APOLLODORUS FOOTNOTES 3D
THE LIBRARY CONTENTS
APOLLODURS, THE LIBRARY BOOK 3 FOOTNOTES BY J. G. FRAZER
271. The usual story was that the crafty Ulysses spread out baskets and women's gear, mingled with arms, before the disguised Achilles and his girlish companions in Scyros; and that while the real girls pounced eagerly on the feminine gauds, Achilles betrayed his sex by snatching at the arms. See Philostratus Junior, Im. i; Scholiast on Hom. Il. xix.326; Ov. Met. 13.162ff. Apollodorus tells us that Achilles was detected by the sound of a trumpet. This is explained by Hyginus, Fab. 96, who says that while Achilles was surveying the mingled trumpery and weapons, Ulysses caused a bugle to sound and a clash of arms to be heard, whereupon Achilles, imagining that an enemy was at hand, tore off his maidenly attire and seized spear and shield. Statius gives a similar account of the detection (Statius, Achill. ii.167ff.).
272. See Hom. Il. 9.437-484, with the Scholiast on Hom. Il. 9.448. But Homer says nothing about the blinding of Phoenix by his angry father or his cure by Chiron; and according to Homer the accusation of having debauched his father's concubine was not false but true, Phoenix having been instigated to the deed by his mother, who was jealous of the concubine. But variations from the Homeric narrative were introduced into the story by the tragedians who handled the theme (Scholiast on Hom. Il. 9.437-484). Sophocles and Euripides both wrote tragedies on the subject under the same title of Phoenix; the tragedy of Euripides seems to have been famous. See TGF (Nauck 2nd ed.), pp. 286, 621ff.; The Fragments of Sophocles, ed. A. C. Pearson, vol. ii.320ff. The blinding of Phoenix by his father Amyntor is alluded to by a poet of the Greek anthology (Anth. Pal. iii.3). Both the poet and Apollodorus probably drew on Euripides, who from an allusion in Aristoph. Acharn. 421 is known to have represented Phoenix as blind. Both the blinding and the healing of Phoenix are related by Tzetzes (Scholiast on Lycophron 421), who may have followed Apollodorus. According to the Scholiast on Hom. Il. 9.437-484, the name of the concubine was Clytia; according to Tzetzes, Scholiast on Lycophron 421, it was Clytia or Phthia. Apollodorus calls her Phthia. The Scholiast on Plato (Laws, xi. p. 931 B), gives a version of the story which agrees entirely with that of Apollodorus, and may have been copied from it. The healing of Pho.enix's eyes by Chiron is mentioned by Prop. ii.1.60.
274. See Hom. Il. 23.84-90; compare Scholiast on Hom. Il. xii.1; Strab. 9.4.2; Ovid, Ex Ponto i.3.73ff. The name of the slain lad was variously given as Clisonymus (Scholiast, l.c.) or Aeanes (Strabo and Scholiast, ll.cc.)
275. According to the Parian Chronicle (Marmor Parium 2-4), with which Apollodorus is in general agreement, the first king of Attica was Cecrops, and the country was named Cecropia after him, whereas it had formerly been called Actice (sic) after an aboriginal named Actaeus. Pausanias (Paus. 1.2.6) represents this Actaeus as the first king of Attica, and says that Cecrops succeeded him on the throne by marrying his daughter. But Pausanias, like Apollod. 3.15.5, distinguishes this first Cecrops from a later Cecrops, son of Erechtheus (Apollod. 1.5.3). Apollodorus is at one with Pausanias in saying that the first Cecrops married the daughter of Actaeus, and he names her Agraulus (see below, Apollod. 3.14.2). Philochorus said, with great probability, that there never was any such person as Actaeus; according to him, Attica lay waste and depopulated from the deluge in the time of Ogyges down to the reign of Cecrops. See Eusebius, Praeparatio Evangelii, x.10. Tzetzes (Chiliades v.637) and Hyginus, Fab. 48 agree in representing Cecrops as the first king of Attica; Hyginus calls him a son of the earth. As to his double form, the upper part of him being human and the lower part serpentine, see Aristoph. Wasps 438, with the Scholiast; Eur. Ion 1163ff.; Tzetzes, Scholiast on Lycophron 111; Tzetzes, Chiliades v.638ff.; Scholiast on Aristoph. Plutus 773; Diod. 1.28.7, who rationalizes the fable after his usual fashion.
276. As to the contest between Poseidon and Athena for possession of Attica, see Hdt. 8.55; Plut. Them. 19; Paus. 1.24.5; Paus. 1.26.5; Ov. Met. 6.70ff.; Hyginus, Fab. 164; Serv. Verg. G. 1.12; Lactantius Placidus on Statius, Theb. vii.185; Scriptores rerum mythicarum Latini, ed. Bode, i. pp. 1, 115 (First Vatican Mythographer 2; Second Vatican Mythographer 119). A rationalistic explanation of the fable was propounded by the eminent Roman antiquary Varro. According to him, the olive-tree suddenly appeared in Attica, and at the same time there was an eruption of water in another part of the country. So king Cecrops sent to inquire of Apollo at Delphi what these portents might signify. The oracle answered that the olive and the water were the symbols of Athena and Poseidon respectively, and that the people of Attica were free to choose which of these deities they would worship. Accordingly the question was submitted to a general assembly of the citizens and citizenesses; for in these days women had the vote as well as men. All the men voted for the god, and all the women voted for the goddess; and as there was one more woman than there were men, the goddess appeared at the head of the poll. Chagrined at the loss of the election, the male candidate flooded the country with the water of the sea, and to appease his wrath it was decided to deprive women of the vote and to forbid children to bear their mother's names for the future. See Augustine, De civitate Dei xviii.9. The print of Poseidon's trident on the rock of the acropolis at Athens was shown down to late times. See Strab. 9.1.16; Paus. 1.26.5. The “sea,” which the god was supposed to have produced as evidence of his right to the country was also to be seen within the Erechtheum on the acropolis; Pausanias calls it a well of sea water, and says that, when the south wind blew, the well gave forth a sound of waves. See Hdt. 8.55; Paus. 1.26.5; Paus. 8.10.4. According to the late Latin mythographers (see the references above), Poseidon produced a horse from the rock in support of his claim, and this version of the story seems to have been accepted by Virgil (Geo. i.12ff.), but it is not countenanced by Greek writers. The Athenians said that the contest between Poseidon and Athena took place on the second of the month Boedromion, and hence they omitted that day from the calendar. See Plut. De fraterno amore 11; Plut. Quaest. Conviv. ix.6. The unlucky Poseidon also contested the possession of Argos with Hera, and when the judges gave a verdict against him and in favour of the goddess, he took his revenge, as in Attica, by flooding the country. See Paus. 2.22.4; compare Paus. 2.15.5; Polemo, Greek History, cited by the Scholiast on Aristides, vol. iii. p. 322, ed. Dindorf.
277. The olive-tree seems to have survived down to the second century of our era. See Hdt. 8.55; Dionysius of Halicarnassus, De Dinarcho Judicium 3; Paus. 1.27.3; Cicero, De legibus, i.1.2; Hyginus, Fab. 164; Pliny, Nat. Hist. xvi.240. Dionysius agrees with Apollodorus in representing the tree as growing in the Pandrosium, which is proved by inscriptions to have been an enclosure to the west of the Erechtheum. See Frazer, commentary on Pausanias, vol. ii. p. 337.
