
the ne2t piece is likewise ignored.
Another e2ample o# the women #ocusing on li#elike ualities and ignoring
possible religious conte2ts #or the artwork is seen a#ter their %iewing is interrupted b"
the abuse o# the sla%e &"dilla. &okkale is trans#i2ed b" a painting o# a naked bo"
participating in a sacri#icial procession. She imagines the wound he would ha%e i# she
were to scratch him ^ U `V ]V ] ^ U L_WU U U QU\R ^ ^U Q QI [- lines 96;ὸ ῖ ὴ ὸ ὸ ' ῦ ὐ ἔ ἔ
8. Again- she is #ascinated b" imagining the subject o# the painting e2isting outside o#
the static scene in which he is depicted. 1he li#elike ualit" o# his #lushed skin V GQ[Iἰ
77 See anker ,6- ad. loc.76 Cunningham /6=/- ad. loc. sternl" warns that this interpretation ought not be attempted. anker
,6- ad. loc. o##ers a brie# but con%incing case #or wh" such an interpretation is possible- drawingon the research o# Massa )ositano /6=0 and *i regorio /66=.
8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
her ^R ` - y_UU\- ̂ ^TG QfG - line =/.ὔ ἐ ῖ ῇ ἐ ῃ ῃ >ne ma" here imagine the Mona
?isa or an" similar painting- whose e"es notoriousl" seem to #ollow the %iewer.
&okkale notices and reacts to this phenomenon.6, 4t is %er" di##icult to read these lines
without thinking o# the series o# epigrams taking M"ron's Hei#er as their subject. 1his
connection again suggests that Herodas' ekphrastic passages are best interpreted in a
manner similar to Hellenistic epigrams posing as inscriptions. !ollowing line =/- &"nno
speaks brie#l" on the prowess o# Apelles. 1he temple attendant will then enter and the
women will o##er no #urther comments on the artwork in the temple.
2.,: +)nno and +okkale as Anti-odels for how to ead Herodas
!rom the e2amples cited abo%e it should be clear that the two %iewers #eatured in
the #ourth mime are drawn to pieces o# art done in a realistic st"le that depict subjects in
such a wa" that suggests to the %iewer that the piece is on the brink o# coming to li#e or
that encourages the %iewer to imagine the subject reacting to a touch or some other
outside stimulus. 4t should be no surprise that the women are drawn to such pieces.
Scholars working on Hellenistic art and aesthetics ha%e noticed this interest in li#elike
depictions in the companion #ields o# poetr" and ph"sical art.60 Mundane subject
matters and scenes become increasingl" popular in the Hellenistic period and there is a
decrease in the ideali@ed images o# the Classical period.65 1hus- Herodas' #ourth mime
6, See &oenderink- et. al. ,5 #or a scienti#ic stud" o# this phenomenon. anker ,6- ad. loc. belie%es that this e##ect- commonplace toda"- ma" ha%e been a no%elt" #or Herodas' audience.
60 !owler /676- 5 notes that common subjects in Hellenistic art and poetr" included %arious memberso# the lower classes and scenes o# e%er"da" li#e. <unning parallel to this interest in new subjects wasJan increasing realismO made possible b" ad%ancement in techniues and technical abilities.
65 )ollitt /678- /5 remarks that realism JsupersedesO the idealistic depictions o# the pre%ious age.4nwood and erson /66=- 2% see a similar shi#t in philosoph". )latonic idealism gi%es wa" toJempiricism- materialism- and naturalism.O
8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
could be a replacement #or the real woman- the bo" whose #lushed skin would bleed
should he be scratched- the sil%er #ire;tongs that would e2cite an" thie# who happened to
set e"es on them- or the sacri#icial o2 whose #rightening glare stirs up terror in &okkale's
heart. 1he women in the #ourth mime are clearl" interested in the same #eatures that
e2cited other Hellenistic %iewers.
And "et- 4 belie%e that Herodas does not want his audience to accept &"nno and
&okkale as authoritati%e #igures #or how to %iew art. 1o support this claim- it is
necessar" to consider what makes a good %iewer- and #or this it will be use#ul to consider
ekphrasis as a poetic de%ice and its role in ancient poetr". 1he basic de#inition o# an
ekphrasis can be disputed- with some scholars arguing #or an e2pansi%e de#inition while
others pre#er a more limited application o# the term. !or the purposes o# this paper 4 will
work with a somewhat more narrow de#inition+ Jthe representation in words o# a %isual
representation.O68 1his de#inition is closer to the speci#ic sub;categor" o# ekphrasis
called ekphrasis agalmaton- which is the description o# works o# art b" a literar" %iewer.
4t is this #orm o# ekphrasis that we see in the #ourth mime. Central to ancient ekphrasis
is enargeia, or %isual %i%idness- which has been discussed abo%e.6= 1he goal o# enargeia
in orator"- according to ancient authorities such as {uintilian and ?onginus- is to
stimulate an emotional reaction #rom the audience- such that the" are persuaded b" the
orator.67 1he descriptions o# scenes- characters- and objects must be brought to li#e b"
68 Bartsch and Elsner ,=- i. *u Bois ,=- 59 notes that this is a Jreducti%e de#inition-O but adoptsit hersel#. anker ,5- = gi%es as a de#inition+ the Jocular presentation in literature o# an"phenomenon in nature and culture.O 3ebb ,6- in her introduction pp. /;//- gi%es a goodo%er%iew o# the broad de#inition o# ekphrasis that was used in the ancient world.
6= See oldhill ,=- 0;=D *uBois ,=- 59D anker ,5- ,9.67 oldhill ,=- 0;7 discusses %arious Jrhetorical handbooks-O including those o# {uintilian and
?onginus.
8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
but statements that are re#lecti%e o# the %iews o# an elite- intellectual class./5 1his is
taken #or granted when dealing with ekphraseis in epigrams or other genres- such as
histor" or rhetoric- where the description o# an object and commentar" on it are issued
#rom an authoritati%e #igure- such as the narrati%e %oice in an epigram or historical
report. 1his authoritati%e %oice behind an ekphrasis is usuall" a member o# the elite
class whose opinions can generall" be interpreted as re#lecti%e o# the widespread %iews
o# a sophisticated upper class./9 Ha%ing pre%iousl" stated that an ekphrasis is
instructi%e- it can now be added that the" speci#icall" instruct the audience member in
elite- intellectual belie#s and %alues.
