DEAN CLOSE SCHOOL CLASSICS DEPARTMENT MAGAZINE

Beneath the MaskThe Artistry of Poetry

Virgil Aeneid IV.198-218

An introduction to Exekias

HeLiCoN

Volume 2 | Lent Term 2015

Editorial...................................................................... 3

Plato’s importance in the modern world...................... 4

An introduction to Exekias ......................................... 5

The modern-day influence of Greek and Roman Medicine ...................................................... 6

The Artistry of Poetry ................................................. 7

Classics Crossword ...................................................... 8

Beneath the Mask ....................................................... 9

The Murder Trial of Philip II of Macedon................. 12

Virgil Aeneid IV.198-218 .......................................... 15

Artemis and Actaeon................................................. 17

To what extent has Pythagoras influencedthe world today? ....................................................... 18

From Mos Maiorum to the Megabyte....................... 19

Welcome

HeLiCoN

Contents

WELCOME TO THESECOND EDITION OF THE DEAN CLOSECLASSICS DEPARTMENTMAGAZINE ‘HELICON’

2

Welcome to the second edition ofthe Dean Close ClassicsDepartment magazine, Helicon.We hope that many of youenjoyed the inaugural magazineand are delighted onceagain to

include articles by both students and staffmembers on subjects ranging from vase-painting to ancient medicine and frombetter known literary authors(Euripides, Plato and Virgil) to theperson responsible for the death ofPhilip II of Macedon. Some of theClassics Department membershave contributed before andothers are making theirHelicon debut; also includedare two Upper Sixth CriticalEssay Competitionsubmissions and the winner oflast year’s Wilson Challenge onthe most influential figure from theClassical period.

The Classics Department continues tohave a full calendar of events andactivities, and the CheltenhamLiterary Festival presented

some wonderful opportunities to hear outstanding classical scholars:Mary Beard on Laughter in Ancient Rome; Michael Scott onDelphi; Adam Nicolson on Why Homer matters; Llewellyn Morganand again Mary Beard on Reading Martial’s poetry; Edith Hall,Rosie Wyles and Tom Holland on Greek Drama; and a panel,including Times Literary Supplement Editor Sir Peter Stothard,

discussing Roman Emperors.

With a record number of students studying Latinand Greek at A2, all of whom have madeOxbridge applications, Classics is certainlyfit and strong - indeed warmcongratulations are extended to RebeccaDaltry, Bella Stuart-Bourne andStephen Whitford for their offers fromCambridge, the last combining hisClassics offer with a ChoralScholarship from the prestigiousKing’s College.

We hope that you enjoy immersingyourself in various aspects of the

Classical world that are brought to life inthese pages and do visit our Classics blog athttp://www.deanclose.org.uk/Classics

David EvansSenior Master, Classics Departmentand Helicon Editor

Helicon Editorial

3

The Dean Close Classics Departmentcontinues to have a full calendar of events andactivities, and the Cheltenham Literary Festivalpresented some wonderful opportunities to hearoutstanding classical scholars

Plato’s Importance In The Modern World

Iam going to be discussing Plato and hisinfluence on the development of Europe*.He lived between about 428 BC and 348BC*. Little can be known about his earlylife and education due to the very limited

accounts. He came from one of the wealthiest andmost politically active families in Athens. His fathercontributed all that was necessary to his education,and so it is likely that he was taught by some of theleading experts of the era in areas such asphilosophy, music, and grammar*. Ancient sources describe him as a bright butmodest boy who excelled in his studies.

His name comes from the Greek word ‘platon’, meaning ‘broad’. It is unclearfrom where this name originated; some say it was from the breadth of hiseloquence, or his stocky build, or perhaps even from his large forehead.

He later became a pupil of Socrates, and declared himself to be a devotedfollower in the dialogue, ‘Apology of Socrates’*.

His works encompassed 26 dialogues (which include ‘Republic’ and‘Symposium’), and thirteen letters***. Directly or indirectly (through histutee, Aristotle), Plato’s view of the world was dominant for two millenniauntil the scientific revolution in the 17th century**.

In his early literary efforts, Plato conveyed Socrates’ teachings by presentingaccurate reports of his tutor’s conversational interactions. These dialogues areour primary source of information about Socrates’ philosophy*. They weretypically devoted to the investigation of a single issue. For example, the ‘Crito’uses the circumstances of Socrates’ imprisonment to discuss whether anindividual citizen is ever justified in refusing to obey the state*. Socratesargued that key features of a well-lived life include introspection and ethicalconsistency; he is commonly reported to have said that “the unexamined life isnot worth living” **.

He is the first Greek philosopher about whom we know a decent amount, andhe has been the precursor to all scientists and thinkers, as he always demandedproof and asked questions*. We may never have had access to the thoughts ofSocrates*, who is credited as one of the founders of Western philosophy,without Plato’s documentation of his work **.

Although the middle dialogues continue to use the talkative Socrates as afictional character, they see Plato develop, express, and defend his ownconclusion about central philosophical issues*. Beginning with the ‘Meno’, forexample, Plato not only reports the Socratic notion that no one knowinglydoes wrong (one of the Socratic paradoxes), but introduces the doctrineof recollection in an attempt to discover whether virtue can betaught*. The doctrine of recollection was one of Plato’s first ideasin the field of epistemology, or the study of the nature ofknowledge. It is his conviction that our most basic knowledge

comes when we bring back to mindour acquaintance with eternal realitiesduring a previous existence of the soul.The Theory of Forms* holds that thereexists a realm of forms, perfect ideals ofwhich things in this world are but imperfectcopies, but we can perceive objects in thisworld through their similarities with these‘forms’ - these are the ‘eternal realities’ with whichwe become accquainted in a previous existence ofthe soul. This type of metaphysics may seem exotic

and over-elaborate, but the problem that it seeks toaddress, namely ‘the problem of universals’ *, hasbeen a dominant theme in philosophy ever since.Realists, who believe that universals such as rednessand tallness exist independent of particular red andtall objects, are often called Platonists. The basic termsof all debates surrounding universals and similar topicswere set out by Plato **.

The masterpiece amongst Plato’s middle dialogueswas the ‘Republic’. It concerned the definition of justice, the character of thejust city state, and the just man. He divides society in three groups *, and usesbody parts to symbolise these castes. The workers are known as the‘Productive’ *, and are represented by the abdomen. The chest represents the‘Protective’ * - the warriors and guardians. The head represents the‘Governing’ *. This group is made up of those who are rational, wise, and self-controlled. They are therefore well suited to make decisions for thecommunity **. According to this model, the principles of Atheniandemocracy are rejected as only a few are fit to rule. Instead of rhetoric andpersuasion, Plato argues that wisdom and reason should govern *. A large partof the ‘Republic’ then addresses how the educational system should beorganised to produce these philosopher kings. This authoritarianism * wasattractive to early fascists ** and continues to influence modern conservativesand dictators throughout the world ***.

Plato’s contribution to philosophy also includes ideas relevant to theology andreligion *. Plato’s ‘Laws’ contains the earliest fully developed cosmologicalargument *, though it is not an argument for a single First Cause, but for atleast two, with one accounting for good and one for evil. Nevertheless, this hasbecome a hugely influential argument in favour of the existence of a higherpower.

In such a short time, I have merely scraped the surface of Plato’s influence onthe development of Europe. It extended to fields such as mathematics *, logic*, and ethics *. It is often unclear due to the nature of his works, in whichSocrates is seen as a character, to what extent he recounted his tutor’sphilosophy, and to what extent he incorporated his own ideas through thecharacter. However, it is indisputable that through both his own philosophy,and through his influence on his tutee, Aristotle, and through him onAlexander the Great, a tutee of Aristotle, he has had a large impact on thedevelopment of Europe *. Researching Plato was not an easy task, as when I

looked him up in the index of books on philosophy, his ideasseemed to appear on the majority of pages.

Indeed the English philosopher Alfred NorthWhitehead once noted: “the safest generalcharacterization of the Europeanphilosophical tradition is that it consists of aseries of footnotes to Plato.” *

Patrick BunkerLower Sixth Former

4

5

Exekias was, bycommonconsent, thegreatest of the

Athenian Black Figure Artists. Hewas both potter and painter and produced mostof his work towards the end of the 6th centuryBC. His vases can be studied at A level as part ofthe Classical Civilisation course; many of hisimages are familiar to scholars studying GCSE.