280. Compare Paus. 1.2.6; Hyginus, Fab. 146; Ov. Met. 2.737ff. All these writers call the first of the daughters Aglaurus instead of Agraulus, and the form Aglaurus is confirmed by inscriptions on two Greek vases (Corpus Inscriptionum Graecarum, vol. iv. p. 146, Nos. 7716, 7718).
281. Compare Paus. 1.21.4; Stephanus Byzantius and Suidas, s.v. Areios pagos in Bekker's Anecdota Graeca, vol. i. p. 444, lines 8ff. From the three latter writers we learn that the story was told by the historians Philochorus and Hellanicus, whom Apollodorus may here be following.
282. See Eur. Ion 1258ff.; Eur. IT 945ff.; Dem. 23.66; Marmor Parium 5ff.; Paus. 1.28.5; Scholiast on Eur. Or. 1648, 1651. The name Areopagus was commonly supposed to mean “the hill of Ares” and explained by the tradition that Ares was the first to be tried for murder before the august tribunal. But more probably, perhaps, the name meant “the hill of curses.” See Frazer, note on Pausanias. i.28.5 (vol. ii. pp. 363ff.). For other legendary or mythical trials in the court of the Areopagus, see below, Apollod. 3.15.1; Apollod. 3.15.9.
283. See above, Frazer on Apollod. 1.9.4, where Cephalus is said to have been a son of Deion by Diomede; compare Apollod. 2.4.7; Apollod. 3.15.1. Pausanias also calls Cephalus a son of Deion (Paus. 1.37.6; Paus. 10.29.6), and so does Ant. Lib. 41. The Scholiast on Hom. (Od. xi.321) calls his father Deioneus. Hyginus in two passages (Hyginus, Fab. 189, 270) describes Cephalus as a son of Deion, and in another passage (Hyginus, Fab. 160) as a son of Hermes (Mercury) by Creusa, daughter of Erechtheus. Euripides tells how “Dawn with her lovely light once snatched up Cephalus to the gods, all for love”( Eur. Hipp.454ff.).
284. According to Hes. Th. 986ff. and Paus. 1.3.1, Phaethon was a son of Cephalus and the Dawn or Day. According to another and seemingly more usual account the father of Phaethon was the Sun. See Diod. 5.23; Paus. 1.4.1; Paus. 2.3.2; Lucian, Dial. Deorum xxv.1; Tzetzes, Chiliades iv.357ff.; Eustathius on Hom. Od. xi.325, p. 1689; Scholiast on Hom. Od. xvii.208; Ov. Met. 2.19ff.; Hyginus, Fab. 152, 156; Lactantius Placidus on Statius, Theb. i.221; Scholia in Caesaris Germanici Aratea, p. 421, ed. Fr. Eyssenhardt, in his edition of Martianus Capella; Scriptores rerum mythicarum Latini, ed. Bode, i. pp. 37, 93, 208 (First Vatican Mythographer 118; Second Vatican Mythographer 57; Third Vatican Mythographer iii.8.14); Serv. Verg. A. 10.189. The mother who bore him to the Sun is usually called Clymene (so Lucian, Tzetzes, Eustathius, Ovid, Hyginus, Lactantius Placidus, the Vatican mythographers, and Servius); but the Scholiast on Hom. Od. xvii.208 calls her Rhode, daughter of Asopus. Clymene herself, the mother of Phaethon, is said to have been a daughter of Ocean and Tethys (Tzetzes, Chiliades iv.359; Ov. Met. 2.156) or of Iphys or Minyas (Eustathius). Apollodorus passes over in silence the famous story how Phaethon borrowed the chariot of the Sun for a day, and driving too near the earth set it on fire, and how in his wild career he was struck dead by Zeus with a thunderbolt and fell into the river Eridanus, where his sisters mourned for him till they were turned into poplar trees, their tears being changed into drops of amber which exuded from the trees. The story is told at great length and with many picturesque details by Ovid, (Metamorph. ii.1ff.). Compare Lucretius v.396ff.; Diodorus Siculus, Lucian, the Scholiast on Homer, Hyginus, and the Latin Mythographers. Euripides wrote a tragedy on the subject, of which some considerable fragments survive. See TGF (Nauck 2nd ed.), pp. 599ff. For some similar stories, see Frazer's Appendix on Apollodorus, “Phaethon and the Chariot of the Sun.”
286. A different and apparently more prevalent tradition represented Adonis as the son of Cinyras by incestuous intercourse with his daughter Myrrha or Smyrna. See Scholiast on Theocritus i.107; Plut. Parallela 22; Ant. Lib. 34 (who, however, differs as to the name of Smyrna's father); Ov. Met. 10.298ff.; Hyginus, Fab. 58, 164; Fulgentius, Mytholog. iii.8; Lactantius Placidus, Narrat. Fabul. x.9; Serv. Verg. Ecl. 10.18, and Serv. Verg. A. 5.72; Scriptores rerum mythicarum Latini, ed. Bode, i. p. 60 (First Vatican Mythographer 200). Similar cases of incest with a daughter are frequently reported of royal houses in antiquity. They perhaps originated in a rule of transmitting the crown through women instead of through men; for under such a rule a widowed king would be under a strong temptation to marry his own daughter as the only means of maintaining himself legitimately on the throne after the death of his wife. See Adonis, Attis, Osiris, 3rd ed., i.43ff. The legend of the incestuous origin of Adonis is mentioned, on the authority of Panyasis, by Apollodorus himself a little lower down.
287. Compare Bion i; Cornutus, Theologiae Graecae Compendium 28; Plut. Quaest. Conviv. iv.5.3, 8; Athenaeus ii.80, p. 69 B; Tzetzes, Scholiast on Lycophron 831; Aristides, Apology, ed. J. Rendel Harris (Cambridge, 1891), pp. 44, 106ff.; Prop. iii.4(5) 53ff., ed. F. A. Paley; Ov. Met. 10.710ff.; Hyginus, Fab. 248; Macrobius, Sat. i.21.4; Lactantius, Divin. Inst. i.17; Firmicus Maternus, De errore profanarum religionum 9; Augustine, De civitate Dei vi.7. There are some grounds for thinking that formerly Adonis and his Babylonian prototype Tammuz were conceived in the form of a boar, and that the story of his death by a boar was only a misinterpretation of this older conception. See Spirits of the Corn and of the Wild, ii.22f.; C. F. Burney, The Book of Judges (London, 1918), pp. xviiff., who refers to “the brilliant discovery of Ball (PSBA. xvi.1894, pp. 195ff.) that the Sumerian name of Tammuz, DUMU.ZI (Bab. Du' ûzu, Dûzu) is identical with the Turkish dōmūz ‘pig,’ and that there is thus an ‘original identity of the god with the wild boar that slays him in the developed legend.’” W. Robertson Smith, as Professor Burney points out, had many years ago expressed the view that “the Cyprian Adonis was originally the Swine-god, and in this as in many other cases the sacred victim has been changed by false interpretation into the enemy of the god” (Religion of the Semites, New Edition, London, 1894, p. 411, note). The view is confirmed by the observation that the worshippers of Adonis would seem to have abstained from eating swine's flesh. See W. W. Baudissin, Adonis und Esmun (Leipsig, 1911), p. 142, quoting SS. Cyri et Joannis Miracula, in Migne's Patrologia Graeca, lxxxvii.3, col. 3624.
