The Library of Greek Mythology (Oxford World's Classics) Read online

  Great Clarendon Street, Oxford 0X2 6DP

  Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford.

  It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship,

  and education by publishing worldwide in

  Oxford New York

  Athens Auckland Bangkok Bogotá Buenos Aires Calcutta

  Cape Town Chennai Dar es Salaam Delhi Florence Hong Kong Istanbul

  Karachi Kuala Lumpur Madrid Melbourne Mexico City Mumbai

  Nairobi Paris São Paulo Shanghai Singapore Taipei Tokyo Toronto Warsaw

  with associated companies in Berlin Ibadan

  Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press

  in the UK and in certain other countries

  Published in the United States

  by Oxford University Press Inc., New York

  © Robin Hard 1997

  The moral rights of the author have been asserted

  Database right Oxford University Press (maker)

  First published as a World’s Classics paperback 1997

  Reissued as an Oxford World’s Classics paperback 1998

  All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted by law, or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics rights organizations. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the address above

  You must not circulate this book in any other binding or cover

  and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer

  British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data

  Data available

  Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data

  Apollodorus.

  [Bibliotheca. English]

  The library of Greek mythology / Apollodorus; translated by Robin Hard.

  (Oxford world’s classics)

  Includes bibliographical references and indexes.

  1. Mythology, Greek. I. Hard, Robin. II. Title. III. Series.

  PA3870.A73 1997 29.1’3—dc20 96–34135

  ISBN–13: 978–0–19–283924–4

  ISBN–10: 0–19–283924–1

  13

  Printed in Great Britain by

  Clays Ltd, St Ives plc

  OXFORD WORLD’S CLASSICS

  For over 100 years Oxford World’s Classics have brought readers closer to the world’s great literature. Now with over 700 titles—from the 4,000-year-old myths of Mesopotamia to the twentieth century’s greatest novels—the series makes available lesser-known as well as celebrated writing.

  The pocket-sized hardbacks of the early years contained introductions by Virginia Woolf, T. S. Eliot, Graham Greene, and other literary figures which enriched the experience of reading. Today the series is recognized for its fine scholarship and reliability in texts that span world literature, drama and poetry, religion, philosophy and politics. Each edition includes perceptive commentary and essential background information to meet the changing needs of readers.

  Refer to the Table of Contents to navigate through the material in this Oxford World’s Classics ebook. Use the asterisks (*) throughout the text to access the hyperlinked Explanatory Notes.

  OXFORD WORLD’S CLASSICS

  APOLLODORUS

  The Library of Greek Mythology

  Translated with an Introduction and Notes by

  ROBIN HARD

  OXFORD WORLD’S CLASSICS

  THE LIBRARY OF GREEK MYTHOLOGY

  APOLLODORUS is the name traditionally ascribed to the author of the Library. Although he was formerly identified as Apollodorus of Athens, a distinguished Alexandrian scholar of the second century BC, it is now recognized that the Library must have been written at a later period, probably the first or second century AD. It is not known whether Apollodorus was the author’s true name; in any case we know nothing about him. Essentially an editor rather than an original writer, he compiled this brief but comprehensive guide to Greek mythology by selecting and summarizing material from the works of earlier writers. Based in the main on good early sources, it is an invaluable reference work.

  ROBIN HARD studied Greek at Aberystwyth and Reading, writing a doctoral thesis on Plato’s Symposium, and is currently combining writing and translating with the part-time teaching of ancient philosophy and Greek.

  CONTENTS

  Introduction

  Note on the Text and Translation

  Select Bibliography

  THE LIBRARY OF GREEK MYTHOLOGY

  Contents

  Genealogical Tables

  Map

  The Library

  Appendix: Some Interpolations and an Unreliable Passage from the Epitome

  Explanatory Notes

  The Twelve Gods

  References to Animals and Transformations

  Index of Names

  INTRODUCTION

  THE Library of Apollodorus is a concise but comprehensive guide to Greek mythology. It covers the full span of mythical history from the origins of the universe and the gods to the Trojan War and its aftermath, and between these limits it tells the story of each of the great families of heroic mythology, and of the various adventures associated with the main heroes and heroines.