Without doubt, my favourite: The suicide ofAjax. The great hero makes ready to quit thisworld. The painting is stark and sombre. The treebows its head in lamentation; it is a palm tree and

is indicative of the foreign location (Troy)in which Ajax’ tragedy unfolds.Meanwhile, his armour andweapons serve as a grimreminder of the reason why hehas reached this nadir - Achilles’armour had been awarded toOdysseus and Ajax had beendishonoured. Everythingwithin the panel focuses ourattention upon the swordwith which Ajax will take hisown life.

This is the interior of adrinking cup known as a kylix.

Appropriately, we find thatDionysus the god of wine, is the

subject of Exekias’ painting. Not onlydoes the artist fill a difficult space adroitly

but he also alludes in a restrained manner tothe immense power of this deity. The dolphinsbeneath Dionysus’ boat are former pirateswhom the god has punished for their hybris.Meanwhile, his boat is beginning to undergo

metamorphosis: a vine climbs up the mast with

clusters of rich juicy grapes whilst the godreclines just like at a symposium, at ease whilstthe sail billows in a gentle breeze.

A painting for the pyschologists: Achilles kills theAmazon warrior, Penthesilea. According to themyth, Achilles falls in love with her at exactly thesame time that he penetrates her with his spear.Freud would have had a field day consideringthis uncomfortable juxtaposition of love anddeath. Achilles towers over his victim; he is cladentirely in armour and his helmet conceals all ofhis facial features , making the warrior less of ahero and more the unfeeling, compassionlessinstrument of war. Penthesilea’s legs bucklebeneath his onslaught. The curvature of the vaseis used to capture the feeble thrust of her spear aslife ebbs away from her. Look how Exekiasexploits the combatants’ eyes to suggest what isto come.

Most people’s favourite: Achilles and Ajax playingdice before going into battle. It is a study inconcentration - there is a poignancy about theimpression of intense silence in contrast to thedin of battle which will be experienced verysoon, generated by the artist’s draughtsmanship.The composition is superb: the curvature of thevase is echoed by the bent backs of the heroes.The Greek love of symmetry and balance findperfect expression in this vase painting.

If you have enjoyed looking at these pictures, why notborrow a copy of Susan Woodford’s An Introduction toGreek Art, from the Classics Department. She writesvery perceptively about Exekias and other vasepainters. Or borrow John Boardman’s Athenian BlackFigure Vases for a comprehensive survey of the BlackFigure style.

Jon AllenHead of Classics

An introduction to Exekias

6

An important aspect of medicinein Ancient Greece was whatpeople actually believed aboutthe body. One theory was thetheory of the four humoursand this originated in the

works of Aristotle. The Greeks believed the bodywas made up of four components or humourswhich needed to be balanced for people to remainhealthy. The humours were liquids within thebody - blood, phlegm, yellow bile, and black bile.Despite the theory having no apparent basis onreality, the idea of the four humours would result indoctors observing the symptoms of a patient, thefirst time this occurred, and this was an importantstep forward in medicine in the Ancient World.

A man important to this field, who would haveencouraged this method of the observation andrecording of symptoms, was a Greek philosophercalled Hippocrates born in the 5th Century BCE.The work of Hippocrates is particularly importantto modern medicine as the books written by himand his followers are the earliest examples of whatGreek medical thought was based upon.

Hippocrates’ theories dismissed the idea that magicor spirits could cause or cure disease: he arguedthat the doctor should not apply the same theoryfor the cause of a disease in every case. Instead, thedoctor should observe the patient carefully andmake a judgement of the cause, after carefulconsideration of the symptoms. Essentially,Hippocratic medical ideas were that diseases shouldbe allowed to run their natural course, with doctorsgiving treatments like herbal remedies to ease pain.Only when absolutely necessary should a doctorresort to surgery, which, in a world without

anesthetics, was not always successful. Despite thereluctance of Hippocrates to attribute diseases tothe unworldly, the gods were still important figuresin ancient medicine, most of all, Aesculapius - theGreek, and later Roman, god of medicine, referredto by Homer as the ‘blameless physician’.Worshippers built large temples around Greece tohim and, throughout the classical period, peoplewould visit these temples to be healed.

At a temple, a patient would take part in a numberof rituals, which they believed would cure theirillness or disease. These rituals included makingsacrifices, bathing, and sleeping in the courtyard.It is also believed that the priests would haveattempted to heal many visitors to the templesthrough the use of ointments and herbal remedies.These practices took place in Greece for centuries

and continued on into the era of theRoman Empire.

Ancient Roman medicine was in manyways a development of Ancient Greekmedicine, which was applied anddeveloped in more difficult situations likecontinuous war or gladiatorial shows.Large cities with high concentrations ofpeople created situations of fire and plagueand this brought a need for public healthstrategies. Although there is little writtenevidence regarding these strategies, there is

lots of evidence in the buildings that have survived:stepping stones to cross roads, drainage systems likethe Cloaca Maxima (right), piped water, publictoilets and public baths are some examples. Theuse of soap was also learnt from Gaul and theRomans soon realised that it was unhealthy to burythe dead in the city. These strategies put in placeby the Romans are essentially identical to hygienestandards of today.

One hugely influential figure on modern medicinefrom the Ancient World was Claudius Galen, whowas born in Pergamum (in modern day Turkey)and had Greek parents. He studied in both Greeceand Alexandria and returned home to becomechief physician at the gladiator school inPergamum, gaining lots of experience treatingwounds. In the 160s CE, he moved to Rome andspent the rest of his life in the Roman capital. Hebecame physician to the Emperor Marcus Aureliusand was later physician to his successors,Commodus and Septimius Severus. Galen used anexperimental method to investigate medicine andthroughout his life dissected animals, trying tounderstand how the body functioned. Many of hisobservations were accurate and reliable; forinstance, he proved that urine was produced in thekidney rather than the liver. One of his greatestdiscoveries was that arteries carry blood throughthe body, although he did not discover circulation.Perhaps most importantly, Galen compiled allsignificant Greek and Roman medical thought todate, and added his own discoveries and theories.He is credited as having a huge influence overmedicine for over fifteen centuries after his death.

In conclusion, Ancient Greek and Romantechniques and practices have had a huge influenceover modern-day medicine, both in method and intheory. A set of surgical instruments found inPompeii perhaps demonstrates this mostemphatically. The tools are from the house of asurgeon and are the best surviving examples oftools at a surgeon’s disposal in the first centuryBCE. These tools would also be similar to thoseused in the times of both Hippocrates and Galenand in fact some tools didn’t change significantlyuntil the 20th century.

Joe Morford Lower Sixth Former

The modern-day influence ofGreek and Roman Medicine

GREEK AND ROMAN MEDICINEWAS LARGELY BASED, LIKE INANCIENT EGYPT, ON RELIGIOUSBELIEFS AND SUPERSTITIONS AND MAYAT A GLANCE SEEM PRIMITIVE ANDALMOST INCOMPARABLE

TO PRACTICES OFTODAY; HOWEVER, WHEN STUDIED MORE CLOSELY, IT SOON BECOMES APPARENTTHAT MODERN-DAY MEDICINE IS ROOTED INTHESETIMES.

Roman surgical instruments

Uvula Forceps

A witty idea: from Ovid Amores Book 1 Poem 1

Arma gravi numero violentaque bella parabamedere, materia conveniente modis.par erat inferior versus - risisse Cupidodicitur atque unum surripuisse pedem.

I was getting ready to sing of weapons and violent warfare inserious verse, suiting my subject to the metre. The second line was equal to thefirst - but Cupid seems to have laughed and stolen the last foot.

Ovid introduces his collection of love poems with a clever 4-liner, which playson the subject of standard metrical patterns. Hexameter (6 feet) lines are usedfor the greatest literary genre, epic – the metrical pattern used by Homer.However, the elegiac couplet, used for what was considered a less august genre,elegy, consists of alternating hexameter and pentameter (5 feet) lines. Thewitticism of Ovid here is that he claims that he was intending to write epicpoetry (thus wanting to be considered as a seriously-minded poet) but it was allLove’s fault (through Cupid’s theft of the final foot of his second line) that hisepic venture had to become love elegies. Non culpa mea . . .

An idyllic scene: from Virgil’sEclogue 1et iam summa procul villarum culmina fumantmaioresque cadunt altis de montibus umbrae.

And, now, the farm-roof chimneys smoke in the distance,and from the tall hills the lengthening shadows fall.

Virgil, in his first poetic work, portrays the beauty of nature and the rurallives of many Italians of his time. Indeed, born near Mantua in CisalpineGaul, he had a great passion for the countryside like that from his youth,evidenced also by his next great literary work, The Georgics.