288. According to Ant. Lib. 34, Smyrna, the mother of Adonis, was a daughter of Belus by a nymph Orithyia. Tzetzes mentions, but afterwards rejects, the view that Myrrha, the mother of Adonis, was a daughter of Thias (Scholiast on Lycophron 829, 831). Hyginus says that Cinyras, the father of Adonis, was king of Assyria (Hyginus, Fab. 58). This traditional connexion of Adonis with Assyria may well be due to a well-founded belief that the religion of Adonis, though best known to the Greeks in Syria and Cyprus, had originated in Assyria or rather in Babylonia, where he was worshipped under the name of Dumuzi or Tammuz. See Adonis, Attis, Osiris, 3rd ed., i.6ff.
289. As to the transformation of the mother of Adonis into a myrrh-tree, see Scholiast on Theocritus i.107; Plut. Parallela 22; Ant. Lib. 34; Tzetzes, Scholiast on Lycophron 829; Ov. Met. 10.476ff.; Hyginus, Fab. 58, 164; Fulgentius, Mytholog. iii.8; Lactantius Placidus, Narrat. Fabul. x.9; Serv. Verg. Ecl. 10.18 and Aen. v.72; Scriptores rerum mythicarum Latini, ed. Bode, i. p. 60 (First Vatican Mythographer 200). The drops of gum which oozed from the myrrh-tree were thought to be the tears shed by the transformed Myrrha for her sad fate (Ov. Met. 10.500ff.).
290. According to another version of the story, Aphrodite and Persephone referred their dispute about Adonis to the judgment of Zeus, and he appointed the Muse Calliope to act as arbitrator between them. She decided that Adonis should spend half the year with each of them; but the decision so enraged Aphrodite that in revenge she instigated the Thracian women to rend in pieces Calliope's son, the musician Orpheus. See Hyginus, Ast. ii.6. A Scholiast on Theocritus (Id. iii.48) reports the common saying that the dead Adonis spends six months of the year in the arms of Persephone, and six months in the arms of Aphrodite; and he explains the saying as a mythical description of the corn, which after sowing is six months in the earth and six months above ground.
292. According to the Parian Chronicle (Marmor Parium 4-7), Deucalion reigned at Lycorea on Mount Parnassus, and when the flood, following on heavy rains, took place in that district, he fled for safety to king Cranaus at Athens, where he founded a sanctuary of Rainy Zeus and offered thank-offerings for his escape. Compare Eusebius, Chronic. vol. ii. p. 26, ed. A. Schoene. We have seen that, according to Apollod. 3.8.2, the flood happened in the reign of Nyctimus, king of Arcadia.
294. Compare the Parian Chronicle, Marmor Parium 8-10; Paus. 1.2.6; Eusebius, Chronic. vol. ii. p. 30, ed. A. Schoene. The Parian Chronicle represents Amphictyon as a son of Deucalion and as reigning, first at Thermopylae, and then at Athens; but it records nothing as to his revolt against Cranaus. Pausanias says that Amphictyon deposed Cranaus, although he had the daughter of Cranaus to wife. Eusebius says that Amphictyon was a son of Deucalion and in-law of Cranaus.
296. With this story of the birth of Erichthonius compare Scholiast on Hom. Il. 2.547 (who agrees to a great extent verbally with Apollodorus); Eur. Ion 20ff.; Eur. Ion 266ff.; Eratosthenes, Cat. 13; Nonnus, in Westermann's Mythographi Graeci, Appendix Narrationum, 3, pp. 359ff.; Tzetzes, Scholiast on Lycophron 111; Antigonus Carystius, Hist. Mirab. 12; Etymologicum Magnum, s.v. Erechtheus, p. 371.29; Hyginus, Fab. 166; Hyginus, Ast. ii.13; Serv. Verg. G. 3.113; Fulgentius, Mytholog. ii.14; Lactantius, Divin. Inst. ii.17; Augustine, De civitate Dei xviii.12; Scholia in Caesaris Germanici Aratea, p. 394, ed. Fr. Eyssenhardt (in his edition of Martianus Capella); Scriptores rerum mythicarum Latini, ed. Bode, i. pp. 41, 86ff., 88 (First Vatican Mythographer 128; Second Vatican Mythographer 37, 40). The story of the birth of Erichthonius was told by Euripides, according to Eratosthenes, Cat. 13 and by Callimachus, according to the Scholiast on Hom. Il. 2.547. Pausanias was plainly acquainted with the fable, though he contents himself with saying that Erichthonius was reported to be a son of Hephaestus and Earth (Paus. 1.2.6; Paus. 1.14.6). As C. G. Heyne long ago observed, the story is clearly an etymological myth invented to explain the meaning of the name Erichthonius, which some people derived from eris, “strife,” and chthôn, the ground,” while others derived it from erion, “wool,” and chthôn, “the ground.” The former derivation of “eri” in Erichthonius seems to have been the more popular. Mythologists have perhaps not sufficiently reckoned with the extent to which false etymology has been operative in the creation of myths. “Disease of language” is one source of myths, though it is very far from being the only one.
297. With this story of the discovery of Erichthonius in the chest compare Eur. Ion 20ff.; Eur. Ion 266ff.; Paus. 1.18.2; Antigonus Carystius, Hist. Mirab. 12; Ov. Met. 2.552ff.; Hyginus, Fab. 166; Hyginus, Ast. ii.13; Fulgentius, Mytholog. ii.14; Lactantius, Divin. Inst. i.17; Scriptores rerum mythicarum Latini, ed. Bode, i. pp. 41, 86ff., 88 (First Vatican Mythographer 128; Second Vatican Mythographer 37, 40). Apollodorus apparently describes the infant Erichthonius in the chest as a purely human babe with a serpent coiled about him. The serpent was said to have been set by Athena to guard the infant; according to Eur. Ion 20ff., there were two such guardian serpents. But according to a common tradition Erichthonius was serpent-footed, that is, his legs ended in serpents. See Nonnus, in Westermann's Mythographi Graeci, Appendix Narrationum 3, p. 360; Etymologicum Magnum, s.v. Erechtheus, p. 371.47; Hyginus, Fab. 166; Serv. Verg. A. 3.113; Scriptores rerum mythicarum Latini, ed. Bode, i. pp. 41, 87 (First Vatican Mythographer 128, Second Vatican Mythographer 37). Indeed, in one passage (Astronom. ii.13) Hyginus affirms that Erichthonius was born a serpent, and that when the box was opened and the maidens saw the serpent in it, they went mad and threw themselves from the acropolis, while the serpent took refuge under the shield of Athena and was reared by the goddess. This view of the identity of Erichthonius with the serpent was recognized, if not accepted, by Pausanias; for in describing the famous statue of the Virgin Athena on the acropolis of Athens, he notices the serpent coiled at her feet behind the shield, and adds that the serpent “may be Erichthonius” (Paus. 1.24.7). The sacred serpent which lived in the Erechtheum on the acropolis of Athens and was fed with honey-cakes once a month, may have been Erichthonius himself in his original form of a worshipful serpent. See Hdt. 8.41; Aristoph. Lys. 758ff., with the Scholiast; Plut. Them. 10; Philostratus, Im. ii.17.6; Hesychius, s.vv. drakaulos and oikouron ophin; Suidas, s.v. Drakaulos; Etymologicum Magnum, s.v. drakaulos, p. 287; Photius, Lexicon, s.v. oikouron ophin; Eustathius on Hom. Od. i.357, p. 1422, lines 7ff. According to some, there were two such sacred serpents in the Erechtheum (Hesychius, s.v. oikouron ophin). When we remember that Cecrops, the ancestor of Erichthonius, was said, like his descendant, to be half-man, half-serpent (above, Apollod. 3.14.1), we may conjecture that the old kings of Athens claimed kinship with the sacred serpents on the acropolis, into which they may have professed to transmigrate at death. Compare The Dying God, pp. 86ff.; and Frazer on Paus. 1.18.2 (vol. ii. pp. 168ff.). The Erechtheids, or descendants of Erechtheus, by whom are meant the Athenians in general, used to put golden serpents round the necks or bodies of their infants, nominally in memory of the serpents which guarded the infant Erechthonius, but probably in reality as amulets to protect the children. See Eur. Ion 20-26, Eur. Ion 1426-1431. Erechtheus and Erichthonius may have been originally identical. See Scholiast on Hom. Il. 2.547; Etymologicum Magnum, s.v. Erechtheus, p. 371.29; C. F. Clinton, Fasti Hellenici, vol. i. p. 61 note (n).