>ne #inal point on what constitutes a good or bad %iewer will pro%e particularl"
illuminating in the discussion concerning how Herodas characteri@es his women and
how he wants his audience to react to their responses to the art in the temple. ?onginus-
in his rhetorical work |[G K_I ὶ 1 $n the Sublime- discusses the power#ul e##ect
enargeia can ha%e on an audience. He writes that an orator is not onl" able to persuade
an audience member- but can ensla%e him `[\F[ ̂ U QGV^ U WUU- QVὐ ὸ ἀ ὴ ἀ ὰ ὶ
]_ ^V- /9.6.ῦ oldhill sei@es on the importance o# this passage- and argues that Ja
good listener knows to resist- to be critical.O/8 4# a similar line o# reasoning can be
He argues that the production o# commentar" happens in the epigrams related to M"ron's Hei#er- belie%ing that the epigrams do not respond to the sculptor's work- but to the Jtropes o# %erisimilitudeO
/=. 1he epigrams do not merel" note the li#elike nature o# the statue- but engage in an intellectualdiscussion that has its basis in an awareness o# art criticism and the widel" held aesthetic %alue o# arealist portra"al o# nature. 4t this engagement with an intellectual tradition that is missing in theremarks o# the women in Herodas' #ourth mime.
/5*uBois ,=- 58./9Although it ma" be ob%ious- 4 am re#erring here to ancient ekphraseis. E%en in the ancient world there
ma" be e2ceptions to this general statement. 1he ekphrastic epigrams o# Possis and Erinna come tomind. 4t is possible- though- that these still represent the elite- male;dominated %iewpoint.
/8oldhill ,=- 5. 3ebb ,6- /0/;/88 e2plores how enargeia was used in rhetoric as a persuasi%etool.
8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
#ollowing &okkale's reaction to the bull. <esponding to her #riend's appreciation o# the
painting's li#elike %i%idness- she praises its painter- Apelles. Herodas' decision to include
the name o# this #amous painter is no small coincidence- whate%er his association with
the Asclepion at &os.//= Besides the #ineness o# his lines to which &"nno clearl" alludes-
Apelles was also known #or paintings so decepti%el" true to li#e that one could predict
through ph"siognom" when the subject o# his portraits would die. //7 Apelles should be
%iewed as a parallel to Herodas himsel#. Both are skilled in li#elike depictions- and both
decei%e their audience. Apelles does so through the illusion that his paintings are ali%e.
Herodas does so through the realistic ualities o# the characters and mundane settings
o# his mimes that lull his audience into the belie# that the mimes onl" operate on an
ob%ious le%el and nothing o# importance is hidden beneath the sur#ace. 1he" #ail to
probe deeper and notice the less ob%ious elements o# his poetr"- such as aesthetic
statements.//6 &"nno then prescribes a punishment #or those #ound guilt" o# not %iewing
properl" the works o# Apelles. She declares that whoe%er has %iewed Apelles works
without gi%ing them just consideration W `VWVvVI Q ]\QZI- line == ought to beὴ ἐ
hung up in a #uller's shop `] I QGTWV^ Q[ UI U LUVTRI Q -ὸ ἐ ῖ ἐ ἴ ῳ line =7./, 1his
statement is both comical and serious. 4t is sure to pro%oke laughter #rom an educated
audience that recogni@es the #ailure o# &"nno and &okkale to %iew properl" the artwork
in the temple. At the same time- it is also a warning #or those who #ail to gi%e Herodas'
//= See #ootnote 8.//7 )lin" &atural 'istory 09.08+ Imagines adeo similitudinis indiscretae pin(it, ut ) incredibile dictu )
Apio grammaticus scriptum reli*uerit, *uendam e( +acie hominum divinantem, *uos metoposcoposvocant, e( iis di(isse aut +uturae mortis annos aut praeteritae vitae.
//6 1his certainl" has been the case in much o# the earl" scholarship on Herodas a#ter the originalpublication o# the pap"rus- and persists in some scholarship o# the current period.
/,1his ma" be an echo o# Hippona2. See *egani !r. /=5.
8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
e2istence and became interested in acuiring one #or hersel#- prompting her %isit to
&oritto. >n the sur#ace- then- the mime is simpl" about two women chatting about the
best place to bu" dildos. A deeper meaning- howe%er- emerges when looking more
closel" at the language emplo"ed b" Herodas and recogni@ing his tendenc" to comment
seriousl" on his own poetr".
)erhaps the most clear signal that Herodas will use the dildo as a metaphor #or
his own poetr" is the repetition o# the %erb `^R Jto stitchOῥ used in re#erence to its
construction./,7 1his %erb appears at lines /7- 50- 5=- 57- and 9/. acob Stern has
con%incingl" argued that the baubon o# interest in the si2th mime is an e2cellent parallel
#or Herodas' own poetr"+ ugl" on the sur#ace- but with Jhidden la"ers o# meaning.O/,6 4t
is a particularl" apt metaphor #or Herodas' new genre mimiambos- which- as discussed
pre%iousl" in relation to the eighth mime- combines the low;brow- %ulgar subject matter
o# mime with the biting aesthetic and ethical criticism #ound in Hipponactean iamboi .
&erdon's dildos are much the same./0 >n the sur#ace the" are an object #ew respectable
reek women would pro#ess to ownD/0/ e%en Herodas' women are concerned with the
harm that ma" be done to their reputations b" public knowledge o# their possession o#
such an object- as seen when Metro asks &oritto i# she will slander her i# she re%eals the
name o# the dildo's maker ]VXV[ I U [ `R ῖ 3 ἴ - lines ,,;,0. Yet beneath an Jugl"O
e2terior is a great deal o# cra#tsmanship- such that &oritto compares &erdon's skill to
/,7!ord /677 discusses the connection o# the %erb to terms such as a VK ]I and VK ]\V- as well asῥ ῳ ῥ ῳthe metaphorical use re#erring to the composition o# poetr". See also Stern /6=6- ,90##.
/,6Stern /6=6- ,9,./01he %er" topic o# dildos links Herodas to the most #amous author o# mimes- his predecessor Sophron.
4t is uite possible that Sophron's mimes #eatured women %iewing dildos- perhaps in a setting morelike that seen in Herodas' se%enth mime. See Hordern ,5 on #ragments ,0 and ,9.
/0/ 1he e2ception- perhaps- might be on the comic stage- where one would almost be shocked to learn o# a woman who did not possess a dildo
8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
that o# Athena ^ I FZUV\ZI V ^ I G U ̂ I [ GVI- yTG]RUI- ][I- lines 89;ῆ % ὐ ῆ ὀ ῆ ὰ 4 ῖ ὐ ὶ
8=. 1his is reminiscent o# the #ourth mime when &okkale is struck b" a relie# car%ing
^V ^ G[ I FZUV\ZU LfKV ̂ QV- lines 9=;97.ῦ ἐ ῖ % ὰ So- too- does the description o#
&erdon's cra#tsmanship ^ I [ GVI-ὰ ῖ line 88 echo &"nno's praise o# Apelles'
cra#tsmanship in the #ourth mime ZFUV\ Nἀ [ G[I- ῖ line =,.