His opening Eclogue ends with a stunning picture of the countrysideevening: after the farmers’ hard day in the fields, fires have been lit to give acosy inside warmth and the sun sets, sending lengthening shadow acrossthe hills; toil has ended for another day.

As our own winter nights draw in, and we light our fires to keep out thechill, this picture resonates strongly even today.

A most striking enjambement (elided!): from Virgil’s Aeneid Book 6

Corripit Aeneas extemplo avidusque refringit cunctantem, et vatis portat sub tecta Sibyllae.

Aeneas immediately grasps it (the Golden Bough) and eagerly breaks it off, even though it resists, and carries it back to the shrine of the prophetess, the Sibyl.

This short extract comes from the book of Virgil’s Aeneid, whichacts as a bridge between the first and second halves of the poem.Aeneas’ descent into the Underworld will not only cement his placeas a great hero in the pantheon of heroes (the greatest hero -Heracles - literally snatches Cerberus from the Jaws of Hades) butwill also serve to strengthen his self-confidence and ambition for thefuture. Throughout the poem up until this point, it has beenincreasingly clear that Aeneas, a refugee from the Greek sack of Troy,is fated to found a new city, which will eventually lead to theglorious empire-builder that is Rome. Just before these lines, Aeneashas been told by the prophetess, the Sibyl, that to enter theUnderworld he must first bring back a Golden Bough to give as apresent to Proserpina; anyone fated to enter the Underworld will beable to break off the Bough from its tree (much like Arthur was ableto draw Excalibur from the stone as the destined king).

Having reached the tree with the Golden Bough, Aeneas immediately (‘extemplo’) reaches upeagerly (‘avidus’) to break it off but Virgil stops us in our tracks as we continue without punctuationinto the next line, where we encounter enjambed the word ‘cunctantem’ (hesitating / delaying / withsome difficulty). What is this all about? Either Aeneas is fated to enter the Underworld or he is not.Wouldn’t our view of Arthur’s fate to be king be changed, if he struggled to pull the sword out of thestone? Perhaps this suggests that Aeneas’ destiny to found a new city will be beset with difficulty- hecertainly encounters many problems in the second half of the Aeneid! Or this reflects Aeneas’ ownhesitancy about his destiny? Or it is poetic licence to create suspense? I would certainly love to quizVirgil in the afterlife – ‘Publius, what did you mean by this striking enjambement of ‘cunctantem’?’

A wonderful Simile (simple butdeep): from Catullus Poem 11nec meum respectet, ut ante, amorem,qui illius culpa cecidit velut pratiultimi flos, praetereunte postquamtactus aratro est.

...nor may she look back upon my love as before, whichthrough her fault has fallen, just as a flower on themeadow’s edge, after the touch of the passing plough.

The poet Catullus had an apparently ill-starred affairwith an aristocratic woman. Poem 11 is full of bitternessat how he has been treated, when the relationship isended by her. Although two mutual ‘friends’, Furius andAurelius, have promised to stay loyal to him, even if hedecides to journey to the ends of the earth, all Catullusasks them to do is to pass on a message to the woman,who has now cast him off - good riddance! However thepoem ends with a poignant description of how he nowfeels - either he, or perhaps his love for her, is like a flowerdestroyed by a passing plough. The surprisingvulnerability and weakness displayed by the man of thisrelationship, symbolised by the flower at the edge of thefield, is balanced by the heartless, even ruthless, attitude ofthe woman, likened to an inanimate and insensitive lumpof metal. When one touches the other, there is only oneresult and we can imagine the plough moving on in itswork, totally unaware of course and unaffected by thedestruction left behind. The reversal of the contemporarymasculine supremacy and authority is very striking andevokes genuine sympathy in the reader due to the beautyof the imagery.

David EvansClassics Department

7

The Artistry of Poetry Some of my favourite poetic moments from Latin literature

ACROSS:2. Afterthought surrounds an upturned rod to make a king of Pisa (6)4. Goddess of wisdom and strategy in Greek mythology (6)7. Heracles’ fourth and final wife, male insect, we hear (4)8. Victory for a sports brand? (4)9. Naves sail into this (4)10. Creature which Actaeon was turned into by Diana (4)12. Hera’s lookalike, the goddess of duality, mixed hen peel (7)14. City in Phrygia transfers iron dog (7)15. __ introduces a question at the Stadium of Light (Latin) (2)17. The most dreadful of the Graeae sisters, whose name means ‘terrible’ (5)18. ‘quam’ in certain contexts (2)19. Elpis was the Greek goddess of this, the last thing to come out of Pandora’s box (4)20. Hermes’ mother and the eldest of the Pleiades, the spirit of midwifery (4)22. Latin ‘written after’ (abbrev.), now used in letters (2)24. Greek letter (3)27. Double kiss twenty in Roman numerals (2)29. Muse hides neuter perils (7)30. Roman god of the sea is also a planet (7)31. Bird often associated with Athena (3)32. Past of curro (English) (3)34. Not ‘prope’ (3)35. Greek tragic playwright, undersides of feet contain cooked chop (9)38. Mortal woman who had an affair with Zeus but ended up being burned by him,

partially cause me leaches (6)41. Founder of Thebes, dishonourable man has to give up a letter (6)43. How? why? (Greek and Latin respectively), crop us warped (3,3)44. In the Iliad, Achilles’ slave girl, cookie (abbrev.) holds increase (7)46. Ancient capital city of Lydia in Turkey, regularly starred bins (6)48. At that time: illo temp—- (3)49. So many either way (Latin) (3)50. Part of the ship which Odysseus is tied to when he passes the Sirens (4)51. The region surrounding Sparta (7)54. A type of poet who recited epics orally was an odd Blair ode (4)55. Bird which pecked out Prometheus’ liver every day (5)56. Snake-like monster with many heads turned out hardy (5)

DOWN:1. The ferryman of the underworld (5)2. Daughter of Demeter who was abducted by Hades lost prone sheep (Greek name) (10)3. The Trojan son of Zeus who is fated to be killed by Patroclus in the Iliad (8)4. Daughter of Oedipus, a small insect one went (8)5. Wife of Hector in the Iliad (10)6. God of the winds, who is featured in the Odyssey (6)9. Greek goddess of gossip, who was a terrible winged creature (5)11. Sauce made from fermented fish which was particularly popular in Pompeii (5)13. Greek letter for �����16. The oldest of the Greek gods, the god of love and desire (4)18. Iliad Greek warrior is a Dutch football team (4)21. English sound made by the Greek letter (2)22. Greek for ‘fear’, and one of Apollo’s nicknames curtailed

(answer transliterated to English) (6)23. Roman goddess of beauty is also a planet (5)24. Through (Latin) (3)25. taberna (English) (3)26. He held up the sky, finally dropped (5)28. Persian king went back for Latin six king (6)33. Greek (accusative plural of) market-place (answer transliterated to English) (6)36. pauper (English) (4)37. Roman numerals for 66 (4)39. Nine goddesses of the arts and sciences absorbed in thought? (5)40. Woman who was abducted by the king of the gods as a bull, and is now one of

his moons (6)41. One of the Gemini twins in Graeco-Roman mythology, sugar spoken (6)42. Title of a play by Euripides about a woman who kills her children (5)43. Apples reflected a cleaning implement (Latin nom. pl.) (4)44. tintinabulum, door, cow, jar (4)45. mane! (English) (4)47. Sit down! (Latin voc. sing.) (4)52. First declension genitive singular ending (Latin) (2)53. In the garden (Latin) (abbrev.), a greeting in reverse (English) (2)

Eliot’s Cruciverbal Corner

Classics Crossword by Eliot Tottman, Lower Sixth Former

8

9

Time masks most of thepast. Take Richard III:since Shakespeare’s dayuntil very recently, he wasthe ‘Deformed, unfinish’d’cripple, ‘sent before [his]time’; this portrayal has

since been questioned, and in 2012, when hisbody was dug up in a car park, tests andsimulations suggested that he was actually wellbuilt and rather attractive. Richard lived in the15th Century. When there can be such polaropinions on a personality from six centuriesbefore ours, where there is a relative

abundance of sources, how can we have anyhope of reconstructing someone from 5th

Century BC Greece? How can we hope to shedlight on the true Euripides, when our onlycontemporary source is the comic poetAristophanes, and when his work’s authenticityis frequently open to debate? Perhaps the searchis futile. But to dismiss it is to submit to only asemi-understanding of the eighteen plays whichhave come down to us. As well as a study of thepolitical and historical circumstances of the plays,we need to understand Euripides’ personality asbest we can, and his place in Athenian society.