  This is the only work of its kind to survive from classical antiquity. Although the Greeks developed an extensive and varied mythographical literature in Hellenistic and Roman times, the few handbooks which have been preserved are mostly specialist anthologies, recording myths of the constellations, for instance, or tales of transformation, and many of the stories contained in them are relatively obscure and of late origin. The author of the Library, by contrast, wanted to provide his readers with a general handbook which would offer them an account of the most important myths as related in the earlier tradition (with only the occasional late or recondite variant). Otherwise we possess only two works which are at all comparable. There is a Latin compendium, the Myths (Fabulae) of Hyginus, probably dating to the second century AD, which was based on a Greek predecessor, but conveys its contents in a very imperfect form; it presents summaries of myths and various catalogues in many separate chapters. Although it is a valuable source for myths or versions of myths which would otherwise have been lost, it is disorganized and sadly unreliable, and has to be approached with caution. Secondly, when Diodorus of Sicily was compiling his historical compendium in the first century BC, he departed from the more austere practices of many fellow historians and included a section on the mythical history (or pre-history) of Greece. Although it contains a useful biography of Heracles and other interesting material, Diodorus’ account of Greek myth is not nearly as complete as that in the Library, and much of it is based on inferior Hellenistic sources.

  It may seem surprising that this unpretentious handbook should have survived when the most important works of the ancient mythographers have been lost. Fortune, of course, plays a large part in such matters; all surviving manuscripts of the Library derive from a single archetype. But if it is unpretentious to a fault, the Library encloses a mass of reliable information in a short space, and it is clear that the scholars of later antiquity found it exceptionally useful for that reason. It is often cited in the scholia (explanatory comments on the works of the classical authors) and similar sources, and in the twelfth century the Byzantine scholar John Tzetzes made extensive use of it. This suggests that the preservation of this particula
r handbook was not simply a freak of fortune, and that the writers of this later period thought that it had its virtues, at least from a purely practical point of view. As it happens, we know directly what one of the finest Byzantine scholars thought of the Library, for Photius, patriarch of Constantinople in the ninth century, registered his opinion in a brief review. While travelling abroad on a diplomatic mission, Photius kept a record of his reading for his brother, and in this record, after summarizing the contents of another mythical work, he noted:

  In the same volume, I read a small work by the scholar Apollodorus; it is entitled the Library. It contained the most ancient stories of the Greeks: all that time has given them to believe about the gods and heroes, and about the rivers, and lands, and peoples, and towns, and thence everything that goes back to the earliest times. And it goes down as far as the Trojan War, and covers the battles that certain of the heroes fought with one another, and their exploits, and certain of the wanderings of the heroes returning from Troy, notably those of Odysseus, with whom this history of ancient times concludes. All in all, it is a general summary which is by no means lacking in usefulness to those who attach some value to the memory of the ancient stories.

  If the Library had been lost, like so many of the works reviewed by Photius, we might feel some regret on reading these words; as it is, we can refer to the original and judge for ourselves whether for the modern reader too it fulfils the claims that Photius makes for it. These claims are by no means extravagant. It is indeed a useful synopsis of the mythical history of Greece; and, it may be added, it is based for the most part on good early sources, and the author was content to summarize them as he found them without imposing his own interpretations, or attempting to reconcile conflicting traditions, or making any alterations for literary effect.

  In the manuscripts, this book is entitled the Library of Apollodorus of Athens, the Grammarian. ‘Library’ was a title applied to compendia; for a compendium, which draws together material from a multitude of other books, could be regarded as a library in itself. Diodorus called his much larger historical compendium the Historical Library for the same reason. In Photius’ copy of the Library, a little poem was placed at the beginning in which the book itself addresses the reader and expresses this thought directly. It ran like this:

  Now, due to my erudition, you can draw upon the coils of time, and know the stories of old. Look no longer in the pages of Homer, or in elegy, or the tragic Muse, or lyric verse, and seek no longer in the sonorous verses of the cyclic poets; no, look in me, and you will discover all that the world contains.

  Whether this was really written by the original author is impossible to say, but none the less it seems appropriate and suggestive, even if the mixed metaphor at the beginning is not altogether fortunate. Time is pictured as a serpent, and the succession of ages as the serpent’s coils which the learning embodied in the book will enable its readers to ‘draw on’ (as though drawing water from a well). For rather than search through a whole library of ancient poems, they have merely to look within this ‘Library’ to discover all that they could wish to know about the myths and legends of early Greece. And there is some truth in this, even if we would be happy to have the same opportunity as its author to consult all these early poetic sources in the original, and there is a certain philistinism in the suggestion that a work of these dimensions could enclose ‘the world’.

  The attribution of the work to Apollodorus of Athens, a distinguished scholar (or ‘grammarian’) who worked at Alexandria in the second century BC, is more problematic. Although Apollodorus had wide interests and also wrote on literary, historical, geographical, and other matters, he appears to have been most highly regarded in antiquity for a treatise on Greek religion entitled On the Gods, which would have contained extensive discussion of divine mythology. Thus the Library, which is largely devoted to heroic mythology, could be seen as a complementary work; and if the attribution were correct, we would possess a book by one of the most learned authors of the greatest age of Greek scholarship. The reference to ‘the scholar (grammarian) Apollodorus’ in Photius’ review shows that he too considered this Apollodorus to be the author, and the attribution was accepted by modern scholars until quite recently, although it was increasingly recognized that it raises serious problems. Not until 1873, when the publication of a thesis on the Library by Carl Robert forced a reconsideration of the matter, were these problems fully confronted.

