Hesiod’s ‘Theogony’ 27-28: an Attempt at a New Interpretation
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17072/2073-6681-2025-3-56-65Keywords:
Hesiod; Theogony; prooemium; Muses; Delphi; Oracle; questionings; answers; oral epic tradition.Abstract
A new interpretation of verses 27-28 of the proem to Hesiod's poem Theogony is proposed. The mysterious ‘many lies that look like the truths’, along with the actual ‘truths’ that Hesiod's Muses are able to tell, have brought to life a considerable number of interpretations, which in itself indicates the lack of a proper understanding. This passage receives a satisfactory explanation if we assume that in the famous remark of the goddesses about ‘many lies’ the author meant ambiguous answers given by the Delphic Oracle, which could be interpreted by mortals in various ways, including erroneously. The hypothesis is confirmed, inter alia, by Plutarch's testimony to the direct relationship of the Muses to the Oracle's activities as they were his ‘assistants in future-telling’. Remarkably, the famous phrase of the Muses coincides almost verbatim with the text of the Homeric hymn to Hermes, where three bee maidens, who taught the god the art of divination, could also ‘tell the truth’ or ‘lie’ when predicting the future, with ‘tell the truth’ meaning making true predictions, while ‘lie’ referring to making false predictions, depending on whether they taste the divine honey or not. The proposed understanding is supported by a significant number of unambiguous correspondences between various passages in Theogony and Works and Days by Hesiod and the poetic responses of the Delphic Oracle. The author of the article comes to a conclusion about a common field of epic poetry, which included, on the one hand, the works of epic poets and, on the other hand, the activities of the Oracle, whose hexametric answers are directly related to the oral epic poetic tradition. This also gives some reason to deem it highly likely that the Boeotian poet familiarized himself with the corpus of poetic responses of the Oracle, which existed in one form or another.References
Гринцер Н. П. Что сравнивать и зачем сравнивать? Комментарий к статье Иэна Разерфорда // Мировое древо. 2012. № 19. С. 63–70.
Приходько Е. В. Представления древних эллинов о будущем в зеркале мантического искусства // Ученые записки Петрозаводского государственного университета. 2023. Т. 45, № 3. С. 19–26. doi 10.15393/uchz.art.2023.883.
Almqvist O. Beyond Oracular Ambiguity: Divination, Lies and Ontology in Early Greek Literature // Social Analysis: The International Journal of Anthropology. 2021.Vol. 65. № 2. P. 41–61.
Anecdota Graeca. – Immanuelis Bekkeri. Anecdota Graeca. Vol. I. Berolini: apud G. C. Naucium. 1814. 494 p.
Collins D. Hesiod and the divine voices of Muses // Arethusa. 1999. Vol. 32. № 3. P. 241–262.
Etymologicum Magnum. – Friderici Sylburgii. Etymologicum Magnum. Lipsiae: apud Io. Aug. Gottl. Weidel, MDCCCXVI. 570 p.
Farnell L. R. The Cults of the Greek States. Vol. V. Oxford: at the Clarendon Press. 1909. 618 p.
Fontenrose J. The Delphic Oracle. Its Responses and Operations. Berkely – Los Angeles – London: University of California Press, 1978. 494 p.
Fr. Gr. Hist. – Jacoby F. Die Fragmente der griechischen Historiker. Berlin, 1923–1958.
Kambylis A. Die Dichterweihe und ihre Symbolik: Untersuchungen zu Hesiodos, Kallimachos, Properz und Ennius. Heidelberg: Winter, 1965. 218 S.
Kannicht R. Der alte Streit zwischen Philosophie und Dichtung: Zwei Vorlesungen über Grundzüge der griechischen Literaturauffassung' // Antike und Universalgeschichte. 1980. № 23/6. S. 6–36.
Katz J., Volk K. 'Mere Bellies'?: A New Look at Theogony 26–8 // JHS. 2000. № 120. P. 122–131.
Marquardt P. The two faces of Hesiod’s Muse / Illinois Classical Studies. 1982. Vol. 7. № 1. P. 1–12.
McLeod W. Oral Bards at Delphi // Translations and Proceedings of the American Philological Association. 1961. Vol. 92. P. 317–325.
Murray P. Poetic inspiration in early Greece // JHS. 1981. Vol. 101. P. 87–100.
Nagy G. Greek mythology and poetics. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1990. 388 p.
Naerebout F., Beerden K. “Gods Cannot Tell Lies”: Riddling and Ancient Greek Divination // The Muse at Play: Riddles and Word-play in Greek and Latin Poetry. Ed. by Jan Kwapisz, Mikołaj Szymanski, David Petrain. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2013. P. 121–147.
Neitzel H. Hesiod und die Lügenden Musen: Zur Interpretation von Theogonie 27 f. // Hermes 1980. Bd. 108. H. 3. S. 387–401.