Euripides appears in Acharnians,Thesmaphoriazusae and Frogs. The first is theshortest, the most absurd and least naturalisticappearance of the three plays. We are so far in therealms of caricature that not much can be saidabout him with any confidence; however, bydrawing a comparison with the portrait ofthe poet Agathon in Thesmaphoriazusaeand in Plato’s Symposium, we can try andgauge the extent of Aristophanes’ comicexaggeration. In Thesmaphoriazusae,Aristophanes presents Euripides at hismost believable, as an actual characteressential to the plot, who featuresthroughout. Superficial insults maskprofound compliments. Frogs. isgenerally more concerned with thenature of Euripides’ work - contrastedwith Aechylus’ - but it is still relevant forour study of Euripides, because from thisplay we can better understand theAthenians’ attitude towards him. For this

last purpose, it is also worth considering howjustified Aristophanes’ literary criticism is.

Acharnians won first place at the Lenaia, adramatic festival, in 425BC. Theprotagonist, Dikaiopolis, is hoping toconvince the chorus of war-hardenedveterans to spare his life for seeking

peace with Sparta. He goes to the house ofEuripides to ask for rags to wear, in order to lookpitiable and beggarly. The first thing tounderstand about this Euripides is that he is firstand foremost a caricature. Fourteen years later, inThesmaphoriazusae, Aristophanes caricaturedAgathon, a contemporary tragedian, in a similarway. Euripides’ first on-stage line – lines 407-9are spoken from within – is spoken in thelanguage and metre of tragedy: ‘What criest thouforth?’ (Ach. 410). Aristophanes sustains thispretty well throughout Euripides’ scene. InThesmaphoriazusae 101ff., Agathon speaks insimilar style. This is not necessarily mockery: inOld Comedy, the audience would expect atragic playwright to speak in tragic language, notleast as a means of identification. When he doesenter, he is lying on the ekkyklema (all’ekkuklēthēt’: Ach. 408)with his ‘feet up’(anabadēn 410) and wearing ‘tragic rags’ (tahraki’ ek tragōidias 412). InThesmaphoriazusae, Agathon is dressed as awoman, shown by Mnesilochos’ amusingconfusion over whether he is looking at a manor a woman: ‘Where’s your prick (peos:Thesm. 142)?... Where are your tits (titthia143)?’. Agathon gives a reason: ‘I wear clothes tosuit my inspiration’ (gnōmēi 148). This seems tobe Euripides’ reason too for wearing rags. Theidea is familiar to us in the expression ‘step intosomeone else’s shoes’. However, to 5th CenturyAthenians, it clearly seemed an unusual practice,as shown both by Dikaiopolis’ and Mnesilochos’reactions to it, and because Aristophanes presentsthe scene in Acharnians as a comic situation initself, rather than being a springboard fromwhich to make jokes. Finally, there is a certainaloofness in Euripides’ character. Reclining incostume, there is something unbearably superiorabout him, starkly contrasted with the worldly,‘straight’ farmer Dikaiopolis. His tragic languagealso adds to this sense of superiority, as heobstinately refuses to sink to the linguistic level

Beneath the Mask: a search for the true Euripides in the plays of Aristophanes

of his plebeian fellow citizens. In itself, thiscaricature of Euripides is not particularly usefulin our search for the real man: he is toodistorted, too much a result of Aristophanes’comic exaggeration and the tradition ofalazoneia (‘braggartry’) essential to OldComedy. We can, from the evidence inAcharnians looked at so far, only say with anyconfidence that, somewhere at the root ofAristophanes’ Euripides, there is somethingauthentically Euripidean; if not, the Athenianswould not have found it so funny. This is wellargued by Douglas M Macdowell, using thestanding joke of ‘Kleonymos, a fat politicianwho was said to have discarded his shield’. Overa ten year period, Aristophanes made some kindof reference to this incident in at least five plays.But did he really throw away his shield in battle?

Unlikely, as it was an offence punishable bydisfranchisement. As a politician, Kleonymos wassure to have some opponent who would leap atsuch an opportunity to bring him low; thisseems not to have happened, as there is evidencefor his continued participation in public affairs.Yet there must have been some ‘well-knownincident which gave rise to the joke’. Otherwise,just as in Euripides’ case, it would not have beenfunny. Macdowell suggests two scenarios fromwhich the joke may have grown. The first, thatperhaps Kleonymos ‘accidentally dropped hisshield with a loud clatter’ in public, in aprocession (similar to a known incidentinvolving a certain Pantakles and his helmet). Orperhaps he did discard his shield, but ‘escapedconviction by claiming that he did so for a goodpurpose’, such as rescuing a wounded comrade.At most, we can say there is some truth inAristophanes’ constant jibes.

However, using the parallel of Agathon’sappearance in Thesmaphoriazusae, we canperhaps gauge to what extent Aristophanes wasaccustomed to exaggerate reality; for Agathonalso appears in Plato’s celebrated dialogue, theSymposium.We find a much more humanAgathon, who has just won first prize at theLenaia (which fixes the dialogue firmly in416BC). One of the first descriptions of him isas kalos ‘handsome’ (Symp. 174a), which is

decidedly more complimentary to an Athenianman than how Aristophanes describes him.

EURIPIDES: But you are euprosōpos, leukosand clean-shaven. You have a woman’svoice, a dainty manner – you’re euprepēsto look at. (Thesm. 191-2)To call a man euprosōpos or leukoswas anoffence to his manhood, both words holdingconnotations of more feminine or childishbeauty - Barrett translates them as ‘good-looking’ and ‘fair-complexioned’, which doesnot do full justice to the sense of daintiness andprettiness which they convey here. Being clean-shaven was seen as effeminate, and this isintensified later when we realise that in fact hehas a ‘razor case’, a xurodokēs (220). It is onething to be unable to grow a beard – which byno means escaped ridicule – but it is quiteanother to shave intentionally. Finally,Aristophanes’ use of euprepēs, ‘well-looking,comely, becoming’, again means something like‘pretty’ here. Contrast this with Plato’s kalos,which, although it can mean ‘beautiful, fair, fine’,can be used to describe anything attractive,without any pejorative connotations. Hence,there is the translation of ‘handsome’. BothPlato and Aristophanes were aware of Agathon’slooks, and so we can confidently say that he wasa good-looking man, but looking at thedifference between the two descriptions, we geta sense of the latter’s comic exaggeration.

Plato’s Agathon is also a brilliant andwelcoming host: ‘As soon as Agathon sawme he cried out: “You have come just intime to join us at dinner”’ (174e)He is nothing but warm and polite to his guests.In Thesmaphoriazusae he is far lesswelcoming: unwilling to help Euripides (195-9), apparently more interested in composing hisodes (101ff.) and in perfecting his make-up (hisprops include ‘saffron gown’, ‘hairnet’ and ‘hand-mirror’ 130-45) than attending to his guests.True, we must remember that in theSymposium, he is hosting a party and probablyfeeling generous after his dramatic victory,whereas in Acharnians he is visited by peopledemanding help, and so would naturally be lessaccommodating. Nevertheless, the contrast isnoteworthy. These differences in the portrayal ofAgathon can be applied to and paralleled withEuripides, and we can try and guess to whatextent Aristophanes has exaggerated each aspectfor comic effect.

Thesmaphoriazusae produced at the CityDionysia of 411BC, presents quite a differentEuripides. In Acharnians, he is little more thana caricature: here, he has a point to the action ofthe play, and is a comic hero of sorts. The

women of Athens, meeting at the Thesmaphoriafestival in mock-assembly, are furious withEuripides. They claim that his unfavourableportrayals of women make their life harder.Euripides sends his relative, Mnesilochos,disguised as a woman, to spy on the assemblyand to try to convince them to forgive him. Heis caught. Three successive escape attempts fail,each of which parodies a play of Euripides. First:

MNESILOCHOS: …I’ll write a message onoar-blades. [Looks around hopefully.]Damn, there don’t seem to be any. Whereon earth can I get my hands on oar-blades? Where? Aha! These votive tabletsare made of wood – perfect! (770-4)Mnesilochos proceeds to scratch ‘Euripides’ intothe tablets and scatter them around. This episodeparodies another from the lost play Palamedes.The eponymous hero, out of jealousy of hiscleverness, is falsely accused by Odysseus,unfairly tried and condemned to execution.Before he was killed, he managed to send wordto his brother Oeax by writing on oar-blades,which he threw into the sea. One washed up onhis home shores, bringing news to his father,who then cursed the Greeks, causing the stormwhich scattered and killed many of them ontheir way home. Aristophanes appears to bemocking this rather excessively clever plotdevice. Euripides’ next two attempts, whichparody Helen (855-923) and Andromeda(1015-127) respectively, also fail. Finally (1172),he arrives dressed as an old crone. He persuadesthe Scythian archer guarding Mnesilochos to gooff with a young dancing-girl, and while he isgone, Euripides frees Mnesilochos and theyescape. The fact that the final comic methodsucceeds where the tragic plots failed is a kind oftriumph of comedy over tragedy.