  There is one very definite indication that the Library could not have been written during the lifetime of Apollodorus of Athens: it contains a reference to the Chronicles of Castor of Rhodes (p. 59). This was a study in comparative chronology which is said to have contained tables which extended to 61 BC; and the date of its author is confirmed by a report that he married the daughter of Deiotarus, an eastern king who was defended by Cicero in 45 BC. Unless the reference to Castor was added to the text at a later period (and there is no reason to suppose that it was) the Library must have been written a century or more after the death of Apollodorus of Athens.

  In view of the difficulty raised by this citation, we must ask whether the Library is in any case a book which we could reasonably accept as the work of a scholar of Apollodorus’ stature and period. In truth, it is not at all what we would expect from a learned Alexandrian scholar. Rather than an original synthesis achieved through the author’s own research and reflection (as was surely the case with Apollodorus’ treatise on the gods), we have an elementary handbook which the author compiled by consulting and epitomizing standard sources. And the author made no attempt to interpret the myths and explain their meaning in rationalistic terms, as was characteristic of Hellenistic mythographers. In relation to the gods, for instance, many writers of this period would explain that they represented forces of nature, or that they had originally been human beings who later had divine status attributed to them. Although it is explicitly attested that Apollodorus of Athens adopted such an approach, there is not a trace of it in the Library; nor was the author disconcerted by the fabulous element in many heroic myths (unlike Diodorus, who often provides rationalized versions, following Hellenistic sources). He simply accepts the myths as enjoyable stories which formed an important part of the Greek heritage, a characteristic attitude in later times. Furthermore, there are features in the author’s use of language which suggest that the book was written at a later period than the second century BC. In short, there is every indication that the attribution to Apollodorus of Athens can be confidently rejected.

  Apollodorus was a fairly common name, and it is conceivable that the Library was compiled by an author of that name who was later confused with the famous scholar of an earlier period; but it is more likely that our book is sailing under a flag of convenience. Perhaps, as Robert suggested, the author was too timid to launch the work under his own name, or perhaps later copyists found it to their advantage to pass it off as the work of a distinguished scholar. In any case, we know nothing about the author. Accordingly, the author is sometimes referred to as the pseudo-Apollodorus, particularly in the continental literature; but it is more convenient to use the traditional name, with due reservation.

  Accepting that the traditional attribution reveals nothing about the author, can we infer anything about his time of birth, or his origins, or perhaps even his character from the book itself? It must be stated from the outset that a compilation of this kind is of its very nature unlikely to reveal much about its author, and in the present instance some features which might be of help in that regard are lacking. There is no dedication, and there are no incidental allusions to things that the author has seen or experienced. Nor does he make any reference to recent or contemporary events; indeed, the only historical event mentioned by him is the Phocian War (p. 163), which took place in the fourth century BC. It is possible, however, to draw some conclusions about when the Library may have been written, and perhaps about the origins of its author.

  The reference to Castor (the latest author t
o be cited) shows that the Library could not have been written before the first half of the first century BC. To establish a later limit with equal certainty, it would be necessary to find a reference to the Library in another work which could be dated to a sufficiently early period. In practice, however, this approach is unproductive. Although, as was remarked above, the Library is cited quite frequently in the scholia and elsewhere, all the relevant sources are either hard to date or were certainly written at a much later period. We must therefore rely on internal criteria. Let us consider first the author’s use of language, which might be expected to provide the most definite indications.

  Although the author’s Greek is generally unexceptional, there are features in his vocabulary and idiom which are more characteristic of later Greek. He occasionally uses words in senses which are not attested before the early Christian era, and sometimes the verb forms and minor points of grammar and expression are suggestive of later usage (even if they are not entirely unparalleled in the works of earlier authors). On these stylistic grounds, it is commonly agreed that the Library would be best dated to the first or second century AD (although some would place it somewhat earlier or later); and the author’s general attitude and approach is consistent with such a dating. It has been remarked that in contrast to many Hellenistic writers, he is uncritical in his approach to myth. This is not because he accepts all the stories as being literally true, but because his approach is that of an antiquarian, so the question of truth or falsity is no longer relevant. This antiquarian approach, accompanied by a taste for the archaic and picturesque, and the desire to take stock of aspects of the Greek heritage, were characteristic of authors writing under the early empire. One has only to think of Plutarch or Pausanias. In preparing this summa of Greek myth, the present author was writing on a lesser scale in a work that belonged to an inferior genre; but the literature of epitomes and popular handbooks was itself characteristic of the age, and in its way, witnessed to the same tendencies.