HYMN TO DIONYSUS
The loss of one quire and a leaf in M, and probably of more in its archetype (p. xv), has deprived us of all but the last twelve verses of this hymn. The lines quoted by Diodorus, which were first connected with the hymn by Ruhnken, came apparently from the beginning; there is no reason to doubt, with Baumeister, the connexion of the two fragments. Another line is perhaps preserved by Athenaeus 653 B “Κράτης ἐν δευτέρῳ Ἀττικῆς διαλέκτου ἐν τοῖς ὕμνοις τοῖς ἀρχαίοις φάσκων ἀντὶ τοῦ βότρυος τὴν σταφυλὴν κεῖσθαι διὰ τούτου αὐτῇσι σταφυλῇσι μελαίνῃσιν κομόωντες” (p. 65 Wachsmuth). On the source of the quotation in the scholia to Apollonius Arg. B 1211 see p. lxix. Date.—From its position in M it is probable that this was a long hymn, on the scale of those to Dem. , Apoll., Hermes and OtherwiseHH Aphr., plainly, it would have been placed among the short preludes. Space is allowed for a hymn of such size by the probable loss of much matter in the archetype of M (see p. xv). There is hence the presumption that in age it was equal to the four greater hymns. Diodorus attributed it to Homer (iv. 2 “καὶ τὸν Ὅμηρον δὲ τούτοις μαρτυρῆσαι ἐν τοῖς ὕμνοις”). The other hymn to Dionysus in the collection (vii) is in a different style, and comparisons between the two are not helpful; but it is probable that the seventh hymn is later, and that its composer borrowed the concluding formula “οὐδέ πῃ ἔστι” from 18, 19. There is nothing, either mythological or linguistic, in the fragments of this hymn which suggests a late period. That there were various hymns to Dionysus, of this class, may be inferred from Menander “περὶ ἐπιδεικτ”. ch. 6 (Walz Rh. Gr. ix. p. 144) “φασὶν . . . ὅτι καὶ χωρὶς τῶν γενεαλογικῶν εἴησάν τινες μυθικοὶ ὕμνοι, οἷον ὅτι Διόνυσος Ἰκαρίῳ ἐπεξενώθη”.Δρακάνῳ: this is usually supposed to be the promontory in the island of Icaros (Strabo xiv. 639, Paus.ix. 11. 2). Hermann and others therefore hold that “Ἰκάρῳ” could not refer to the island, as the whole would include the part. But, although there were several other places of the name (Pliny N. H. iv. 23, Byz. Steph. s.v.), Icaros is here undoubtedly the island near Samos. The poet might mean “either on Dracanon or (elsewhere) in Icaros.” But Maass (Hermes xxvi. 1891, p. 178 f.) is probably right in identifying Dracanon with a cape of the same name in Cos, an island which had some connexion with Dionysus. For this cape see Strabo 657, where it is spelt “Δρέκανον” (other variations are “Δράκονον, Δρακάνιον, Δράκανος”; the forms in “α” and “ε” are equally sound, being perhaps from [root ]“δρακ, [ροοτ ]δρεκ”, in “δέρκομαι, ἔδρακον”). The Dracanon in Theocr. xxvi. 33, Dion. ix. 16 (mentioned as the birthplace) is also to be taken as in Cos; so also Anth. Pal. vii. 651. 3 “ἀλλὰ τὰ μὲν Δολίχης τε καὶ αἰπεινῆς Δρακάνοιο”
“Ἰκάριον ῥήσσει κῦμα περὶ κροκάλαις”, where, as in the hymn, the promontory is mentioned as separate from the island (Doliche is the old name of Icaros, Apollod.ii. 6. 3).[2] Νάξῳ: see Preller-Robert i.^{2} 676 f.