298. “The precinct” is the Erechtheum on the acropolis of Athens. It was in the Erechtheum that the sacred serpent dwelt, which seems to have been originally identical with Erichthonius. See the preceding note.
300. Compare the Parian Chronicle, Marmor Parium 18; Harpocration, s.v. Panathênaia; Eratosthenes, Cat. 13; Hyginus, Ast. ii.13, who says that Erichthonius competed at the games in a four-horse car. Indeed, Erichthonius was reputed to have invented the chariot, or, at all events, the four-horse chariot. See the Parian Chronicle, Marmor Parium 18, 21; Eusebius, Chronic. vol. ii. p. 32, ed. A. Schoene; Verg. G. 3.113ff.; Fulgentius, Mytholog. ii.14. According to some, he invented the chariot for the purpose of concealing his serpent feet. See Serv. Verg. G. 3.113; Scriptores rerum mythicarum Latini, ed. Bode, i. pp. 41, 87 (First Vatican Mythographer 127; Second Vatican Mythographer 37). The institution of the Panathenaic festival was by some attributed to Theseus (Plut. Thes. 24), but the Parian Chronicle (Marmor Parium 18), in agreement with Apollodorus, ascribes it to Erichthonius; and from Harpocration, s.v. Panathênaia we learn that this ascription was supported by the authority of the historians Hellanicus and Androtion in their works on Attica. Here, therefore, as usual, Apollodorus seems to have drawn on the best sources.
301. Compare Clement of Alexandria, Protrept. iii.45, p. 39, ed. Potter, who gives a list of legendary or mythical personages who were said to have been buried in sanctuaries or temples. Amongst the instances which he cites are the graves of Cinyras and his descendants in the sanctuary of Aphrodite at Paphus, and the grave of Acrisius in the temple of Athena on the acropolis of Larissa. To these examples C. G. Heyne, commenting on the present passage of Apollodorus, adds the tomb of Castor in a sanctuary at Sparta (Paus. 3.13.1), the tomb of Hyacinth under the image of Apollo at Amyclae (Paus. 3.19.3), and the grave of Arcas in a temple of Hera at Mantinea (Paus. 8.9.3). “Arguing from these examples,” says Heyne, “some have tried to prove that the worship of the gods sprang from the honours paid to buried mortals.”
302. Compare Paus. 1.5.3, who distinguishes two kings named Pandion, first, the son of Erichtonius, and, second, the son of Cecrops the Second. This distinction is accepted by Apollodorus (see below, Apollod. 3.15.5), and it is supported by the Parian Chronicle (Marmor Parium 22, 30). Eusebius also recognizes Pandion the Second, but makes him a son of Erechtheus instead of a son of Cecrops the Second (Eus. Chronic. bk. i. vol. i. col. 185, ed. A. Schoene). But like Cecrops the Second, son of Erectheus (below, Apollod. 3.15.5), Pandion the Second is probably no more than a chronological stopgap thrust into the broken framework of tradition by a comparatively late historian. Compare R. D. Hicks, in Companion to Greek Studies, ed. L. Whibley, 3rd. ed. (Cambridge, 1916), p. 76.
303. Here Apollodorus differs from the Parian Chronicle, which dates the advent of Demeter, not in the reign of Pandion, but in the reign of his son Erechtheus (Marmor Parium 23ff.). To the reign of Erechtheus the Parian Chronicle also refers the first sowing of corn by Triptolemus in the Rharian plain at Eleusis, and the first celebration of the mysteries by Eumolpus at Eleusis (Marmor Parium 23-29). Herein the Parian Chronicle seems to be in accord with the received Athenian tradition which dated the advent of Demeter, the beginning of agriculture, and the institution of the Eleusinian mysteries in the reign of Erechtheus. See Diod. 1.29.1-3. On the other hand, the Parian Chronicler dates the discovery of iron on the Cretan Mount Ida in the reign of Pandion the First (Marmor Parium 22ff.). He says nothing of the coming of Dionysus to Attica. The advent of Demeter and Dionysus is a mythical expression for the first cultivation of corn and vines in Attica; these important discoveries Attic tradition referred to the reigns either of Pandion the First or of his son Erechtheus.
305. The implication is that their wassailing had taken place by night. The Greek meth' hêmeran regularly means “by day” as opposed to “by night”; it is not to be translated “the day after.” See Hdt. 2.150, ou nuktos alla met' hêmerên poieumenon; Plat. Phaedrus 251d, emmanês ousa oute nuktos dunatai katheudein oute meth' hêmeran. Compare Apollod. 1.9.18, Apollod. 3.5.6 (nuktôr kai meth' hêmeran), Apollod. 3.12.3; Apollod. E.4.5; Apollod. E.7.31 (meth' hêmeran men huphainousa, nuktôr de analuousa.)