&oritto continues to sing &erdon's praises in the #ollowing lines. 1he baubon is
wonder#ull" straight GF- line =.ὀ 1he straps are made o# a so#t wool- not leather ἰ
] WVU^\Q G- Q WU^[I-ἰ ἔ ὐ ἰ lines =/;=,. 3hen describing the smoothness or
so#tness o# the dildo &oritto uses a highl" literar" phrase- comparing it to sleep ἀ ἠ
WVVQ^ZI `UI- line =/.ὔ /0, 1he e##ect o# the women's commentar" is to draw attention
to the dildo as a work o# art- not merel" a se2 to". <eaders or perhaps %iewers who do
not probe past the sur#ace o# the mime would doubtlessl" ha%e been entertained b" the
comic themes-/00 while those who look #or a deeper meaning are rewarded b" another
glimpse o# Herodas' keen sel#;awareness and concern with presenting his poetr" in a
sophisticated light.
Another element o# aesthetic criticism in the si2th mime deser%ing o# attention is
the re#erence to two well known #emale poets- Possis and Erinna. 3hen &oritto asks
Metro where she'd seen the dildo- Metro tells her that Possis- the daughter o# Erinna-
had it ~ I [ [U G\UUZI- line ,. ὶ ἶ ἠ 1he use o# these names can be no small
coincidence. Both were rough contemporaries o# Herodas- and well known poets at
/0, 1he most ob%ious comparison noted b" man" commentators is to Iliad /.,+ WVVQ ][]WZW Uῷ 5`U .1 ῳ 1heocritus also pro%ides se%eral parallels- such as at Idyll 9.9/+ `UR WVVQ^[GV- or /9./,9+1
WVVQ^[G `UR.1 See also Stern /6=6- ,90./00 See !innegan /66,- ,6;05 #or one such e2ample o# a reading where emphasis is gi%en to the ob%ious
Jcomic depra%it"O o# the women.
8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
that./05 4t would appear that Herodas makes another allusion to the same women in the
se%enth mime. &erdon- the shoemaker- o##ers a long list o# the %arious shoe st"les he has
a%ailable- among which are JPossisesO ~\][I- line 9= and JBaukisesO zV_Q\][I-
line 97. Baukis is- o# course- the companion o# Erinna- to whom the Dista++ is directed.
1he bawd" nature o# the si2th and se%enth mimes at #irst encourages the %iew that
Herodas intends to insult these #emale poets. Headlam and &no2 remarks that Jthe
choice o# two such names proceeds clearl" #rom malicious c"nicism.O/09 i%en the
prominence o# aesthetic criticism in iambic poetr"- this %iew is certainl" de#ensible.
1here is another possible %iew- howe%er- that 4 #ind more compelling.
ackie Murra" has suggested that Herodas' re#erences are not intended as insults-
but rather that the si2th and se%enth mimes together suggest Jimitation and pla"#ul
appreciationO o# poetic contributions made b" Erinna and Possis./08 1he ke"- according
to Murra"- is recogni@ing that mimes si2 and se%en #orm a dip"tch./0= Murra" suggests
that si2 and se%en together metaphoricall" allude to Herodas himsel# consciousl"
writing a dip"tchD the sewing o# the dildos in the si2th mime and shoe;making in the
se%enth are both metaphors #or writing poetr". 4 ha%e alread" noted that the re#erences
to Possis and Erinna are ob%ious. Scholars generall" accept that mimes si2 and se%en
ought to be read together- and the assertion that the" #orm a dip"tch seems #air. 3hat
connection- then- is there between Herodas' re#erence to Possis and Erinna- and the
/05 anker ,6- ad. loc. dates Erinna to the #irst hal# o# the third centur" and Possis to the #irst twent" "ears o# the third centur". Some debate e2ists concerning Erinna's +loruit - but this is generall"accepted.
/09 Headlam and &no2 /6,,- ad. loc. Cunningham /6=/- ad. loc. e2presses the same %iew- and alsoadds that this Jis one o# the %er" #ew occasions when Herodasq is not totall" impersonal.O
/08 Murra" ,7./0= See <ist /660 and &ut@ko ,8.
8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
dipt"ch as a poetic techniue Murra"'s response depends on earlier scholarship
showing that Erinna's epigrams dealing with Baukis ow;)age / and , are an e2ample
o# a dip"tch. ?eaping o## #rom here- Murra" suggests that Herodas is signaling a poetic
debt to his poetic predecessor's techniue.
3hether or not one accepts Murra"'s %iew is not essential to the point 4 would
like to make regarding the signi#icance o# Herodas' decision to include a re#erence to
these two #amous poets. 1he %er" #act that he does make a re#erence to Possis and
Erinna at all is just as important as wh" he does so. 3hate%er one belie%es Herodas'
moti%ations #or including the re#erence is- either as a respect#ul nod to a #ellow poet or
as an in%ecti%e barb- the same thing can be said+ it is another e2ample o# Herodas
adopting an aesthetic position and pla"ing the role o# aesthetic critic. $nderstood in a
positi%e light the re#erence embraces and praises Erinna's use o# the dip"tch structure in
her poems. ?ikewise- i# interpreted as an in%ecti%e barb the re#erence attempts to
e2clude Erinna and Possis #rom the poetic communit". 1his is consistent with the
persona o# the iambographer and the aims o# in%ecti%e poetr"- which ine%itabl"
pri%ileges one group while e2cluding another./07 Both interpretations support the
primar" argument made in this chapter that Herodas' mimes are concerned with
aesthetic criticism- particularl" in relation to poetics.
2.: Conclusion
1he aim o# this chapter has been to identi#" #irst Herodas' connection to an
/07See Pappa /666- ,88 on this point. He is concerned with Catullus- but the general points made in hisarticle regarding iambic poetr"- speci#icall" o# the in%ecti%e %ariet"- are pertinent to this discussion.
8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
Chapter #: Ethical Criticism in Herodas! Mimiamboi
#.1: The eneric Interest of Iambos in Ethical Criticism
1his chapter will #ocus on what 4 ha%e elsewhere called ethical criticism. 4 would
like to begin b" de#ining what 4 mean b" this term- to a%oid con#usion with the phrase o#
the same name coined b" Porthrop !r"e in his /69= work Anatomy o+ riticism. 4 use
ethical criticism in this paper to re#er to the ethical or moral judgment o# the beha%ior o#
an indi%idual or group. 4n some cases these judgmental statements are clearl"
concerned with promoting one set o# %alues o%er another. More o#ten- howe%er-
statements in Herodas and his iambic predecessors pronouncing ethical judgments are
inherent in a %erbal assault on another character #or a percei%ed #law or moral #ailure.