However, these insults in fact mask some fairlyprofound compliments. Euripides’ line, ‘I’m wellknown by sight’ (189), is a fact whichAristophanes chooses not to contend: are we toinfer that his fame is deserved? The physicaldepiction of Euripides (‘old and white hairedand bearded’ 190) fits Greek ideals. This wouldbe respected by his contemporaries.Furthermore, when Mica - a particularly angrywife - gives a speech against him, Aristophanesimplies that what Euripides accuses women of isin fact true:

MICA: Suppose a woman finds she can’tbear her husband a child. She’s got toproduce one from somewhere, hasn’t she?What chance has she got with her husbandsitting watching her the whole time?(407-9)

10

Beneath the Mask: a search for the true Euripides in the plays of Aristophanes

11

These husbands are suspicious of their wivesbecause they have seen certain Euripideanvillainesses on-stage, such as Phaedra, Medea andStheneboea. In these lines, men’s suspicion seemsto be well founded. In the Second Woman’sspeech, she accuses Euripides of impiety:

Although a rather specific and unusual situation,we can sympathise to some extent. But then: Theproblem is not as bad as it seemed. Moreover,before the escape from the Scythian archer,Euripides makes his peace with the women,persuading them in few lines (1160f.) to forgivehim, as long as he never says ‘anything bad’ aboutthem again. The women, when giving theirspeeches earlier, seemed furious; the speed withwhich the issue is resolved suggests it was a lot offuss over nothing. Though we must be wary ofviewing this play through the anachronistic lensof feminism, it is still noteworthy that thewomen, complaining of ill-treatment atEuripides’ hand, are in fact portrayed far moreviciously and negatively here by Aristophanesthan any in Euripides’ plays. Though this sexismwill not have been so patently obvious to anAthenian man, Aristophanes is still beingintentionally hypocritical to undermine the caseagainst Euripides. When seen in its entirety, thisplay seems more a defence of Euripides than anattack. As Murray says, ‘it is difficult to see howEuripides can have regarded theThesmaphoriazusae as anything but atremendous compliment’. But the fact that adefence is needed suggests that Euripides holds aslightly precarious position in the city. Rumoursagainst him are of a sort typically used againstpolitical opponents, or at least public rivals. This,combined with Euripides’ lack of dramaticvictories - compared to Sophocles’ 80% victoryrate - implies some unpopularity. Whatever thismay mean for him, this should allow us toappreciate his innovations more, because it metwith perhaps significant opposition.

Finally, we come to Frogs. This play, victoriousin the Lenaia of 405BC and the first piece ofwestern literary criticism, is greatly concernedwith tragedy. Dionysus, god of drama, wine andjoyful celebration, travels down to Hades to fetchEuripides back. He is the god’s favourite poet, forwhom he yearns (Frogs 53) as one yearns for‘pea-soup’ (etnous 62). He wants him back inAthens, as all the good playwrights are nowdead. Down there, he finds Aeschylus andEuripides competing for the ‘Throne of Tragedy’(ton tragōidikon thronon 769). Pluto, lord ofthe underworld, asks Dionysus to adjudicate.

The comparison between the two tragedianssheds light on Euripides. But before that scene,we glimpse the man beneath the mask. Firstly,the fact that Dionysus initially set out to retrieveEuripides, as the god of drama, is a complimentin itself - although this is a rather dysfunctionalDionysus. It is also quickly established whatparticularly attracts Dionysus: a sophisticated (asin sophistry) style. Euripides’ extant plays belongto the last third of the fifth century, to the periodof the Peloponnesian War, but also to the age ofthe sophists. The sophists were ‘itinerantprofessors of higher education’ who gave‘popular lectures and specialised instruction in awide range of topics’, particularly philosophyand rhetoric. As Winnington-Ingram says,‘Euripides was a poet of the avant-garde’ – we‘hardly need the testimony of Aristophanes totell us this’, though he does in ‘unmistakable

terms’. One example ofthis from his Heraclesshould suffice: Lyssa (or‘Madness’) and Iris havebeen sent by Hera, queenof the gods, to possessHeracles, causing him tomurder his family. WhenLyssa shrinks from thetask, Iris rebukes her forher sōphrosynē. Here,Euripides’ clevernesscreeps in. Lussasōphronousa (‘madnessbeing sensible’): ‘therecould be no moresophisticated conception,nothing more calculatedto delight a young

intellectual in the audience.’ Furthermore, thefact that Lyssa’s reluctance is superfluous to theplot, as she nevertheless goes on to possessHeracles, supports Winnington-Ingram’sargument: here, Euripides is having some fun.

In Frogs, Aristophanes parodies this sophisticstyle. Dionysus, quoting some of his favouritelines of Euripides, refers (101-2) to the famousline in Euripides’ Hippolytus, ‘My tongue hassworn, but my heart isn’t under oath’ (Hipp.612). Many of the Athenian public hadremembered the line out of context, and took itas a clever (perhaps typically Euripidean) excusefor perjury. The popularity of this line is attestedby the fact that Aristophanes, both in Frogs andThesmaphoriazusae refers to the line onlyvaguely, especially in the former case, assumingthat it is a well-known quotation.

The actual contest, or agōn, is a series of two-way attacks by the playwrights. By assessing howjustified Aristophanes’ criticism is, we can elicithow much Athenians would have accepted it,and therefore understand their attitude toEuripides’ plays. At first (911-20), Aeschylus isaccused of keeping his characters silent, but on-stage, at the start during long choral odes.MacDowell holds this as an empty criticism:‘Aristophanes (as a joke) makes Euripides say(accusingly) that Aeschylus in this way wascheating the audience and getting away withfewer speeches – as if songs were not at leastequally difficult to write’. This may be implied,but it is not explicit in the text. Euripides’ issuewith this practice is ‘that the public would sitwaiting in expectation, as the play went on andon, for the moment when Niobe would actuallysay something’ (919-20).

The implication seems rather to be thatAeschylus had excessively lengthy build-ups, asdemonstrated by Aristophanes’ language ondiēiei, a wonderfully onomatopoeic word,usually means ‘go to and fro, roam about’.Sommerstein translates it as ‘went on and on’;Barrett goes further: ‘on … and on … and on.’The example Aristophanes gives, from the lostplay Niobe, was probably notorious for this.Other than Niobe, only one other example isgiven: Achilles, from the two lost plays TheMyrmidons and The Phrygians. The criticism,generalised to apply to Aeschylus’ canon, seems

Though we must be wary of viewing this play through theanachronistic lens of feminism, it is still noteworthy that thewomen, complaining of ill-treatment at Euripides’ hand,are in fact portrayed far more viciously and negatively hereby Aristophanes than any in Euripides’ play

HeLiCoN

to be an unfair one. This apparently unfoundedcriticism sets the tone for the rest of the contest.

Of the remaining stages of the agōn,most areunfounded or inconclusive: most of Euripides’plays do indeed start with explanatory prologues(945-7), which is the counter to Aeschylus’extended initial choral odes; there are certainlylinguistic differences between the twoplaywrights (923-43), but Aristophanes does notsay which is better; Euripides accuses Aeschylusof undemocratic casting, of giving speeches onlyto the aristocracy. On the other hand, Euripdes‘would make the wife speak, and the slave just asmuch, and the master, and the maiden, and theold crone’ (948f.). But this view is ignorant ofthe speeches given to Electra, Clytemnestra andthe Nurse in Aeschylus’ Libation Bearers. Thisis criticism, but not as we know it: it servescomedy, rather than scholarship. But twosections of the agōnmust be taken moreseriously. Euripides claims (954-79) to haveintroduced rhetorical skills and cleverargumentation, as supported by his sophisticatedstyle. He boasts that he thus influencedcontemporary politicians, such as Theramenesand Kleitophon. Theramenes was renowned forhis political pragmatism, helping to establish andlater overthrow two oligarchies, and then beingan influential part of the subsequently restoreddemocracy. Because of this ability to escapetrouble, he earned the nickname kothornos, aboot which could fit either foot. The fact thatEuripides’ plays apparentlyencouraged these politicalupheavals is hardly acompliment;following theexample from thestory ofKleonymos’shield, we canassume thatthere was apopular viewthat Euripideswas partly toblame,exaggerated byAristophanes.This was adangerousreputation for him tohave. Finally, Aeschylusaccuses Euripides ofcreating deceitfulwomen, which led‘women of quality … todrink hemlock’ (1049-55). AsSommerstein says, this would havebeen ‘pointless unless there had been

at least one well-known case of an upper classlady committing suicide by this means’. If this istrue, and the case was even vaguely linked toEuripides, again his reputation Athens may havebeen under threat.