306. With this story of the first introduction of wine into Attica, and its fatal consequences, compare Scholiast on Hom. Il. 22.29; Ael., Var. Hist. vii.28; Nonnus, Dionys. xlvii.34-245; Hyginus, Fab. 130; Hyginus, Ast. ii.4; Statius, Theb. xi.644-647, with the comment of Lactantius Placidus on Statius, Theb. v. 644; Serv. Verg. G. 2.389; Probus on Verg. G. 2.385; Scriptores rerum mythicarum Latini, ed. Bode, i. pp. 6, 94ff. (First Vatican Mythographer 19; Second Vatican Mythographer 61). The Athenians celebrated a curious festival of swinging, which was supposed to be an expiation for the death of Erigone, who had hanged herself on the same tree at the foot of which she had discovered the dead body of her father Icarius (Hyginus, Ast. ii.4). See Hesychius, s.v. Aiôra; Etymologicum Magnum, s.v. Aiôra; Athenaeus xiv.10, p. 618 EF; Festus, s.v. “Oscillantes,” p. 194, ed. C. O. Muller. Compare The Dying God, pp. 281ff. However, some thought that the Erigone whose death was thus expiated was not the daughter of Icarius, but the daughter of Aegisthus, who accused Orestes at Athens of the murder of her father and hanged herself when he was acquitted (so Etymologicum Magnum, l.c.; compare Apollod. E.6.25 with the note). Sophocles wrote a play Erigone, but it is doubtful to which of the two Erigones it referred. See The Fragments of Sophocles, ed. A. C. Pearson, vol. i. pp. 173ff. The home of Icarius was at Icaria (Stephanus Byzantius, s.v. Ikaria). From the description of Statius, Theb. xi.644-647 we infer that the place was in the woods of Marathon, and in accordance with this description the site has been discovered in a beautiful wooded dell at the northern foot of the forest-clad slopes of Mount Pentelicus. The place is still appropriately named Dionysos. A rugged precipitous path leads down a wild romantic ravine from the deserted village of Rapentosa to the plain of Marathon situated at a great depth below. Among the inscriptions found on the spot several refer to the worship of Dionysus. See Frazer, commentary on Pausanias, vol. ii. pp. 461ff., compare p. 442.
308. For the tragic story of Procne and Philomela, and their transformation into birds, see Zenobius, Cent. iii.14 (who, to a certain extent, agrees verbally with Apollodorus); Conon 31; Ach. Tat. 5.3, 5.5; Tzetzes, Chiliades vii.459ff.; Paus. 1.5.4; Paus. 1.41.8ff.; Paus. 10.4.8ff.; Eustathius on Hom. Od. xix.518, p. 1875; Hyginus, Fab. 45; Ov. Met. 6.426-674; Serv. Verg. Ecl. 6.78; Lactantius Placidus on Statius, Theb. v.120; Scriptores rerum mythicarum Latini, ed. Bode, i. pp. 2, 147 (First Vatican Mythographer 8; Second Vatican Mythographer 217). On this theme Sophocles composed a tragedy Tereus, from which most of the extant versions of the story are believed to be derived. See The Fragments of Sophocles, ed. A. C. Pearson, vol. ii. pp. 221ff. However, the version of Hyginus differs from the rest in a number of particulars. For example, he represents Tereus as transformed into a hawk instead of into a hoopoe; but for this transformation he had the authority of Aesch. Supp. 60ff. Tereus is commonly said to have been a Thracian, and the scene of the tragedy is sometimes laid in Thrace. Ovid, who adopts this account, appears to have associated the murder of Itys with the frenzied rites of the Bacchanals, for he says that the crime was perpetrated at the time when the Thracian women were celebrating the biennial festival (sacra trieterica) of Dionysus, and that the two women disguised themselves as Bacchanals. On the other hand, Thuc. 2.29 definitely affirms that Tereus dwelt in Daulia, a district of Phocis, and that the tragedy took place in that country; at the same time he tells us that the population of the district was then Thracian. In this he is followed by Strab. 9.3.13, Zenobius, Conon, Pausanias, and Nonnus (Dionys. iv.320ff.). Thucydides supports his view by a reference to Greek poets, who called the nightingale the Daulian bird. The Megarians maintained that Tereus reigned at Pagae in Megaris, and they showed his grave in the form of a barrow, at which they sacrificed to him every year, using gravel in the sacrifice instead of barley groats (Paus. 1.41.8ff.). But no one who has seen the grey ruined walls and towers of Daulis, thickly mantled in ivy and holly-oak, on the summit of precipices that overhang a deep romantic glen at the foot of the towering slopes of Parnassus, will willingly consent to divest them of the legendary charm which Greek poetry and history have combined to throw over the lovely scene. It is said that, after being turned into birds, Procne and Tereus continued to utter the same cries which they had emitted at the moment of their transformation; the nightingale still fled warbling plaintively the name of her dead son, Itu! Itu! while the hoopoe still pursued his cruel wife crying, Poo! poo! (pou, pou, “Where? Where?”). The later Roman mythographers somewhat absurdly inverted the transformation of the two sisters, making Procne the swallow and the tongueless Philomela the songstress nightingale.
309. Erechtheus is recognized as the son of Pandion by the Parian Chronicle (Marmor Parium 28ff.), Eusebius, Chronic. vol. i. p. 186, ed. A. Schoene, Hyginus, Fab. 48 and Ov. Met. 6.675ff. According to Ov. Met. 6.675ff. Erechtheus had four sons and four daughters.
310. Compare Harpocration, s.v. Boutês, who tells us that the families of the Butads and Eteobutads traced their origin to this Butes. There was an altar dedicated to him as to a hero in the Erechtheum on the acropolis of Athens (Paus. 1.26.5). Compare J. Toepffer, Attische Genealogie (Berlin, 1889), pp. 113ff. Erechtheus was identified with Poseidon at Athens (Hesychius, s.v. Erechtheus). The Athenians sacrificed to Erechtheus Poseidon (Athenagoras, Supplicatio pro Christianis 1). His priesthood was called the priesthood of Poseidon Erechtheus (Pseudo-Plutarch, x. Orat. Vit. Lycurgus 30, p. 1027, ed. Dubner; Corpus Inscriptionum Atticarum iii.805; Dittenberger, Sylloge Inscriptionum Graecorum(3) 790). An inscription found at the Erechtheum contains a dedication to Poseidon Erechtheus (Corpus Inscriptionum Atticarum 387, vol. i). Hence we may conclude with great probability that Heyne is right in restoring Erechtheôs for Erichthoniou in the present passage of Apollodorus. See the Critical Note.
311. Orithyia is said to have been carried off by Boreas from the banks of the Ilissus, where she was dancing or gathering flowers with her playmates. An altar to Boreas marked the spot. See below, Apollod. 3.15.2; Plat. Phaedrus 229b-c; Paus. 1.19.5; Ap. Rhod., Argon. i.212ff., with the Scholiast on Ap. Rhod., Argon. i.212, from whom we learn that the story was told by the poet Simonides and the early historian Pherecydes. Compare Ov. Met. 6.683ff. According to another account, Orithyia was seen and loved by Boreas as she was carrying a basket in a procession, which was winding up the slope of the acropolis to offer sacrifice to Athena Polias, the Guardian of the City; the impetuous lover whirled her away with him, invisible to the crowd and to the guards that surrounded the royal maidens. See Scholiast on Hom. Od. xiv.533, who refers to Aculiaus as his authority. A different tradition as to the parentage of Orithyia appears to be implied by a vase-painting, which represents Boreas carrying off Orithyia in the presence of Cecrops, Erechtheus, Aglaurus, Herse, and Pandrosus, all of whom are identified by inscriptions (Corpus Inscriptionum Graecarum, vol. iv. p. 146, No. 7716). The painting is interpreted most naturally by the supposition that in the artist's opinion Aglaurus, Herse, and Pandrosus, the three daughters of Cecrops (see above, Apollod. 3.14.2), were the sisters of Orithyia, and therefore that her father was Cecrops, and not Erechtheus, as Apollodorus, following the ordinary Greek tradition (Hdt. 7.189), assumes in the present passage. This inference is confirmed by an express statement of the Scholiast on Ap. Rhod., Argon. i.212 that Cecrops was the father of Orithyia. As to the vase-painting in question, see F. G. Welcker, Antike Denkmäler, iii.144ff.; Baumeister, Denkmäler des klassischen Altertums, i.351ff.