εἰραφιῶτα: for the form cf. “σπαργανιῶτα” h. Herm. 310, “μηχανιῶτα 436, χαριδῶτα” h. xviii.12, “ὑλειῶτα” Anth. Pal. vi. 106. Some exx. are quoted by Fick B. B. xx. 179. The derivation and meaning of the epithet have only lately been made out. The ancients offer a choice of etymologies (schol. Il. 1.39 “ παρὰ τὸ ἐρέφω, ὅθεν καὶ εἰραφιώτης ὁ Διόνυσος λέγεται: ἐστέφετο γὰρ κισσῷ: ἢ ἀπὸ τοῦ ἐρράφθαι αὐτὸν τῷ μηρῷ τοῦ Διός. ἢ παρὰ τὸ ἐρίφῳ αὐτὸν συνανατραφῆναι: ἢ παρὰ τὸ ἐρίῳ αὐτὸν πλέκεσθαι:” cf. E. M. 302, 53, Choeroboscus ap. Cramer An. Ox. ii. p. 211, 32. The sense of the word in literature is that of “μηρορραφής” (Bacchae 96, Nonnus Dion. ix. 23, Orph. h.xlviii. 2. f., Orph. h.anon. 1=Abel p. 284). Fick l.c. reverts but without probability to “εἶρος ἔρρος” wool, in the sense of the shaggyanimal. sc. goat; Wieseler (Philol. x. 701) takes the word as equivalent to “ἐρίφιος”, the title of Dionysus (to whom kids were sacred) preserved by Hesych. and The B. derivation however which has found most favour is that of Sonne K. Z. x. 103, cf. Sanscrit RSabha a bull (see Neil ap. Frazer G. B. ii. 164 where the bull-Dionysus is discussed; Fröhde B. B. 21. 199, who adds “ἔρραος” ram; Prellwitz ib. 22, 99; Meillet I. F. v. 328 who adduces “ἀρνειός” and Lat. verres and thinks the original sense was “male”; Solmsen ib. vii. 46 sq. comparing Laconian “εἴρην”, and the Macedonian proper name “Ἀρραβαῖος”). We have the Aeolic form in Alcman fr. 90 “ἐρραφεώτου γὰρ ἄναξ”.[3] ἐΠ᾽ Ἀλφειῷ Ποταμῷ: the cult of D. in Elis was important; for references see Preller-Robert i.^{2} p. 692 and 695.
[4] On the derivation of the words Semele and Dionysus see Preller-Robert i.^{2} p. 660 and 664; Kretschmer Aus d. Anomia, 1890, 17 f.; Fröhde B. B. xxi. p. 185 f., Harrison Prolegomena p. 404 f.
τερπικεραύνῳ: the epithet is chosen (according to Adami de poet. scenicis p. 243) to suggest the circumstances of the birth; cf. Eur. Bacch. 90“λιποῦσ᾽ αἰῶνα κεραυνίῳ πλαγᾷ”. So Dion. viii. 319 “νυμφίε τερπικέραυνε”.[5] ἐΝ Θ´ηβῃσιν: the common tradition of the birth at Thebes is followed in the Delphic paean (B. C. H. xix. p. 393 f., Smyth Greek Melic Poets p. 524) “δ̀ν Θήβαις ποτ᾽ ἐν εὐίαις Ζη[νὶ γείνατο] καλλίπαις Θυώνα”.
[7] κρύπτων: Adami compares Eur. Bacch. 98“κρυπτὸν ἀφ᾽ Ἥρας”, and Orph. h.xxx. 3, lii. 5.
[8] Νύση: the place was perhaps originally mythical, and invented to account for the name Dionysus (so Kretschmer l.c.); afterwards it was localised in various parts of the Greek and barbarian world. The Nysa of the hymn may be in Arabia ( Diod.iii. 65 and 66 quoting Antimachus fr. 70 Kinkel). It might, however, be the Ethiopian Nysa ( Herod.ii. 146Herod., iii. 97); it would be needless to suppose that in this case Dionysus was identified with Osiris. On Nysa see Preller-Roberti.^{2} p. 663, Maass Hermes xxvi. p. 184, Roscher Lex. i. 1029 f., Harrison Prolegomena p. 379.
ὕπατον ὄρος: the reading “ὄρος”, of Diodorus, is supported by h. Apoll. 139 “ῥίον οὔρεος ἄνθεσιν ὕλης”. It would also preserve a rare case of “ὄρος” digammated: H. G. § 393. Wesseling conjectures that “κέρας” was derived from Apoll. Arg. 4.282 “ἔστι δέ τις ποταμὸς ὕπατον κέρας Ὠκεανοῖο”; but see p. xlix. Gemoll, on the other hand, prefers “κέρας”; it is used for a peak (German -horn) in Xen. An.v. 6. 7.Cf. “ὑψικέρατα πέτραν” Nub. 597 (Pind. fr. 285), “ὄρη δύο ἃ καλοῦσι κέρατα” Strabo 395.[10] οἱ: this, as Hermann saw, must refer to Semele.
ἀΓάλματα: votive offerings generally, for “ἀναθήματα”, as in early inscriptions ( Herod.v. 60, 61, Paus.x. 7. 3, of tripods); the statue of Chares was “ἄγαλμα τοῦ Ἀπόλλωνος”; see Roberts Epigr. i. 7 and 138. The word might include the early temple images or “ξόανα”; but, unless the hymn belongs to an age at least as late as the sixth century B.C., “ἀγάλματα” cannot refer to votive statues, the most archaic of which are not older than the beginning of the century.