Nietzsche F. Werke. Kritische Gesamtausgabe. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1995. 397 p.
Parke H. Apollo and the Muses, or prophecy in Greek verse // Hermathena. 1981. № 130/131. P. 91–112.
Parke H. W., Wormell D. E. The Delphic oracle. Vol. II. Oxford: at the Clarendon Press, 1956. xxxvi+271 p.
Puelma M. Der Dichter und die Wahrheit in der griechischen Poetik von Homer bis Aristoteles // Museum Helveticum. 1989. Vol. 46, № 2. S. 65–100.
Pucci P. Hesiod and the language of poetry. Baltimore, 1977. P. vii+147.
Roessler W. Die Entdeckung der Funktionalität in der Antike // Poetica. 1980. № 12. P. 283–319.
Roscher W. Nektar und Ambrosia. Leipzig: Teubner, 1883. 115 S.
Rudhart J. Le preambule de la Theogonie: la vocation du poete, le language des Muses // Cahiers de philologie. 1996. № 17. P. 25–39.
Scheinberg S. The Bee Maidens of the Homeric Hymn to Hermes // Harvard Studies in Class. Philology. 1979. Vol. 3. P. 1–28.
Stern-Gillet S. Hesiod’s Proem and Plato’s Ion // The Classical Quarterly. 2014. Vol. 64, № 1. P. 25–42.
Stroh W. Hesiods lügende Musen // Studien zum Antiken Epos / Hrsg. H. Görgemanns, E. A. Schmidt. Mesenheim am Glan, 1976. S. 85–112.
Svenbro J. La parole et la marbre: aux origins de la poetique greque. Lund: Les Belles Lettres, 1976. 268 p.
Thalmann W. Furor poeticus. Poetic Inspiration in Conventions of Form and Thought in Early Greek Epic Poetry. Baltimore, 1984. 247 p.
Verdenius W. J. Notes on the Proem of Hesiod’s “Theogony” // Mnemosyne, Fourth Series. 1972. Vol. 25. Fasc. 3. P. 225–260.
West M. L. Commentary // Hesiod. Theogony. Oxford: at the Clarendon Press, 1966. P. 150–437.
Wilamowitz-Moellendorff U. von. Der Glaube der Hellenen. Berlin: De Gruyter, 1955. Vol. 2. 632 p.
References
Grintser N. P. Chto sravnivatʼ i zachem sravnivat’? Kommentariy k statʼe Iena Razerforda [What to compare and why to compare?]. Mirovoe drevo [Arbor Mundi], 2012, issue 19, pp. 63-70. (In Russ.)
Prikhodʼko E. V. Predstavleniya drevnikh ellinov o budushchem v zerkale manticheskogo iskusstva [Ancient Greeks’ perceptions of the future in the mirror of divination]. Uchenye Zapiski Petrozavodskogo Gosudarstvennogo Universiteta [Proceedings of Petrozavodsk State University], 2023, vol. 45, issue 3, pp. 19-26. doi 10.15393/uchz.art.2023.883. (In Russ.)
Almqvist O. Beyond oracular ambiguity: Divination, lies and ontology in early Greek literature. Social Analysis: the International Journal of Anthropology, 2021, vol. 65, issue 2, pp. 41-61. (In Eng.)
Anecdota Graeca. – Immanualis Bekkeri. Anecdota Graeca [Greek Anecdotes]. Vol. I. Berolini, apud G. C. Naucium. 1814. 494 p. (In Ancient Greek and Latin)
Collins D. Hesiod and the divine voices of Muses. Arethusa, 1999, vol. 32, issue 3, pp. 241-262. (In Eng.)
Etymologicum Magnum. – Friderici Sylburgii. Etymologicum Magnum. Lipsiae, apud Io. Aug. Gottl. Weidel, MDCCCXVI. 570 p. (In Ancient Greek and Latin)
Farnell L. R. The Cults of the Greek States. Oxford, at the Clarendon Press, 1909, vol. V. 618 p. (In Eng.)
Fontenrose J. The Delphic Oracle. Its Responses and Operations. Berkely – Los Angeles – London, University of California Press, 1978. 494 p. (In Eng.)
Fr. Gr. Hist. – Jacoby F. Die Fragmente der griechischen Historiker [Fragments of the Greek Historians]. Berlin, 1923–1958. (In Ancient Greek and Latin)
Kambylis A. Die Dichterweihe und ihre Symbolik. Untersuchungen zu Hesiodos, Kallimachos, Properz und Ennius [Initiation into Poets and Its Symbolism. Studies on Hesiod, Callimachus, Propertius, and Ennius]. Heidelberg, Winter, 1965. 218 p. (In Ger.)