312. This is the third instance of marriage or betrothal with a niece, the daughter of a brother, which has met us in Apollodorus. See above, Apollod. 2.4.3; Apollod. 2.4.5. So many references to such a marriage seem to indicate a former practice of marrying a niece, the daughter of a brother.
314. The tragic story of Cephalus and Procris was told with variations in detail by ancient writers. See Scholiast on Hom. Od. xi.321; Eustathius on Hom. Od. xi.321, p. 1688; Ant. Lib. 41; Tzetzes, Chiliades i.542ff.; Hyginus, Fab. 189; Ov. Met. 7.670-862; Serv. Verg. A. 6.445; Scriptores rerum mythicarum Latini, ed. Bode, i. pp. 16ff., 147 (First Vatican Mythographer 44; Second Vatican Mythographer 216). Of these writers, Tzetzes closely follows Apollodorus, whom he cites by name. They are the only two authors who mention the intrigue of Procris with Pteleus and the bribe of the golden crown. The story was told by Pherecydes, as we learn from the Scholiast on Hom. Od. xi.321, who gives an abstract of the narrative. In it the test of his wife's chastity is made by Cephalus himself in disguise; nothing is said of the flight of the abashed Procris to Minos, and nothing of the love of Dawn (Aurora) for Cephalus, which in several of the versions figures conspicuously, since it is the jealous goddess who suggests to her human lover the idea of tempting his wife to her fall. The episode of Procris's flight to Minos is told with some differences of detail by Antoninus Liberalis. As to the dog which Procris received from Minos, see above, Apollod. 2.7.1. The animal's name was Laelaps (Ov. Met. 7.771; Hyginus, Fab. 189). According to Hyginus, Fab. 189, both the dog and the dart which could never miss were bestowed on Procris by Artemis (Diana). Sophocles wrote a tragedy Procris, of which antiquity has bequeathed to us four words. See The Fragments of Sophocles, ed. A. C. Pearson, vol. ii. pp. 170ff. The accidental killing of Procris by her husband was a familiar, indeed trite, tale in Greece (Paus. 10.29.6).
315. The danger which the women incurred, and the device by which Procris contrived to counteract it, are clearly explained by Ant. Lib. 41. According to him, the animals which Minos discharged from his body were snakes, scorpions, and millipeds.
317. See above, Apollod. 1.9.21; Ap. Rhod., Argon. i.211ff., ii.273ff.; Scholiast on Hom. Od. xiv.533; Scholiast on Soph. Ant. 981; Hyginus, Fab. 14, pp. 42ff., ed. Bunte; Ov. Met. 6.711ff.; Serv. Verg. A. 3.209. According to Hyginus, their wings were attached to their feet, and their hair was sky-blue. Elsewhere (Hyginus, Fab. 19) he describes them with wings on their heads as well as on their feet. Ovid says that they were twins, and that they did not develop wings until their beards began to grow; according to him, the pinions sprouted from their sides in the usual way.
318. This is the version adopted by Ap. Rhod., Argon. i.1298-1308, who tells us that when Zetes and Calais were returning from the funeral games of Pelias, Herakles killed them in Tenos because they had persuaded the Argonauts to leave him behind in Mysia; over their grave he heaped a barrow, and on the barrow he set up two pillars, one of which shook at every breath of the North Wind, the father of the two dead men. The slaughter of Zetes and Calais by Herakles is mentioned by Hyginus, Fab. 14, p. 43, ed. Bunte.
319. See above, Apollod. 1.9.21. The story of Phineus and his sons is related by the Scholiast on Sophocles (Antigone, 981), referring to the present passage of Apollodorus as his authority. The tale was told by the ancients with many variations, some of which are noticed by the Scholiast on Sophocles (Antigone, 981). According to Soph. Ant. 969ff., it was not their father Phineus, but their cruel stepmother, who blinded the two young men, using her shuttle as a dagger. The names both of the stepmother and of her stepsons are variously given by our authorities. See further Diod. 4.43ff.; Scholiast on Hom. Od. xii.69 (who refers to Asclepiades as his authority); Scholiast on Ap. Rhod., Argon. ii.178; Hyginus, Fab. 19; Serv. Verg. A. 3.209; Scholiast on Ovid, Ibis 265, 271; Scriptores rerum mythicarum Latini, ed. Bode, i. pp. 9, 124 (First Vatican Mythographer 27; Second Vatican Mythographer 124). According to Phylarchus, Aesculapius restored the sight of the blinded youths for the sake of their mother Cleopatra, but was himself killed by Zeus with a thunderbolt for so doing. See Sextus Empiricus, Adversus mathematicos i.262, p. 658, ed. Bekker; compare Scholiast on Pind. P. 3.54(96); Scholiast on Eur. Alc. 1. Both Aeschylus and Sophocles composed tragedies entitled Phineus. See TGF (Nauck 2nd ed.), pp. 83, 284ff.; The Fragments of Sophocles, ed. A. C. Pearson, vol. ii. pp. 311ff.
320. Here Apollodorus departs from the usual tradition, followed by himself elsewhere (Apollod. 1.9.21), which affirmed that the Argonauts, instead of punishing Phineus, rendered him a great service by delivering him from the Harpies.
321. With this account of the parentage of Eumolpus, compare Paus. 1.38.2; Scholiast on Eur. Ph. 854; Hyginus, Fab. 157. Isoc. 4.68 agrees with Apollodorus in describing Eumolpus as a son of Poseidon, but does not name his mother. On the other hand the Parian Chronicle (Marmor Parium 27ff.) represents Eumolpus as a son of Musaeus, and says that he founded the mysteries of Eleusis. Apollodorus does not expressly attribute the institution of the mysteries to Eumolpus, but perhaps he implies it. Compare Apollod. 2.5.12. It seems to have been a common tradition that the mysteries of Eleusis were founded by the Thracian Eumolpus. See Plut. De exilio 17; Lucian, Demonax 34; Photius, Lexicon, s.v. Eumolpidai. But some people held that the Eumolpus who founded the mysteries was a different person from the Thracian Eumolpus; his mother, according to them, was Deiope, daughter of Triptolemus. Some of the ancients supposed that there were as many as three different legendary personages of the name of Eumolpus, and that the one who instituted the Eleusinian mysteries was descended in the fifth generation from the first Eumolpus. See Scholiast on Sophocles, Oedipus Colon. 1053; Photius, Lexicon, s.v. Eumolpidai. The story which Apollodorus here tells of the casting of Eumolpus into the sea, his rescue by Poseidon, and his upbringing in Ethiopia, appears not to be noticed by any other ancient writer.