The conclusion of the contest is that Aeschylusis taken back to Athens, but not for Dionysus’original intention: he is fetched ‘so that theAthens may survive’ (1419). Aeschylus representsan older generation of more optimistic, post-Marathon Athenians. His Oresteia trilogy endswith the performers’ triumphant torchlitprocession out of the theatre - much like theprocession during the Panathenaic (‘allAthenian’) Festival. Coming after Athene’s, thepatron saint of Athens, placation of the Furies –who become the Eumenides (‘Kindly Ones’) –and her successful protection of Orestes, leadingto a peace-bond between Argos and Athens, thisprocession is a proclamation of Athenian values,full of hope for the future of democracy.Euripides lacks such optimism, unsurprisinglyafter years of war with the Peloponnesians,especially Sparta. The Euripides who wroteOrestes saw his city’s lands gradually overrun ordestroyed, its population taking refuge withinthe walls.

There is, in the Museo Nazionale, Taranto, acomic mask discovered from the Hellenisticperiod. Its features are so accentuated, soenlarged, that it somewhat reflects Aristophanes’distortion of Euripides. Knowledge of

Thucydides’ History of thePeloponnesian War and other

sources only gives us half thepicture - it is by

understanding whatkind of a manEuripides actuallywas that we maybegin fully toappreciate his work.His plays, the mostperformed of anyancient dramatist, areextremely importantfor us today. Theuniversality of the

topics presented, and theimmediacy of hispsychology andcharacterisation especially,affects not just the scholar orregular theatre-goer: it shouldaffect us all. Analysing thesethree plays as we have, we arebetter placed to try and unmask

the real Euripides.

Stephen Whitford Upper Sixth Former

12

High summer,336BC, KingPhilip II ofMacedon isassassinated,murdered at hisdaughter’s

wedding. Since the event, historians have triedto work out exactly who was behind it. This isa difficult task, as our sources are limited, withonly one surviving contemporary source. Yet itis imperative to find out, since it is crucial toknow the circumstances by which Alexanderthe Great, Philip’s most famous son, rose topower. Was Alexander behind the deathhimself, with the intention of seizing thethrone, or did Philip’s death thrust the throneupon him, leaving him to make the best of asorry situation? Asides from Alexander thereare several parties who could have beenbehind the assassination, including Olympias(one of Philip’s wives and the mother ofAlexander), Pausanias (the assassin himself),and a number of others. This piece willexplore the motives and the ancient sources’opinions of each suspect. In particular it willseek to disprove the widely held assumption ofAlexander’s guilt; in fact, it will show that itwas much more likely to have been Olympias,a headstrong mother driven to murdering herloveless husband.

Despite there being only one survivingcontemporary source of the event - written byAristotle, the philosopher and tutor toAlexander - this is not to say that there wereno other accounts made, which did notsurvive. From surviving secondary sources,which are based on non-surviving primaryaccounts, it is possible to create a fairlyaccurate depiction of the assassination. Philipwas holding a wedding, at Aegae (capital ofMacedon), for his daughter, Kleopatra, andAlexander I of Epirus. This occasion was notjust to be a ceremony, but a celebration takingplace over a number of days. On one of thesedays, Philip held a procession of the 12 gods,

Beneath the Mask

followed by his own statue, at the town arena. Heentered the arena unprotected, probably so as notto defile the religious ceremony. On his entrance,Pausanias of Orestis, one of Philip’s royal guard,leapt out and plunged his weapon into Philip’sheart. The assassin tried to escape but failed,tripping over a vine. Three other members of theroyal guard, who had been in pursuit of theassassin, then killed him impulsively, withoutinterrogation.

In looking at the suspects, we must start with theassassin, Pausanias of Orestis, universally agreed tobe the one who physically killed Philip. Let usexplore Pausanias’ motives.

Aristotle writes that Pausanias killed Philip sincehe had been offended by a group loyal to Philip’sfather-in-law, called Attalus. A fuller story, written afew hundred years later by Diodorus Siculusreports that Pausanias had once been Philip’s lover.But he was replaced by a younger man, who wasalso called Pausanias. Pausanias [the assassin], beingheavily jealous, verbally abused the younger manto the extent that the younger man took his ownlife. Since the younger man had been friends withAttalus, Attalus now blamed the assassin for thedeath of his friend, and so sought revenge. Heinvited the assassin over for dinner, and havinggiven Pausanias too much for drink, Attalussexually abused him. The assassin soughtretributive action from Philip. However, Philip didnot want to rebuke Attalus.

As compensation for what happened, Philipmerely gave the assassin a position amongst hisroyal guard, whereas he appointed Attalus tocommand in Asia. Pausanias had now not onlybeen tossed aside by the king once but now tossedaside again. This makes it clear that Pausanias’motivation was for revenge.However, the questionis then asked - why Philip and not Attalus? Even ifPausanias blamed Philip, then why act at thewedding? Why not wait until after Philip’scampaign in Asia, from which he stood to gain? Itis plausible that Pausanias felt the wedding was theeasiest time for him to act as he, being part of theroyal guard, knew Philip would be undefended.However, the campaign would also have been anopportune time to seek vengeance on not justPhilip but also Attalus, as he was a senior general inthe army.

History records that Pausanias was killed, but evenif he had fled successfully, he would still be

effectively dead, through exile. Moreover, in eitheroutcome Pausanias ruins his family name.Pausanias must have felt that killing Philip wasworth this. Working alone, Pausanias gains revengeonly for himself. Working with another party, aswell as his own revenge, and theirs, he may havestood to gain financially. The second of these, asmany modern historians conclude, seems to bemore likely because his revenge for ‘damagedhonour’ hardly appears adequate. Therefore, wemust look for the most likely party to have workedalongside him.

The next suspect to look at should be Olympias,Alexander’s mother and a wife to Philip. Olympiashad several convincing motives for getting rid ofher husband. For example, if Olympias hadallowed Philip to live through the wedding, shewould have lost her position of power. Above allelse, Olympias wanted to be the Queen mother,the most important woman in Macedonia.However it was a post that could not be aguarantee, as the king of Macedonia was alwaysappointed. Nevertheless this position seemed to beheading her way, since Alexander had shownhimself to be a leader already. At age 16, whilstPhilip was away campaigning, Alexander had beenleft as regent of Macedonia and had successfullywarded off a hostile Thracian tribe. This leadershipand military experience Alexander had acquired, aswell as his appointment in the first place, provedhim to be the most likely candidate for king afterhis father.

However, all this changed when Philip returnedfrom his campaign and married again (337 or 338BCE) to Cleopatra. Cleopatra was the niece ofAttalus, Philip’s general, and now posed a threat ofproducing an heir for Philip. Once she wasshowing signs of carrying Philip’s child, she wasrenamed Eurydike, both Philip’s own mother’sname and a name which can be found inmany dynastic families at that time. It hasbeen rumoured that the pair did indeedhave a son called Caranus at some pointbefore Philip’s death. Regardless, Philip’sspecial treatment of Eurydike and thepossibility of a son from the pair posed athreat to Olympias’ position.

This alone did not commit Olympias to amurder plot. The wedding, which would marryher own daughter, Kleopatra, and Alexander I ofEpirus (336 BCE), must have been the tipping

point that drove her to the murder of her ownhusband and king, if indeed she was responsible.This marriage would make Olympias a uselessasset to Philip. The original union between Philipand her had been brought about to establish analliance between Macedonia and Epirus. Thismatch would not just re-enforce this relation, itwould re-place it. Philip had several other wivesand he was not short of children; consequently hisunion with Olympias would be nothing morethan a formality.

Justin, a Roman author, keenly blames Olympiasfor the murder. He reports that after the murder ofPhilip, Olympias glorified Pausanias’ corpse. Aftershe had laid a golden crown on Pausanias’ head,she gave orders for Pausanias to be cremated alongwith Philip, showing the pair to be of equal worth.Moreover, Justin reports that she built a burialmound for the assassin and that she retrieved thesword Pausanias used to kill the king, offering it upin praise to Apollo.