1his is a ke" element o# iambic poetr"- as 4 ha%e alread" discussed pre%iousl" and will
demonstrate in more detail below. 1he %er" act o# insulting an indi%idual's conduct
rein#orces and promotes the %alue s"stem #a%ored b" the in%ecti%e %oice./06
>ne de#ining #eature o# iambic poetr" is a statement o# blame or censure- a
psogos./5 1hese statements are o#ten couched in hostile terms as personal attacks on
the character or beha%ior o# the addressed indi%idual. Ethical judgments o# the attacked
indi%idual's conduct are o#ten inherent in such attacks. 3hile in%ecti%e assaults ma" be
humorous or entertaining- the" are also o# a serious nature- as the" can be used to
establish the Jboundaries o# ethical conduct.O/5/ 4t is possible to trace this tradition o#
/06 Pappa /666- ,88./5Hughes ,,- ,9 and ,/7D <osen /677D <otstein ,/- 78;6=D Bowie ,/- /;=. 4t is o# course
important to note- as man" o# these scholars do- that psogos is not a #eature o# all iambic poems. 4nother words- a poem can be classi#ied as iambos e%en i# it lacks a direct %erbal attack.
/5/ Acosta;Hughes ,,- ,,.
8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
howe%er- it will be help#ul to look brie#l" at e2amples o# ethical criticism in other
iambographers- both to show that ethical criticism is a common #eature o# iambic poetr"
and to pro%ide e2amples o# the t"pes o# ethical statements common in the iambic poets.
Archilochus is a good starting point #or e2amples o# ethical criticism in earl"
iambic poetr". 4 would like to start #irst with #ragment /,5b 3est- which is clearl"
concerned with ethical beha%ior. 1he te2t is as #ollows+
` U ] `\URU QV V\QGZ^U WTF_-ὸ ὲ ὶ ^[ ̂ WU [ [U[\QVI ..............ὔ ῖ ἰ ] W U QZF[ I ....... F[I V ] \I-ὐ ὲ ὲ ὶ 6 7 ὴ •[€ LV^ G UU ^[ QV GTUVI `VGvLVL[Uἀ ὴ ὶ
[ I UV][\ZU.ἰ ἀ
*rinking much and unmi2ed wine-neither ha%ing chipped in #or the cost NNnor ha%ing been in%ited NN "ou showed up as i# "ou were a #riend- but "our bell" led both "our mind and wits astra" to shamelessness.
1his poem is directed at a certain )ericles- who was e%identl" in the habit o# crashing
dinner parties./55 3hile lacking the %iolent- abusi%e language #ound in man" o#
Hippona2' poems and #or which Archilochus- too- was known-/59 the ethical statement
is clear. 1he use o# the term UV\][Vἀ signals that Archilochus is targeting the ethical
shortcomings o# his enem". 4nherent in Archilochus' poem is a condemnation o#
/55Athenaeus /./5 &aibel./59 Archilochus' malice is most o#ten directed at ?"cambes. Ancient testimonia preser%e the popular stor"
that Archilochus grew angr" with ?"cambes a#ter he reneged on an agreement to allow the poet tomarr" his daughter- Peoboule. Archilochus responded b" writing abusi%e poems directed at ?"cambes
and his daughter- which led to them committing suicide. 1he %eracit" o# this account is surel" suspect-and is better understood as e%idence #or the ancient %iew o# the e2pected persona o# an iambographerrather than as reliable biograph". So- too- should the stor" o# Hippona2 and the sculptors- Boupalusand Athenis- which is clearl" in#luenced b" the pseudo;biographical Archilochean tradition- betreated. See Care" /678. Hawkins ,7 has recentl" looked at the relationship between
Archilochus and ?"cambes- and proposed that ?"cambes pla"ed the role o# a poetic ri%al- whocritiued iambos as a genre and also ga%e %oice to ethical and aesthetic concerns. Archilochus' poemsrespond to this criticism. 1he poet responding to criticism and justi#"ing his st"le and the genre within
which he or she is working reminds me o# Herodas' eighth mime and his attempts to de#end himsel#against his critics- while also demonstrating that his new genre is legitimate.
8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
glutton". Pumerous other e2amples could be cited #rom Archilochus' corpus- but #or this
paper it is enough to show that ethical judgment o# beha%ior is a general #eature o#
Archilochus' poetr".
Hippona2 #ollowed Archilochus' e2ample and cra#ted poems that #eatured biting
in%ecti%e loaded with ethical criticism. A common target o# his is Boupalus- who has
been discussed brie#l" abo%e. )h"sical threats against Boupalus are commonD in %arious
#ragments the poetic %oice threatens to hit him in the #ace QKR z_`_ ^ Uὸ
FVWUὀ - *egani !r. /,/ and in another makes a re#erence to causing him to cr"
QV\[U Q[[fRU zf`VU- *egani !r. 78- line /7. $n#ortunatel" in neither o# these
#ragments do we see an e2ample o# ethical censure. Still- ethical terms are applied to
Boupalus in other #ragments- suggesting that when Hippona2 targets him it is o#ten to
point out a moral #ailure. 1he adjecti%e ^VI is applied to him in #ragment /7-
doubtlessl" in its pejorati%e sense. 4n #ragment , we see a better e2ample o# ethical
criticism- when Hippona2 re#ers to Boupalus as a WZ^GQ\^ZI- an incestuous indi%idual.
1hough such se2ual insults are commonplace- the" still depend on ethical norms to ha%e
an" e##ectD in this case the attack is predicated on the ethical standard o# an indi%idual
re#raining #rom incestuous relations./58 3hile the #ragmentar" nature o# the
Hipponactean corpus makes e2tensi%e anal"sis di##icult- it is ne%ertheless clear #rom
these #ragments that his poems #eatured an interest in ethical standards.
>ne #inal e2ample #rom Hippona2' corpus ma" ser%e as additional e%idence that
he engaged in criticism o# indi%iduals #or #ailing to meet ethical standards./5= 1he
/58Catullus o##ers an interesting later parallel. His poems aimed at ellius 77;6/- #or instance all attackellius #or incestuous beha%ior.
/5= See Acosta;Hughes ,,- 0,##. on criticism in Hippona2. Also o# interest is <osen /677- whoanal"@es Hippona2' relationship with Boupalus and the con%entional #orm o# iambic blame poetr".