[11]
ὠς δὲ τάμεν: “τὰ μέν” is unintelligible owing to the loss of the context. Hermann renders ut ha<*> numero tria sunt, and supposes that three things had been mentioned, though he does not suggest what the “three things” may be. It is possible that they were three titles of Dionysus; cf. Nonn. Dion. xlviii. 965 f. “καὶ τριτάτῳ νέον ὕμνον ἐπεσμαράγησαν Ἰάκχῳ
καὶ τελεταῖς τρισσῇσιν ἐβακχεύθησαν Ἀθῆναι
… Ζαγρέα κυδαίνοντες ἅμα Βρομίῳ καὶ Ἰάκχῳ
”. But the sense “as these things are three” can scarcely be extracted from the Greek: even if “ἐστί” be supplied, the “μέν” is meaningless. In the Oxford text “τάμεν” (which might stand either for “ἐτάμησαν”, an aor. pass., for which cf. “ταμείη” below, or “ἔταμεν”) was substituted. For the graphical change examples are superfluous, though “τὸ μή, τομῇ” may be quoted as a coincidence ( Acut.22). This would give a verb and eliminate “μέν”, but the meaning of the passage would still remain obscure. It is obvious, however, to suggest that there is an allusion to the violent death of Dionysus-Zagreus. The myth, though chiefly mentioned in late authors, was known at least as early as the sixth century B.C. (first in Onomacritus; see Lobeck Aglaoph. ii. p. 615 f.; for references see Preller-Robert i.^{2} p. 705 f., Maass Orpheus p. 79 f., Frazer G. B. ii. p. 161 f.). For the cutting in this connexion cf. Opp. Ven. iv. 281 “μελεϊστὶ τάμεν”, of lambs, Nonn.vi. 205“Διόνυσον ἐμιστύλλοντο μαχαίρῃ”, and the frag. upon Dionysus in the Album gratulatorium to Herwerden, 1902, p. 137 = Pap. Mus. Brit. 273 v. 45; Deriades the enemy of Dionysus says “αἲ γὰρ δὴ μελεϊστὶ διὰ κρέα σεῖο τα[μείη”]. There is, however, no authority for the hypothesis that he was torn into three pieces; and finally we should expect either “ἔταμέν σε τρία” or “ἐτάμης τρία”, as in Symm. 17 “ἑκάστην διελεῖν κελεύω πέντε μέρη” and Theocr. ix. 26 “πέντε ταμὼν” (“κρέας”) “cutting it into five parts,” and other exx. ap. Kühner-Gerth § 411. 5. Possibly the meaning may be “as three victims were offered,” i.e. “τρία σφάγια:” for this sense of “τέμνω” cf. Il. 19.197 (“κάπρον”) “ταμέειν Διί τ᾽ Ἠελίῳ τε”, Eur. Supp.1196“τέμνειν σφάγια”. This would refer to the common “τριττύς” or “τριττύα”; which, however, was not specially connected with Dionysus.
[13] There appear to be two alternative versions, 13-15 and 16; but the similarity largely depends upon the alteration of “ἐκέλευσε” (16) into “ἐπένευσε”. See p. xliii.
[17] ἴληθ̓: the only Homeric form of the imperative. “ἵλαθι” (Theocr. xv. 143) has a short. Moreover, “εἰραφιῶτα” nowhere shows signs of a digamma. For M's mistake cf. 19 “ἐπιλαθόμενον”. Both forms occur in Anth. Pal. xii. 158 “ἵλαθ᾽ ἄναξ ἵληθι”.
Γυναιμανές: of Dionysus Nonn. Dion. xvi. 229, 252; so “θηλυμανής” id. xvii. 184, xxxvi. 469. For the prominence of the female cult of Dionysus see Bachofen das Mutterrecht p. 231 f.[18] λ́ηγοντές τ̓: for the vowel lengthened by position in this place see on h. Dem. 269.
[19] M's “ἐπιλαθόμενοι” points to the dative “ἐπιληθομένῳ”. The same error is clearly found in Il. 23.767 “ νίκης ἱεμένῳ”, where many MSS. have “ἱέμενοι”. The permutation “οι”=“ωι” is recognised by the schol. on Eur. Phoen.682(who refers it to the change of alphabet at Athens in the archonship of Euclides); the MSS. there read “σοί νιν ἔκγονοι”, which the scholiast corrects to “σῷ νιν ἐκγόνῳ”. For another case cf. Arist. Rhet.iii. 1405, Il. 1.13, and for the variation in inscriptions Meisterhans^{3} 24 n. 128.
For the construction cf. Il. 5.253, Il. 6.529 (“ἐλάσασιν” G), Il. 15.58 “, Φ” 185, where the variant is ancient (“κατὰ δοτικὴν αἰ Ἀριστάρχου” with most MSS.), Il. 22.110 (“αὐτῷ” most MSS.), Eur. Or.779Eur. Or., 1657.Ruhnken took the accusative from h. vii.59 “σεῖό γε ληθόμενον”.[21] ΘυώνΗν: the divine counterpart of the Maenads (cf. “θύειν, Θυιάδες”). Hesych. “Θυωνίδας. ὁ Διόνυσος παρὰ Ῥοδίοις”. For a festival “Θυῖα” in Elis cf. Paus.vi. 26. 1.Thyone is the mother of Dionysus in the Delphic paean (quoted on 5); for other references see Roscher 1047.