This report may sound far too exaggerated to betrue, but it is also hard to believe that the reportwas fabricated completely. Could it be true thatOlympias promised the assassin that she wouldglorify him, if he worked with her to kill Philip?Would glorified death and revenge be enough forPausanias? Surely, if Justin’s account is true, thenPausanias would not have ruined his family name,since in death he is raised up to royal status, ratherthan forever branded as an assassin. If Pausanias hadworked with Olympias, then his death was indeednot in vain; surely this makes it a convincing

possibility.

13

The Murder Trial ofPhilipII of Macedon (c.355-336)

In looking at the suspects, we must start with the assassin, Pausanias of Orestis, universally agreed

to be the one who physically killed Philip

Although this speculation does rely on thecredibility of Justin’s report, if it is true, then wecan assume the story went something as follows. In338 BCE, Olympias, after she had run away fromcourt because of Philip’s marriage to Eurydike,starts to feel that her position of power isthreatened. When she hears of thewedding joining her daughterand Alexander I of Epirus,the threat becomes veryreal and she is forcedto find a way tosecure her position.She then, asPlutarch writes,encouragesPausanias tomurder Philip, assoon as he can. It ispossible that notonly did she urgePausanias to act, butpromised him a kinglydeath and appeasement with thegods. Pausanias, furious at Philipanyway, assassinates him, at a time extremelyconvenient for Olympias.

Although this makes a convincing story, we mustalso look to other suspects to ensure that we findthe most likely argument. Alexander, with themost to gain from Philip’s death, must also be astrong suspect. Similar to Olympias, the marriagebetween Philip and Eurydike threatenedAlexander’s chance of being appointed king afterhis father’s death. Although the new king wasindeed appointed by a council, the existing Kingwould usually make it clear during his reign as towho his favoured heir was, and ensure that thisman would be appointed after his death. UntilPhilip’s marriage, it had seemed that Alexander wasthe most likely candidate. However, some ofPhilip’s councillors had observed that Alexanderwas only half-Macedonian, as Olympias originatedin Epirus. Therefore, a son from Eurydike was toreplace Alexander as next in line.

Not only was Alexander concerned with histhreatened position as next in line, but also withPhilip’s planned campaign into Asia. Plutarchwrites that Alexander “cared nothing for pleasureor wealth but only for deeds of valour and glory,and this was why he believed that the more hereceived from his father, the less would be left forhim to conquer”. However, it would be anoutrageous claim to say that Alexander committedpatricide, simply because Alexander wanted to bethe one to conquer Asia himself.

It is not impossible to believe that Alexander,

power-hungry, with a thirst for glory, in an act toprotect both his own position and his mother’s, feltthat Philip had to be taken out of the picture.Indeed, it is very easy to under-estimate just howmuch Alexander wanted glory. Arrian, one ofAlexander’s most important ancient biographers,

makes it clear that Alexander wanted towin battles and conquer lands,

and not to rule. In fact, Arrianimplies that Alexanderyearned to be the nextAchilles, a ‘hero’ inthe Iliad who is anunstoppable fighterand dies fightingfor his country. IfAlexander wantedto achieve this, itwas essential that hebecame king.

Alexander’s mother wasby far the most influential

person in his life. Sheintroduced him to his love of

learning but also, as one historian put it, his“thirst for blood”. Olympias was reported, onseveral occasions, telling her son that she was amaiden; that Zeus himself had impregnated herand that Philip was not his father. Plutarch lists theseveral supernatural events that followedAlexander’s birth, namely that a temple set on fireand that his birth coincided with three victoriesfor Philip. Regardless of whether this is true ornot, it is indeed likely that Alexander grew upthinking himself to be of a god’s descent. Thiswould sound particularly favourable to him, asboth Achilles and Herakles were also of the gods. IfAlexander genuinely believed that he was sired byZeus, then surely murdering Philip would noteven seem to be patricide?

Although Alexander, for most of his early life, heldhis father in reverence, once Philip marriedEurydike, Alexander’s anger became apparent. Theevents according to Plutarch run as follows. AfterPhilip’s wedding, at the banquet, Attalus, uncle ofthe bride, made a toast to all the ‘legitimate heirs’to come from this marriage.

This greatly angered Alexander, who stormed “DoI seem a bastard to you, you wretch?” Philip thenrose with his sword against his son, but lucky forboth, he fell down, overcome by his wine as well ashis anger. Alexander then, scorning him, said“Gentlemen, here is the man who is making readyto cross from Europe to Asia, and who loses hisbalance crossing from couch to couch”.Immediately after this banquet, Alexander fled toIllyria; and several of Alexander’s friends, including

Ptolemy, were thenbanished by Philip.This account,although most of it isprobably written todramatic effect and a twisted version of events,does show that Alexander was completelyoutraged at his father’s marriage.

Moreover, Alexander, according to Plutarch, wasapproached by Pausanias, who had failed to receivehelp from Philip for the abuse to which Attalussubjected him; Pausanias hoped that Alexanderwould help him instead. Alexander pitied him andsupposedly quoted Euripides’ Medea; “The giverof the bride, the bridegroom, and the bride”. Bythis, Plutarch claims Alexander gave Pausanias a listof those who should pay for the wrong doneagainst him (Attalus, Philip and Eurydike).

Despite these reasons, it is unlikely that Alexanderwould have killed his father, acting alone. Withregards to Philip’s planned invasion of Asia,Alexander would have had a key part to play. Hewould almost certainly have led his own force andacquired his own glory, wealth and power.Moreover, his disinterest for ruling, which ismentioned several times by Arrian, makes it seemunlikely that he would have wanted to de-thronehis father. Arrian also reports that Alexander wasdeeply religious and made frequent sacrifices tothe gods. This shows another reason whyAlexander would not have committed such acrime, since it was completely heinous to the gods.

However, it is possible to argue that instead ofacting alone, Alexander agreed to work withOlympias. Perhaps his mother convincedAlexander that Philip was not his father and thatbeing a general in a king’s army was not enoughfor him, since he was a demi-god. PerhapsOlympias claimed that if Alexander did not act,they both would be pushed out of the picture, asPhilip turned his attention to his new heirs andcampaigns.

Is it possible that out of pity for his dear motherand Pausanias, Alexander was further motivated tohelp assassinate Philip? Was Alexander so blindedby his own ambition that he would disregard hismorals in order to become Greece’s greatestconqueror? Even if Alexander did play some partin the murder, Olympias still appears to be themastermind behind him. Was it she who blindedAlexander and led him to murdering a man whoshe convinced him was not his father?

Another suspect for the murder is Attalus, thegeneral. Although it seems unlikely that Pausaniaswould work with a man who abused him in arevolting fashion, perhaps Attalus played Pausanias’

The Murder Trial of Philip II of Macedon (c.355-336)

14

15

In this passage the North African chieftain,Iarbas, expresses his anger and resentmenttowards his father, Jupiter whom hebelieves has failed to support him. This is

accompanied by an invective against both Didoand Aeneas.

hic Hammone satus rapta Garamantidenympha templa Ioui centum latis immaniaregnis, centum aras posuit vigilemquesacrauerat ignem, excubias divum aeternas,pecudumque cruore pingue solum et variisflorentia limina sertis. isque amens animi etrumore accensus amaro dicitur ante arasmedia inter numina divum multa Iovemmanibus supplex orasse supinis: ‘Iuppiteromnipotens, cui nunc Maurusia pictisgens epulata toris Lenaeum libat honorem,

aspicis haec? an te, genitor, cum fulminatorques nequiquam horremus, caecique innubibus ignes terrificant animos et inaniamurmura miscent? femina, quae nostriserrans in finibus urbem exiguam pretioposuit, cui litus arandum cuique loci legesdedimus, conubia nostra reppulit acdominum Aenean in regna recepit.

game. Just as Pausanias had caused Pausanias, theyounger, to commit suicide through verbal abuse,could Attalus have repeatedly taunted the assassinby reminding him of the king’s lack of concern forhim? Could this psychological torment havedriven Pausanias to the murder of the man‘responsible’, Philip? If this is the case, then whatdid Attalus hope to achieve from Philip’s death?Did he even expect Pausanias to take Philip’s life,or just expect Pausanias to take his own life?Although this argument may seem to hold someweight, it is entirely based on the fact that, after theassassination, Alexander expressed his suspicion ofAttalus being involved. This expressed suspicionmay well have been nothing more than a dislikefor the man or a cover up for his owninvolvement. Is it possible that Alexander, workingwith Pausanias, blamed Attalus for the murder asrevenge for Attalus’ abusive actions?