8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
Statements %oicing ethical concerns can be #ound in %arious poems. 4 will look onl"
brie#l" at one o# these- the #i#th iamb )#ei##er !r. /69./9 4t is e%ident at se%eral places in
the poem that the poetic %oice considers himsel# a moral guide #or the subject o# the
poem- a certain schoolmaster named Apollonius- according to the diegesis. He classi#ies
his words as _WX_v line /- meaning counsel or ad%ice. 4n addition- he calls himsel#
a Bakis- S"bil- laurel- and an oak tree L zQI ^ QV \X_V QV ]UZἐ - ὶ ὶ QV ZLI ὶ -
/57See &irkwood /68/ #or discussion o# the authorship o# this piece and the histor" o# scholarship prior
to the publication o# his article. >n the basis o# Jst"le and spiritO &irkwood argues that this pieceactuall" belongs to Archilochus. 4n the #i#t" inter%ening "ears since the publication o# &irkwood'sarticle- howe%er- scholars ha%e mo%ed awa" #rom this %iew in #a%or o# identi#"ing Hippona2 as theauthor this #ragment. See Acosta;Hughes ,,- ,,o- and *egani /670- /87##.
/56See Acosta;Hughes ,,- ,/;/5 #or an e2cellent in;depth discussion o# the in#luence Hippona2 hadon Callimachus' poems. &erkhecker /666 touches on Callimachus' debt to Hippona2 in %ariousplacesD see pp. ,7;0 on the #irst iamb and pp. /50;/58 on the #i#th iamb. Cameron /669- 0=,;0=0discusses how Callimachus a%oided #ollowing Hipponactean con%entions. Hippona2' in#luence onCallimachus is thus betra"ed b" the latter poet's e##orts to distinguish himsel# #rom his predecessor.
/9Another e2ample is the third iamb. Acosta;Hughes ,, deals e2tensi%el" with this poem.
8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
to Metrotime's monologue- in which the beha%ior o# her son is related to the
schoolteacher. &ottalos is a poor student who would rather spend his da"s gambling
than stud"ing. He neglects his lessons lines 7;/7 and is uick to run awa" #rom home
should his parents scold him 08;5/. His antics ha%e not onl" caused Metrotime mental
an2iet"- but ha%e also brought #inancial troubles upon her home Q W[_ ̂ VV\UZI ^ Uἔ ὴ
^TLZU `[`GFZQ[U- line 9D see also lines 55;56. ?ampriskos responds to Metrotime's
complaints b" promising to punish her son lines 97;=. &ottalos is hoisted up on the
shoulders o# some o# the other students and whipped lines =/;6, !inall"- he is let go-
and the mime ends with Metrotime resol%ing to put chains on his #eet to ensure he
comes to school in the #uture lines 65;6=.
>bscured b" Metrotime's %icious language and cruel desire to see her son
whipped she urges ?ampriskos not to stop thrashing him ][ Q V-ὐ ῖ ἐ ῆ
‚VW`G\Q[x ][ GU GI I ]f ῖ ἄ 3 ῃ- lines 7=;77 is a hint o# the reciprocal- nurturing
relationship that e2isted between parent and child in the ancient reek world./9, A
parent would take care o# a de#enseless child with the e2pectation that the same child
would care #or the elderl" parent when he or she could no longer do so. 1his e2pectation
meant that parents were e2pected to in%est in their child's education and upbringing
with the understanding that the" themsel%es would someda" reap the rewards o# their
earl" e##orts. E%idence o# this institution is #ound as earl" as Hesiod in his description o#
the conditions that will e2ist among mortals o# the iron age just be#ore eus destro"s
them in the -orks and Days. 4n addition to general stri#e between kinsmen- Hesiod
/9, 1he Athenian tragedians were especiall" interested in this relationship. See Mc*ermott /6763 7/;60#or a discussion o# the importance o# this institution in Athenian societ" and the implications o#
%iolating its tenets- speci#icall" in re#erence to Euripides' Medea.
8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
^I Q U_I XQ[U V ^ U ]]QR- LGVWW^RU ] `V][\ZU-3 ὐ # ὐ ὸ ὲ lines ,8;,7. She
#ollows up this remark with an e2planation o# the reason that she wanted him to ha%e an
education+ to pro%ide support #or her in her old age ]Q[ GRL U ^ I RG\ZI [Uῦ ἀ ὸ ῆ ἀ ἔ -
line ,6. 1his clear statement o# her reasons #or sending &ottalos to school help #rame
her entire monologue- and is suggesti%e o# a philosophical concern be"ond what might
be e2pected #rom an otherwise comical scene./90 4mplicit in the scene is the #ear o#
parents that e##orts to educate their children in hopes o# securing a better #uture #or
themsel%es will #ail- and that their children will #ail to hold up their end o# the mutuall"
bene#icial relationship that e2ists between parent and child. 1his would amount to a
major ethical #ailure on &ottalos' part.
4t is impossible to assert with an" certaint" Herodas' reasons #or including this
element o# ethical criticism in his mimes besides the ob%ious point mentioned
pre%iousl"- that ethical criticism is a #eature o# iambic authors- which Herodas considers
himsel# to be. 4t cannot be shown that the statement is indicati%e o# Herodas' own %iews-
since his %iewpoint has been thoroughl" obscured b" the additional la"er o# separation
that results #rom the ethical pronouncement being issued b" a character o# the mime
instead o# b" the narrati%e %oice o# the poetic person common in the e2amples #rom
iambic poetr" discussed abo%e. 4 think it likel" in this mime and the other e2amples to
be discussed shortl" that Herodas' aim in including elements o# ethical criticism in his
mimes is to #orce his audience to consider- #or at least a brie# moment- deeper
philosophical issues. 3hile Metrotime might come across as a humorousl" o%erbearing
/90 anker ,6- =6 sees parallels in Pew Comed" and )lautine comed" in ?ampriskos and Metrotime.See also pp. 69;6= #or anal"sis o# the humor in this particular mime.
8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
mother #or much o# the mime- at the core o# her complaints whether she is aware o# it
or not is an important issue likel" rele%ant to the majorit" o# Herodas' audience. 4# the"
are the t"pe o# audience member that is mo%ed to contemplation b" art- that is- i# the"
are unlike the women in the #ourth mime- then the" will laugh- but while laughing the"
will also think. 1his is an appropriate response to Herodas' poetr"- which mi2es low
humor with ele%ated concerns- producing a constant tension that demands to be
e2plored.
#.2.2: Mimiamb 'i4e and the %tatus of %la4es
1he #i#th mime pro%ides "et another instance in which serious philosophical
concerns lurk beneath the sur#ace o# what is- otherwise- a scene reminiscent o# the comic
stage. 4n this case it is Bitinna- a woman o# unclear social and marital status- who
Herodas humorousl" emplo"s as an unconscious %oice #or such concerns./95 1he
uestion at hand in the #i#th mime is that o# the indistinct status o# a sla%e as a
possessable object and human. Herodas creates considerable tension b" using one o# the
most Jt"rannicalO and cruel characters in his entire corpus to lend a %oice to such an
ele%ated philosophical and moral issue. 1he basic premise o# the mime is simple.