322. As to the war between the Athenians and the Eleusinians, see Paus. 1.5.2; Paus. 1.27.4; Paus. 1.31.3; Paus. 1.36.4; Paus. 1.38.3; Paus. 2.14.2; Paus. 7.1.5; Paus. 9.9.1; Alcidamas, Od. 23, p. 182, ed. Blass; Scholiast on Eur. Ph. 854; Aristides, Or. xiii. vol. i. pp. 190ff., ed. Dindorf. Pausanias differs from Apollodorus and our other authorities in saying that in the battle it was not Eumolpus, but his son Ismarus or, as Pausanias calls him, Immaradus who fell by the hand of Erechtheus (Paus. 1.5.2, Paus. 1.27.4). According to Pausanias (Paus. 1.38.3), Erechtheus was himself slain in the battle, but Eumolpus survived it and was allowed to remain in Eleusis (Paus. 2.14.2). Further, Pausanias relates that in the war with Eleusis the Athenians offered the supreme command of their forces to the exiled Ion, and that he accepted it (Paus. 1.31.3; Paus. 2.14.2; Paus. 7.1.5); and with this account Strab. 8.7.1 substantially agrees. The war waged by Eumolpus on Athens is mentioned by Plat. Menex. 239b; Isoc. 4.68, Isoc. 12.193; Dem. 60.8; and Plut. Parallela 31. According to Isocrates, Eumolpus claimed the kingdom of Athens against Erechtheus on the ground that his father Poseidon had gained possession of the country before Athena.
323. Compare Lyc. 1.98ff.; Plut. Parallela 20; Suidas, s.v. parthenoi; Apostolius, Cent. xiv.7; Aristides, Or. xiii. vol. i. p. 191, ed. Dindorf; Cicero, Pro Sestio xxi.48; Cicero, Tusculan. Disput. i.48.116; Cicero, De natura deorum iii.19.50; Cicero, De finibus v.22.62; Hyginus, Fab. 46. According to Suidas and Apostolius, out of the six daughters of Erechtheus only the two eldest, Protogonia and Pandora, offered themselves for the sacrifice. According to Eur. Ion 277-280, the youngest of the sisters, Creusa, was spared because she was an infant in arms. Aristides speaks of the sacrifice of one daughter only. Cicero says (Cicero, De natura deorum iii.19.50) that on account of this sacrifice Erechtheus and his daughters were reckoned among the gods at Athens. “Sober,” that is, wineless, sacrifices were offered after their death to the daughters of Erechtheus. See Scholiast on Soph. OC 100. The heroic sacrifice of the maidens was celebrated by Euripides in his tragedy Erechtheus, from which a long passage is quoted by Lyc. 1.100. See TGF (Nauck 2nd ed.), pp. 464ff.
328. Compare Tzetzes, Scholiast on Lycophron 494, who may have copied Apollodorus. The sons of Pallas, the brother of Aegeus, alleged that Aegeus was not of the stock of the Erechtheids, since he was only an adopted son of Pandion. See Plut. Thes. 13.
329. Compare Paus. 1.5.4, Paus. 1.39.4, according to whom Aegeus, as the eldest of the sons of Pandion, obtained the sovereignty of Attica, while his brother Nisus, relinquishing his claim to his elder brother, was invested with the kingdom of Megara. As to the fourfold partition of Attica among the sons of Pandion, about which the ancients were not agreed, see Strab. 9.1.6; Scholiast on Aristoph. Lys. 58, and on Wasps 1223.
331. As to the oracle, the begetting of Theseus, and the tokens of his human paternity, see Plut. Thes. 3 and Plut. Thes. 6; Tzetzes, Scholiast on Lycophron 494; Hyginus, Fab. 37. As to the tokens, compare Diod. 4.59.1, 6; Paus. 1.27.8; Paus. 2.32.7. Theseus is said to have claimed to be a son of Poseidon, because the god had consorted with his mother; and in proof of his marine descent he dived into the sea and brought up a golden crown, the gift of Amphitrite, together with a golden ring which Minos had thrown into the sea in order to test his claim to be a son of the sea-god. See Bacch. 16(17).33ff. , ed. Jebb; Paus. 1.17.3; Hyginus, Ast. ii.5. The picturesque story was painted by Micon in the sanctuary of Theseus at Athens Paus. 1.17.3, and is illustrated by some Greek vase-paintings. See Frazer, commentary on Pausanias; vol. ii. pp. 157ff.
332. This account of the murder of Androgeus is repeated almost verbally by the Scholiast on Plat. Minos 321a. Compare Diod. 4.60.4ff.; Zenobius, Cent. iv.6; Scholiast on Hom. Il. xviii.590. All these writers mention the distinction won by Androgeus in the athletic contests of the Panathenian festival as the ultimate ground of his undoing. Serv. Verg. A. 6.14 and Lactantius Placidus on Statius, Achill. 192 say that, as an eminent athlete who beat all competitors in the games, Androgeus was murdered at Athens by Athenian and Megarian conspirators. Paus. 1.27.10 mentions the killing of Androgeus by the Marathonian bull. According to Hyginus, Fab. 41, Androgeus was killed in battle during the war which his father Minos waged with the Athenians.
334. With this story of the death of Nisus through the treachery of his daughter Scylla, compare Aesch. Lib. 612ff.; Paus. 1.19.5; Paus. 2.34.7; Tzetzes, Scholiast on Lycophron 650; Scholiast on Eur. Hipp. 1200; Prop. iv.19(18) 21ff.; [Virgil], Ciris, 378ff.; Hyginus, Fab. 198; Ov. Met. 8.6ff.; Serv. Verg. Ecl. 6.74; Lactantius Placidus on Statius, Theb. i.333, vii.261; Scriptores rerum mythicarum Latini, ed. Bode, i. pp. 2, 116 (First Vatican Mythographer 3; Second Vatican Mythographer 121). A similar tale is told of Pterelaus and his daughter Comaetho. See above, Apollod. 2.4.5; Apollod. 2.4.7.
335. Compare Diod. 17.15.2; Hyginus, Fab. 238 (who seems to mention only one daughter; but the passage is corrupt); Harpocration, s.v. Huakinthides, who says that the daughters of Hyacinth the Lacedaemonian were known as the Hyacinthides. The name of one of the daughters of Hyacinth is said to have been Lusia (Stephanus Byzantius, s.v. Lousia). Some people, however, identified the Hyacinthides with the daughters of Erechtheus, who were similarly sacrificed for their country (above, Apollod. 3.15.4). See Dem. 60.27; Suidas, s.v. parthenoi. According to Phanodemus in the fifth book of his Atthis (cited by Suidas, s.v. parthenoi), the daughters of Erechtheus were called Hyacinthides because they were sacrificed at the hill named Hyacinth. Similarly, as Heyne pointed out in his note on the present passage, the three daughters of Leos, namely, Praxithea, Theope, and Eubule, are said to have sacrificed themselves voluntarily, or to have been freely sacrificed by their father, for the safety of Athens in obedience to an oracle. A precinct called the Leocorium was dedicated to their worship at Athens. See Ael., Var. Hist. xii.28; Dem. 40.28; Paus. 1.5.2, with Frazer's note (vol. ii. p. 78); Apostolius, Cent. x.53; Aristides, Or. xiii. vol. i. pp. 191ff., ed. Dindorf; Cicero, De natura deorum iii.19.50. So, too, in Boeotia the two maiden daughters of Orion are said to have sacrificed themselves freely to deliver their country from a fatal pestilence or dearth, which according to an oracle of the Gortynian Apollo could be remedied only by the voluntary sacrifice of two virgins. See Ant. Lib. 25; Ov. Met. 13.685-699. The frequency of such legends, among which the traditional sacrifice of Iphigenia at Aulis may be included, suggests that formerly the Greeks used actually to sacrifice maidens in great emergencies, such as plagues and prolonged droughts, when ordinary sacrifices had proved ineffectual.