Kannicht, R. Der alte Streit zwischen Philosophie und Dichtung: Zwei Vorlesungen über Grundzüge der griechischen Literaturauffassung [The Old Dispute Between Philosophy and Poetry: Two Lectures about the Basic Features of Greek Conception of Literature]. Antike und Universalgeschichte [Antiquity and Universal History], 1980, issue 23/6, pp. 6-36. (In Ger.)
Katz J., Volk K. 'Mere Bellies'?: A New Look at Theogony 26-8. JHS, 2000, issue 120, pp. 122-131. (In Eng.)
Marquardt P. The two faces of Hesiod’s Muse. Illinois Classical Studies, 1982, vol. 7, issue 1, pp. 1-12. (In Eng.)
McLeod W. Oral Bards at Delphi. Translations and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, 1961, vol. 92, pp. 317-325. (In Eng.)
Murray P. Poetic inspiration in early Greece. JHS, 1981, vol. 101, pp. 87-100. (In Eng.)
Nagy G. Greek Mythology and Poetics. Ithaca and London, Cornell University Press, 1990. 388 p. (In Eng.)
Naerebout F., Beerden K. ʽGods Cannot Tell Liesʼ: Riddling and Ancient Greek divination. The Muse at Play: Riddles and Word-Play in Greek and Latin Poetry. Ed. by Jan Kwapisz, Mikołaj Szymanski, David Petrain. Berlin, Walter de Gruyter, 2013, pp. 121-147. (In Eng.)
Neitzel H. Hesiodos und die Lügenden Musen Zur Interpretation von Theogonie 27 f. [Hesiod and lying Muses: Toward interpretation of Theogony 27], Hermes, 1980, vol. 108, issue 3, pp. 387-401. (In Ger.)
Nietzsche F. Werke. Kritische Gesamtausgabe [Works. Critical Complete Edition]. Berlin, Walter de Gruyter, 1995. 397 p. (In Ger.)
Parke H. Apollo and the Muses, or prophecy in Greek verse. Hermathena, 1981, 130/131, pp. 91-112. (In Eng.)
Parke H. W. and Wormell D. E. The Delphic Oracle. Oxford, at the Clarendon Press, 1956, vol. II. xxxvi+271 p. (In Eng.)
Puelma M. Der Dichter und die Wahrheit in der griechischen Poetik von Homer bis Aristoteles [The poet and the truth in the Greek poetry from Homer to Aristotle]. Museum Helveticum, 1989, vol. 46, issue 2, pp. 65-100. (In Ger.)
Pucci P. Hesiod and the Language of Poetry. Baltimore, 1977. vii+147 p. (In Eng.)
Roessler W. Die Entdeckung der Funktionalität in der Antike [The discovery of functionality in antiquity], Poetica, 1980, issue 12, pp. 283-319. (In Ger.)
Roscher W. H. Nektar und Ambrosia [Nectar and Ambrosia]. Leipzig, Teubner, 1883. 115 p. (In Ger.)
Rudhart J. Le preambule de la Theogonie: la vocation du poete, le language des Muses [The Prooemion to the Theogony: The vocation of the Poet, the language of Muses]. Cachiers de philologie, 1996, issue 17, pp. 25-39. (In Fr.)
Scheinberg S. The bee maidens of the Homeric Hymn to Hermes. Harvard Studies in Class. Philo-
logy, 1979, vol. 3, pp. 1-28. (In Eng.)
Stern-Gillet S. Hesiod’s ʽProemʼ and Plato’s ʽIonʼ. The Classical Quarterly, 2014, vol. 64, issue 1, pp. 25-42. (In Eng.)
Stroh W. Hesiods lügende Musen [Hesiod’s lying Muses]. Studien zum Antiken Epos. Festschrift F. Dirlmeyer und V. Pöschl [Studies on Antique Epic]. Ed. by H. Görgemanns, E. A. Schmidt. Mesenheim am Glan, 1976, pp. 85-112. (In Ger.)
Svenbro J. La parole et la marbre: aux origins de la poetique greque [The Word and the Marble: At the Origins of Greek Poetry]. Lund, Les Belles Lettres, 1976. 268 p. (In Fr.)
Thalmann W. Furor poeticus. Poetic Inspiration in Conventions of Form and Thought in Early Greek Epic Poetry. Baltimore, 1984. 247 p. (In Eng.)
Verdenius W. J. Notes on the problem of Hesiod’s ʽTheogonyʼ. Mnemosyne, 1972, fourth series, vol. 25, fasc. 3, pp. 225-260. (In Eng.)
West M. L. Commentary. In: Hesiod. Theogony. Oxford, at the Clarendon Press, 1966, pp.150-437. (In Eng.)
Wilamowitz-Moellendorff U. von. Der Glaube der Hellenen [The Faith of the Hellenes]. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1955, vol. 2. 632 p. (In Ger.)