Bitinna is angr" with her sla%e astron- with whom she has had a se2ual relationship-
#or taking up with another woman. 4n a rage she decides to punish himD most o# the
mime consists o# Bitinna speaking with astron- tr"ing to ascertain his guilt and decide
/95 See anker ,6- /90;99 #or discussion o# Bitinna's status. Po decisi%e statement can be made onthe matterD Bitinna ma" be married- widowed- or independent. !ountoulakis ,= has proposedthat she ma" be a hetaira or a woman o# similar social standing. Arnott /6=/ argues that she ismarried and not a hetaira. Cunningham /6=/ does not comment on her status- e2cept to sa" that sheis a J#ree woman.O See also &onstan /676.
8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
on a suitable punishment. E%er present in the dialogue is the contrast between ] Iῦ
and UFGR`I-ἄ both categories to which astron belongs. 4n the background is the
uestion o# how to reconcile belonging to both.
!ollowing Bitinna's opening lines in which she accuses astron o# sleeping with
another woman lines /;0 is astron's assertion that he is- in #act- a sla%e and that she
ma" treat him as she desires ] I [ Wx G ^ Xf W- line 8. Yet his status isῦ ἰ ῶ # ῃ
e%identl" not so clear as it #irst appears. Bitinna remarks that she was responsible #or
raising him up to a rank among humans L W- ƒ^GRU- [ F[ V U UFG`I-ἐ ; 3 ῖ ἐ ἀ
line /9./99 Appropriate #or such an ele%ated discussion is Bitinna's use o# the ethical %erb
WVG^UR line /8 to describe her #ailure in judgment when she raised him up to a le%el<
o# societ" usuall" inaccessible to sla%es. Bitinna then shi#ts- telling astron he needs to
learn that he is a sla%e and her propert" ][ ^[fU[Q [ I ] I QV ^G[ I `TG [_ ῖ ὀ ἰ ῦ ὶ ῖ ὐ
WU I FZQV LUQ[U- lines ,;,/.) ἔ 4n just , lines astron has identi#ied himsel# as a
] I- while Bitinna has stated that she ga%e him a place amongῦ UFGR`- be#ore=
again reminding him that he is- in #act- a sla%e. 1he alternating use o# the opposed terms
should draw an attenti%e and re#lecti%e audience member's attention to astron's odd
status.
!ollowing Bitinna's order gi%en to another sla%e to bind astron comes a new
protest #rom astron. He asks Bitinna to #orgi%e his mistake [I W ̂ U WVG^\ZUἄ ὴ <
^Vf^ZU- line ,8. He continues to protest- claiming that he is onl" human a#ter all- and
that he simpl" made a mistake UFGR`I [ W- WVG^U-ἄ ἰ ἥ line ,=. astron's use o#
/99 4 am reminded here o# the cena in )etronius' Satyricon- in which the #reedman 1rimalchio- angered with his wi#e !ortunata- reminds her that he is largel" responsible #or her current #ree status+ demachina illam sustuli, hominem inter homines +eci =5.
8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
WVG^UR and the related WVG^\V< < echo Bitinna's earlier language in line /8. Bitinna-
howe%er- rejects his claim b" ordering him o## to the v^G[U line 0,- a place where
sla%es were punished and a word #amiliar to the comic stage./98 astron's #inal words are
spoken at line 06D he will remain present Jon stage-O so to speak- but silent. astron's
status as a sla%e initiall" appears to be certain a#ter this pointD he is re#erred to as a
#ellow sla%e fU]_U- line 98- b" &"dilla- who will be discussed below- and as a
se%en#old;sla%e 8`^]_U- line =9 b" Bitinna./9= 1rue to Bitinna's inabilit" to make
up her mind earlier in the mime- howe%er- she re%erts again to calling him an UFGR`Iἄ
line =7. 1his is the #inal term she applies to him.
Beginning at line 06 with astron's last spoken line a new sla%e comes to the
#ore#ront- one who also occupies a con#used position in Bitinna's household. 1his sla%e-
named &"dilla she is #irst mentioned at line 6D this same name is gi%en to another sla%e
in the #ourth mime- is twice identi#ied as a ]fZ lines 55 and 95 b" Bitinna. &"dilla is
sent b" Bitinna to bring back astron a#ter she has sent him awa" to the v^G[U to be
whipped- as she has changed her mind and now wishes him to be tattooed instead./97
&"dilla intercedes on astron's behal#- calling upon Bitinna b" the endearing term ^V^\
line 86 and pra"ing that her daughter- Bat"llis- #inds a good husband and gi%es her
grandchildren lines 86;=/. She asks Bitinna to #orgi%e [I- line =, astron'sἄ
mistake ̂ U W\VU ^Vf^ZU WVG^\ZU- lines =,;=0- echoing the %er" same language usedὴ <
b" both characters earlier in the mime. Bitinna is at #irst unwilling to relent- but she
/98 See Headlam and &no2 /6,, and anker ,6- ad. loc. #or comic parallels. anker also mentionsthe tendenc" in <oman comed" o# sending a sla%e to the carni+e( as a ?atin eui%alent.
/9= Cunningham /6=/- ad. loc. sa"s that `^]_U is Jcomic e2aggeration.Oἐ 1he phrase also appears inHippona2 *egani !r. /6- line ,. See also anker ,6- ad. loc.
/97 See ones /67= on tattooing in antiuit". See pp. /5=;57 speci#icall" #or tattooing as a punishment#or sla%es.
8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
#inall" does so- citing her lo%e #or &"dilla as the reason. She sa"s that she lo%es &"dilla
no less than her own daughter U ] U U zV^_\]V ^TGLR- line 7, and' ὐ ὲ 6 '
mentions that she raised &"dilla with her own hands U ^ἐ ῇ [G ^ ὶ ῇI Wἐ ῇ FGTKVV-
line 70. Bitinna's use o# the %erb ^TGLR to lo%e is important- as this is the %erb used
o# the lo%e between parent and child./96 Also important is the %erb ^GTR- which is used
to describe the nurturing and rearing o# a child. &"dilla's status is- like astron's-
con#used. She is %er" clearl" re#erred to as a ]fZ- "et Bitinna's language is also
re#lecti%e o# a mother;daughter relationship. 1he status o# both characters is
intentionall" le#t ambiguous.