338. Compare Tzetzes, Chiliades i.490, and the Scholiast on Plat. Ion 121a, both of whom name the father and mother of Daedalus in agreement with Apollodorus. The father of Daedalus is called Eupalamus also by Suidas (s.v. Perdikos hieron), the Scholiast on Plato (Rep. 7. 529d), Hyginus, Fab. 39, 244, and 274, and Servius on Virgil, vi.14. He is called Palamaon by Paus. 9.3.2, and Metion, son of Eupalamus, son of Erechtheus, by Diod. 4.76.1. Our oldest authority for the parentage of Daedalus is Pherecydes, who says that the father of Daedalus was Metion, son of Erechtheus, and that his mother was Iphinoe (Scholiast on Soph. OC 472); and this tradition as to the father of Daedalus is supported by Plat. Ion 533a. According to Clidemus, cited by Plut. Thes. 19, Daedalus was a cousin of Theseus, his mother being Merope, daughter of Erechtheus. On the whole, tradition is in harmony with the statement of Paus. 7.4.5 “that Daedalus came of the royal house of Athens, the Metionids.” Compare J. Toepffer, Attische Genealogie, pp. 165ff. Through the clouds of fable which gathered round his life and adventures we may dimly discern the figure of a vagabond artist as versatile as Leonardo da Vinci and as unscrupulous as Benvenuto Cellini.
339. As to Daedalus's murder of his nephew, his trial, and flight, compare Diod. 4.76.4-7; Paus. 1.21.4; Paus. 1.26.4; Paus. 7.4.5; Tzetzes, Chiliades i.490ff.; Suidas and Photius, Lexicon, s.v. Perdikos hieron; Apostolius, Cent. xiv.17; Scholiast on Eur. Or. 1648; Ov. Met. 8.236-259; Hyginus, Fab. 39, 244; Serv. Verg. G. 1.143 and Serv. Verg. A. 6.14; Isidore, Orig. xix.19.9. The name of the murdered nephew is commonly given as Talos, but according to Paus. 1.21.4 and Suidas and Photius, Lexicon, s.v. Perdikos hieron; it was Calos. On the other hand Sophocles, in his lost play The Camicians (cited by Suidas and Photius,ll.cc.) called him Perdix, that is, Partridge; and this name is accepted by Ovid, Hyginus, Servius, and Isidore. But according to a different tradition, here followed by Apollodorus, Perdix (“Partridge”) was the name, not of the murdered nephew, but of his mother, the sister of Daedalus, who hanged herself in grief at the death of her son; the Athenians worshipped her and dedicated a sanctuary to her beside the acropolis (so Apostolius, Suidas and Photius, ll.cc.). The grave of Talos or Calos was shown near the theatre, at the foot of the acropolis, probably on the spot where he was supposed to have fallen from the battlements (Paus. 1.21.4). The trial of Daedalus before the Areopagus is mentioned by Diodorus Siculus and the Scholiast on Euripides l.c..
340. He is said to have improved the discovery by inventing the iron saw in imitation of the teeth in a serpent's jawbone. See Diod. 4.76.5; Tzetzes, Chiliades i.494ff. Latin writers held that the invention was suggested to him by the backbone of a fish. See Ov. Met. 8.244ff.; Hyginus, Fab. 274; Serv. Verg. A. 6.14; Isidore, Orig. xix.19.9. According to these Latin writers, the ingenious artist invented the compass also. As to Talos or Perdix and his mechanical inventions, see A. B. Cook, Zeus, i.724ff.
342. Literally, “tamed.” As to the adventures of Theseus on his road to Athens, see Bacch. 17(18).16ff., ed. Jebb; Diod. 4.59; Plut. Thes. 8ff.; Paus. 1.44.8; Paus. 2.1.3ff.; Scholiast on Lucian, Jupiter Tragoedus 21, pp. 64ff., ed. H. Rabe; Ov. Met. 7.433ff.; Ovid, Ibis 407ff.; Hyginus, Fab. 38.
343. Compare Diod. 4.59.2; Plut. Thes. 8.1; Paus. 2.1.4; Ov. Met. 7.436; Hyginus, Fab. 38. Periphetes dwelt in Epidaurus, which Theseus had to traverse on his way from Troezen to the Isthmus of Corinth. No writer but Apollodorus mentions that this malefactor was weak on his legs; the infirmity suggests that he may have used his club as a crutch on which to hobble along like a poor cripple, till he was within striking distance of his unsuspecting victims, when he surprised them by suddenly lunging out and felling them to the ground.
344. Compare Bacch. 17(18).19ff., ed. Jebb; Diod. 4.59.3; Plut. Thes. 8.2; Paus. 2.1.4; Scholiast on Lucian, Jupiter Tragoedus 21; Scholiast on Pind. I., Arg. p. 514, ed. Boeckh; Ov. Met. 7.440ff.; Hyginus, Fab. 38. Bacchylides, the Scholiast on Pindar, and Hyginus call Sinis a son of Poseidon (Neptune). The ancients are not agreed as to the exact mode in which the ruffian Sinis despatched his victims. According to Diodorus, Pausanias, and the Scholiast on Pindar he bent two pine-trees to the ground, tied the extremities of his victim to both trees, and then let the trees go, which, springing up and separating, tore the wretch's body in two. This atrocious form of murder was at a later time actually employed by the emperor Aurelian in a military execution. See Vopiscus, Aurelian, 7.4. A Ruthenian pirate, named Botho, is said to have put men to death in similar fashion. See Saxo Grammaticus, Historia Danica, bk. vii. vol. i. pp. 353ff., ed. P. E. Müller. According to Hyginus, Sinis, with the help of his victim, dragged down a pine-tree to the earth; then, when the man was struggling to keep the tree down, Sinis released it, and in the rebound the man was tossed up into the air and killed by falling heavily to the ground. Apollodorus seems to have contemplated a similar mode of death, except that he does not mention the cooperation of Sinis in bending the tree to the earth. According to the Parian Chronicle (Marmor Parium 35ff.) it was not on his journey from Troezen to Athens that Theseus killed Sinis, but at a later time, after he had come to the throne and united the whole of Attica under a single government; he then returned to the Isthmus of Corinth, killed Sinis, and celebrated the Isthmian games. This tradition seems to imply that Theseus held the games as a funeral honour paid to the dead man, or more probably as an expiation to appease the angry ghost of his victim. This implication is confirmed by the Scholiast on Pindar, who says that according to some people Theseus held the Isthmian games in honour of Sinis, whom he had killed. Plutarch tells us Plut. Thes. 8.2 that when Theseus had killed Sinis, the daughter of the dead man, by name Perigune, fled and hid herself in a bed of asparagus; that she bore a son Melanippus to Theseus, and that Melanippus had a son Ioxus, whose descendants, the Ioxids, both men and women, revered and honoured asparagus and would not burn it, because asparagus had once sheltered their ancestress. This hereditary respect shown by all the members of a family or clan for a particular species of plant is reminiscent of totemism, though it is not necessarily a proof of it.