In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, James Butrica <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >By the way, in other traditions of catabasis, how do living mortals return >from the Underworld?
In the so-called Orphic Catabasis of P. Bon. 4, the last legible letters, a few lines from the end of the poem, are sigma kappa alpha phi, which would appear to come from either skaphion or skaphis; one would presume that this meant not 'bowl' but 'boat', suggesting that the visitor departed the same way as he had come, on Charon's skiff. As for Aeneas, what hypothesis does not run into obstacles? If the false dreams in any way represent the foreshadowings of Rome's future in Anchises' speech, how is it that his account fits well enough with standard Roman tradition? (If anything might have raised eyebrows outside the Palatium it was the lament for the young Marcellus, whose death, a setback for the project of hereditary monarchy, would hardly have been a cause for grief amongst those who still harboured republican sentiments.) If the idea is that military glory etc. are in some way a false path, then why didn't Augustus let the _Aeneid_ be destroyed in accordance with the poet's own wishes? (Or are we robust enough to declare the whole tale of the violated _fideicommissum_ a fiction?) If anything at all can be saved of the self-referential theory, it would have to be based on the fuzzy logic of dreams: of course what I am telling you is a myth, for the Muses know how to tell lies that resemble truth (Hesiod, _Theogony_ 27). In the cold light of day, or prose paraphrase, that cannot withstand the arguments that Jim O'Hara has deployed; does that mean it is false, or that that is not the light to view it in? As Jim says, Aeneas is somehow associated with false dreams; that 'somehow' must, one presumes, be rather more than the fact of leaving by the same gate, as if anyone who left Rome by (say) the Porta Capena were an associate or confederate of everyone else who did so. But precisely how. or are we not allowed to ask precisely? And if ever we know how, then why? (Suppose for instance that the wink theory could somehow be made to stand up, why should Vergil wish to play that game?) Leofranc Holford-Strevens *_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_* Leofranc Holford-Strevens 67 St Bernard's Road usque adeone Oxford scire MEVM nihil est, nisi ME scire hoc sciat alter? OX2 6EJ tel. +44 (0)1865 552808(home)/353865(work) fax +44 (0)1865 512237 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) *_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_* ----------------------------------------------------------------------- To leave the Mantovano mailing list at any time, do NOT hit reply. Instead, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message "unsubscribe mantovano" in the body (omitting the quotation marks). You can also unsubscribe at http://virgil.org/mantovano/mantovano.htm#unsub