As in the third mime- no clear ethical message emerges #rom the #i#th mime and
no de#initi%e boundaries #or ethical conduct are established. 1here is perhaps a general
interest in the status o# sla%es and what it means to be an UFGR`I present in the #i#thἄ
mime- but it would be a gross o%erstatement and misreading o# the te2t to draw an"
de#inite conclusion as to what Herodas' own %iews were. All that can be said is there is
an interest in an ethical subject- but an" indication o# the poet's own %iew is obscured b"
the remo%al o# the poetic %oice #rom the poems. Causing e%en more di##icult" is the #act
that within the #i#th mime the characters #ail to make an" decisi%e statements regarding
the status o# sla%es- or e%en appear to recogni@e that the" are addressing such a weight"
philosophical issue. At least in the mimes dealing with aesthetic criticism Herodas'
characters had %er" pronounced %iews that could be critiued. 1he absence o# well
de#ined ethical %iews makes it di##icult to do an"thing more than simpl" point out the
/96 See ?S /./. Aristotle's ud. th. =./,5/b uses the %erb TR to describe the lo%e between parent andchild. 1here are- o# course- man" e2ceptions to this.
8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
Earl" in the poem she responded to "llis' gloom" comments on old age with what
appears to ha%e been a joke W ^ GU_ QV^VK[f][x NNqὴ ῦ L G- ƒ_\- Q ^TG_Iὰ ἠ
L[U-ἄ lines /=;/7./8 1here is no such pla"#ul attitude later in the poem. Metriche tells
"llis she would not ha%e kindl" endured such words #rom an" other woman ^V ^ Lῦ ἐ -
ZI L_UVQ I Q U ]TRIἐ ἄ ὸ ὐ > ἠ `vQ_Vἐ 4 - lines 86;=. She then issues a
h"pothetical ph"sical threat similar to those seen in Herodas' iambic predecessors-
claiming that she would ha%e taught such a woman to sing a lame song while limping
R U ] [\][U U [`V\][_V- line =/ὴ ἀ > ἐ and to consider her door hate#ul ^ Uὸ
] U FG U L[ FV- line =,.ὐ ὸ ἐ ὸ ἠ ῖ /8/ 1he phrase [\][U R is surel" a re#erence toἀ
Herodas' own choliambic meter- also known as limping iambs- and an earl" signal that
Herodas' poems will be st"led on Hippona2' iamboi . 1his pla"#ul re#erence to the
choliambic meter is especiall" appropriate #or a passage that %er" closel" resembles a
t"pical iambic psogos reminiscent o# Hippona2.
!ollowing her threat- Metriche e2plains more #ull" the reasons #or her anger- and
in doing so indirectl" critici@es the conduct o# others and draws up the Jethical
boundariesO identi#ied b" Acosta;Hughes. She warns "llis ne%er to come back bringing
such a stor" ] V ^I I W[ WZ] UV-ὺ $ ἔ ὲ + \Z- ^ U TG_V G[ W FU- lines =0;=5. ῖ ῦ
She is re#erring here- o# course- to the "oung r"llos' passion #or her and "llis' ad%ice
that she should gi%e up on her current relationship. She then de#ines the proper course
o# action #or a woman whose partner is awa". She tells "llis that she will continue
/81he te2tual corruption here makes it di##icult to understand precisel" what Metriche is sa"ing- but L[U seems to ha%e a se2ual connotation. Cunningham /6=/- ad. loc. citesἄ Anacreont . 9=.,/;, as a
parallel./8/ 1he choice o# the adjecti%e FGIἐ to describe Metriche's home ma" be a re#erence to the tendenc" o#
iambographers to cast the object o# their wrath as an enem". She is #raming her relationship with"llis in traditional iambic terms.
8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
waiting- and warns "llis against mocking Mandris ^ U |_FTR ] Z^G\ZU Vὴ ὲ ἔ
F`[U ̂ U ]\GUx L G UL[ ̂ I [ I U]GU- lines =8;==.ὸ ὐ ὰ ἐ ) ἰ /8, Here we see a clear
ethical stance taken b" Metriche regarding her #idelit" towards her partner- %oiced in the
traditional #ormat o# an iambic in%ecti%e poem. 4mplicit in Metriche's attack on "llis is
a rejection o# the procuress' own ethical belie#s- which would encourage Metriche to
abandon her partner and trans#er her a##ections elsewhere.
3hile Metriche's statement is clear- it is still impossible to argue #or an" e%idence
o# Herodas' own opinion being suggested b" her words. 1he #irst mime ma"- howe%er-
gi%e some indication to the t"pes o# topics o# interest to Herodas. ?ines ,8;09 #eature a
sort o# encomium o# the attractions o# )tolemaic Eg"pt. 1hough humorousl" placed in
the mouth o# the "llis- it seems likel" that this sort o# comic praise was welcomed b"
the )tolemies./80 1he encomium is worth" o# closer e2amination. "llis praises a great
%ariet" o# institutions and bene#its #or an indi%idual #ound in )tolemaic Eg"pt- notabl"+
power- personal reputation- wealth- se2ual pleasures- the Mouseion- the temple o#
)tolem" 44 )hiladelphus 44 and Arsinoe 44- and the good king again- re#erring to
)hiladelphus. anker- in his discussion o# this passage- notes that "llis' list is arranged
in a Jcomic disorder-O with serious institutions- such as the Mouseion line 0/-
ju2taposed with more #ri%olous pursuits and pleasures such as wine UI- line 0/ and ἶ
/8, 1he %erb L[R reminds me o# the Homeric hero's concern with being laughed at b" his or herenemies. Euripides' Medea pro%ides the clearest e2ample. She e2presses the pain o# hearing herenemies laughing at her se%eral times- such as at =6= when addressing the chorus+ L G L[ FVὐ ὰ )^Z^ U FG U- \V.ὸ ἐ ἐ ῶ *illon /66/- 059 calls tragic laughter Jmale%olent in the e2treme.OMetriche's strong reaction and use o# heroic language is perhaps undercut b" her reconciliation with"llis. !or discussion o# laughter in Homer see ?e%ine /67,- who on p. 6= obser%es that Jlaughtergenerall" implies a real or imagined ph"sical or moral superiorit" o%er another person.O Such laughteris deser%ing o# punishmentD the suitors will ha%e one last laugh at 1elemachus ] GV ̀ U [̂I `" ? ἄ ἐ ?V ^ ] LTVVU WUZ^ G[I-ὐ ῷ @ ὺ ῆ ,/.0=8;== be#ore >d"sseus cuts them down.
/80 See anker ,6 ad. loc. and pp. 0=;07.
8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
women L_UV Q[I- line 0,. ῖ 1he comic ju2taposition o# the serious and tri%ial in these
lines is consistent with the poetic techniue Herodas emplo"s elsewhere in his poems.
4n the #ourth mime we saw lower class- uneducated women describe works o# art using
the language o# intellectual discourse. ?ikewise- in the %arious mimes discussed abo%e
we ha%e seen %ulgar characters raise uestions and concerns o# serious ethical and
moral importance. 1he tension created b" "llis' deli%erance o# the encomium and the
order o# the attractions is the same tension e%ident throughout the rest o# Herodas'
mimes.
#.#: Conclusion
Besides aiding in creating humor and the ironic tension pre%alent in Herodas'
poetr"- the presence o# the encomium in the #irst poem also signals his connection to
and interest in )tolemaic Eg"ptian culture. 4 would like to de%elop this point b"
suggesting that the ethical issues on which Herodas #ocuses were topics o# great interest
in )tolemaic societ" o# Herodas' da". !eaturing prominentl" in the three mimes
discussed abo%e are primaril" issues dealing with the household and #amil"+ parent;
child relationships are the #ocus o# the third mime- while #idelit" in male;#emale
partnerships is at the #ore#ront o# the #irst mime./85 1he #amil" unit saw changes in the
Hellenistic era in which Herodas wrote and li%ed- so it is uite possible that these mimes
are a reaction to such changes./89 1he #i#th mime #ocuses on the di##icult distinction
/851he third mime also deals with education- another hot topic in )tolemaic Eg"pt. )tolem" 44)hiladelphus passed measures promoting education- while other elites o# the Hellenistic era had ahand in establishing new schools. See Morgan ,/- 9/=.
/89 4t is in )tolemaic Eg"pt that the earliest marriage contracts are #ound. Such contracts deal with a %ariet" o# topics- including dowr"- death- and di%orce. See Yi#tach;!iranko ,0.
8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
Acosta;Hughes- Benjamin. Polyeideia/ the Iambi o+ allimachus and the Archaic
Iambic #radition. Berkele"+ $C )ress- ,,.
Arnott- eo##re". JHerodas and the &itchen Sink.O %reece and !ome /7 /6=/+ /,/;/0,.
Bartsch- Shadi and as Elsner. JEight 3a"s o# ?ooking at an Ekphrasis.O lassical Philology /, ,=+ i;%i.
Bowie- Ewen. JEarl" reek 4ambic )oetr".O Iambic Ideas/ ssays on a Poetic #radition +rom Archaic %reece to the 0ate !oman mpire. Ed. Antonio Aloni- AlessandroBarchiesi- and Alberto Ca%ar@ere. Pew York+ <owman and ?ittle#ield- ,/. /;,7.
Bruss- on. JEpigram.O A ompanion to 'ellenistic 0iterature. Ed. ames Clauss andMartine Cu"pers. Malden- MA+ Blackwell )ublishing- ,/. //=;/09.
*uBois- )age. J<eading the 3riting on the 3all.O lassical Philology /, ,=+ 59;98.
Edmunds- ?owell. JCallimachus 4amb 5+ !rom )er#ormance to 3riting.O Iambic Ideas/ ssays on a Poetic #radition +rom Archaic %reece to the 0ate !oman mpire.Ed. Antonio Aloni- Alessandro Barchiesi- and Alberto Ca%ar@ere. Pew York+<owman and ?ittle#ield- ,/. ==;67.
!innegan- <.. J3omen in Herodian Mime.O 'ermathena /9, /66,+ ,/;0=.
;;;. J1he Pai%e and &nowing E"e+ Ecphrasis and the Culture o# :iewing in theHellenistic 3orld.O Art and #e(t in Ancient %reek ulture. Ed. S. oldhill and <.>sbourne. Cambridge $)- /665. /6=;,,0.
ra#- !. JEkphrasis+ *ie Entstehung der attung in der Antike.O Beschreibungskunst8 >unstbeschreibung. Ed. . Boehm and H. )#otenhauer. MŠnchen+ 3. !ink- /669.
ut@willer- &athr"n. A %uide to 'ellenistic 0iterature. Malden- MA+ Blackwell)ublishing- ,=.
Hawkins- 1om. J>ut;!o2ing the 3ol#;3alker+ ?"cambes as )er#ormati%e <i%al to Archilochus.O lassical Anti*uity ,= ,7+ 60;//5.
8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
Hughes- Benjamin. JCallimachus- Hippona2- and the )ersona o# the 4ambographer.O Materiali e discussioni per l1analisi dei testi classici 0= /668+ ,9;,/8.
&ut@ko- *a%id. J1he Major 4mportance o# a Minor )oet+ Herodas 8 and = as a {uasi;dramatic *ipt"ch.O Beyond the anon. Ed. M.A. Harder- <. <emco- !. <egtuit-and . C. 3akker. ?eu%en+ )eeters- ,8.
8/13/2019 Aesthetic and Ethical Criticism in Herodas' Mimiamboi
Morgan- 1eresa. J thos+ 1he Sociali@ation o# Children in Education and Be"ond.O Aompanion to 6amilies in the %reek and !oman -orlds. Ed. B. <awson. >2#ord+ 3ile";Blackwell- ,/.
Murra"- ackie. Poetically rect/ rinna and &ossis in 'erodas @ and . A)A- ,7-Chicago- 4?. $npublished con#erence abstract. <etrie%ed #rom+http+apaclassics.orgimagesuploadsdocumentsabstractsMurra"(/.pd#
<osen- <alph. JMi2ing o# enres and ?iterar" )rogram in Herodas 7.O 'arvard Studies
in lassical Philology 65 /66,+ ,9;/8.
;;;. JHippona2- Boupalos- and the Con%entions o# the )sogos.O #APA //7 /677+ ,6;5/.
<otstein- Andrea. #he Idea o+ Iambos. >2#ord+ >2#ord $)- ,/.
Scodel- <uth. J4ambos and )arod".O A ompanion to 'ellenistic 0iterature. Ed. amesClauss and Martine Cu"pers. Malden- MA+ Blackwell )ublishing- ,/. ,9/;88.
Sherwin;3hite- Susan. Ancient os. An historical study +rom the Dorian settlement tothe Imperial period. ‹ttingen+ :andenhoeck Œ <uprecht- /6=7.
Skinner- Maril"n. J?adies' *a" at the Art 4nstitute.O Making Silence Speak/ -omen1s9oices in %reek 0iterature and Society. Ed. Andre ?ardinois and ?aura McClure.)rinceton- P+ )rinceton $)- ,/. ,/;,,,.
Suire- Michael. JMaking M"ron's Cow Moo+ Ecphrastic Epigram and the )oetics o#Simulation.O American ?ournal o+ Philology /0/ ,/+ 976;805.