The final suspect we will look at is Amyntas. In359 BC King Perdikkas III of Macedon died, buthis infant son, Amyntas, was too young to claimthe throne. In his stead his uncle, Philip, took tothe throne. Philip then proceeded to change histitle of regent to King. Therefore, Amyntas’ motivewould be to claim what was rightfully his.However, there is little evidence connecting himto the assassination. All that stands against him isthe fact that Alexander executed him in 334 BCEon charge of treason, the details of which arelargely unknown. Since there is little evidenceagainst Amyntas, it is quite easy to rule him out asa suspect.

Having reviewed the most likely suspects for theassassination of Philip II of Macedon, we havethree preliminary conclusions. First, that whoeverwas part of the assassination must have beenworking with Pausanias, since we have establishedbeyond reasonable doubt that he did not workalone. Second, that this other party must haveconvinced Pausanias with a substantial reward tocommit regicide. Third, we can conclude that thisother party must have had reason enough to killPhilip at this particular time. Although most of thesuspects tick one or two of these boxes, only onesuspect ticks all three: Olympias.

It may be true that Alexander was in some wayinvolved, but this would have been solely due tohis mother’s cruel manipulation. The records wehave left of Alexander, namely the accounts madeby Arrian and Plutarch, paint him as a fine leaderwith strong morals. This piece seeks to show thatthese qualities were there even before his father’sdeath.

Ben GeorgeUpper Sixth Former

et nunc ille Paris cum semiuiro comitatu,Maeonia mentum mitra crinemquemadentem subnexus, rapto potitur: nosmunera templis quippe tuis ferimusfamamque fovemus inanem.’

Virgil Aeneid IV lines 198-218

He, a son of Jupiter Ammon, by a rapedGaramantian Nymph, had set up a hundred greattemples, a hundred altars, to the god, in his broadkingdom, and sanctified ever-living fires, the gods’eternal guardians: the floors were soaked withsacrificial blood, and the thresholds flowery withmingled garlands.

They say he often begged Jove humbly with upraisedhands, In front of the altars, among the divine powers,maddened in spirit and set on fire by bitter rumour:“All-powerful Jupiter, to whom the Moors, on theirembroidered divans, banqueting, now pour a Bacchicoffering, do you see this? Do we shudder in vain whenyou hurl your lightning bolts, father, and are those idlefires in the clouds that terrify our minds, and flashamong the empty rumblings?

A woman, wandering within my borders, who paid tofound a little town, and to whom we granted coastallands to plough, to hold in tenure, scorns marriagewith me, and takes Aeneas into her country as itslord. And now like some Paris, with his pack ofeunuchs, a Phrygian cap, tied under his chin, on hisgreasy hair, he’s master of what he’s snatched: while Ibring gifts indeed to temples, said to be yours, andcherish your empty reputation.

Most Romans believed that the world was run bybeings far more powerful than themselves and thatthey needed to be treated with reverence andrespect. In return, they hoped that their godswould help them in every aspect of their lives. Thekey way to ensure the support of the gods was tooffer them gifts. This could come in many formsbut the most important was blood sacrifice, theritual slaughter of an animal. In offering this gift,worshippers hoped to secure a god’s favour. Thisreciprocal relationship between god and man isreflected in the phrase “do ut des” – I give so thatyou may give. Clearly Iarbas, as Jupiter’s own sonno less, expects his offerings to find favour withJupiter.

Virgil Aeneid IV Lines 198-218

Virgil Aeneid IV Lines 198-218

Iarbas is the son of Jupiter Ammon - Hammon wasthe epithet of Jupiter in Africa ; he was probablyoriginally a local god whom the Romans identifiedwith their own Jupiter.

Meanwhile his mother was an anonymousGaramantian nymph seized and ravished by Jupiter.Iarbas’ origins are particularly brutal; this combinedwith the anonymity of his mother appear to lie atthe heart of Iarbas’ misogynism and the contempthe displays for Dido’s achievements later in thepassage. Virgil’s choice of satus, the perfect passiveparticiple of sero, to sow, is significant here: theimportance of his mother is reduced to providing avessel for Jupiter’s seed!

The next four lines focus on Iarbas’ extraordinarydevotion to his father: he has not built a singletemple in Jupiter’s honour but rather a hundred, allof which are huge and are dotted around thelength and breadth of Iarbas’ kingdom;unsurprisingly, each of these temples is associatedwith an altar on which burn ever-lasting fires. Lookat how the chiasmus of templa…centum…centum…aras enacts the deliberate positioning ofIarbas’ temples in his realm. The ground before thetemples is fat with the blood of sacrificial animalswhilst garlands decorate the entrances. Why mightyou ask does Virgil pay so much attention to Iarbas’exaggerated religiosity? Surely the answer is toconvey to us the utter outrage Iarbas now feels onreceipt of the news about Dido that Rumour hasbrought.

We are made aware of his reaction immediately: itis not a stoic acceptance of the matter: “Oh well lifegoes on - Aeneas is the better man and good luckto him! There are more Carthaginian fish in the seaetc”. Far from it - he is described as amens animi;that is to say that he has lost his mind and is nowconsumed by his feelings of resentment.

It might be worth pausing here for a moment justto examine this rather arresting phrase; the wordmens can be used to designate the intellectualrather than the emotional side of one’s “animus”, inwhich case we are being encouraged to perceiveIarbas as a man who now surrenders to his passions,underlined by the use of the perfect passiveparticiple accensus - just like Dido, he too isoverwhelmed by a fiery passion that he cannot

control, perhaps emphasised by the three elisions inthe line: isqu(e) amens anim(i) et rumor(e) accensusamaro. Positioning himself amidst the statues of thegods - media inter numina divum - and prayingwith his hands turned upwards – manibus supinis -(ie towards the divinity he is trying to reach) Iarbasbegins his prayer to Jupiter with a stately vocative -Iuppiter omnipotens. Its beginning is reminiscentof a hymn to a god or a traditional invocation andwe might reasonably expect the powers of thedivinity and his achievements to be detailed.

The relative clause punctures our expectation:rather than illustrating Jupiter’s divine authority, itserves to emphasise what Iarbas and his people aredoing for Jupiter. Iarbas’ people are feasting andpouring libations in the god’s honour, inrecognition of the god’s omnipotence.

The adverb nunc is deliberately ambiguous: does itsuggest that under the rule of Iarbas the people ofMauretania have finally started to worship Jupiterwhen they did not so before or does it signify thatsuch worship is being practised at the same time asIarbas is making his prayer? We are left to make upour own minds. Nevertheless the enjambedpunchline - aspicis haec - reveals at this juncturethat Iarbas’ prayer is in actual fact a challenge toJupiter, a barbed criticism of his mismanagement ofhuman affairs.

Jupiter, remember, was the Roman equivalent ofthe Greek Zeus, the father of gods and men, a skygod originally, in whose armoury was the dreadedthunderbolt. All meteorological phenomena, thecrash of thunder, the blinding brilliance oflightning, were held to be the result of divineaction and expressions of the will of Zeus/Jupiter.Iarbas now suggests that Jupiter’s inactivityregarding Aeneas and Dido renders suchphenomena as devoid of meaning and the religiousawe they inspire in worshippers as being utterlymisplaced. Notice the emphasis on the first word ineach of the clauses: nequiquam ... caeca ... inania.

When Jupiter hurls his thunderbolt do we shudderin vain? Is the lightning aimless, without point orpurpose? Is the thunder devoid of significance?Iarbas appears to be urging Jupiter to intervene notjust on his behalf but also in order to save his self-respect; otherwise he will be deemed powerless, not

omnipotens but impotens. Iarbas now turns hisattention towards Dido, for whom he appears tohave nothing but contempt. He refers to hersneeringly, simply as femina - he is unable orunwilling to refer to her by name. In his mind sheis nothing but a refugee, a homeless exile - nostriserrans in finibus. Look carefully at these words andconsider both their import and their positioning;Iarbas emphasises his possession of the territoryinhabited by Dido through the enclosing wordorder of nostris…in finibus; the wandering of Didointo Iarbas’ lands is echoed by the “wandering “ofthe present participle errans into the middle of thisadjective-noun phrase.

Furthermore Virgil uses an ablative with which toemphasise the haphazard and random nature ofDido’s movements rather than an accusative whichwould imply a sense of direction or purposefulmovement. Dido’s city of Carthage is described asexiguam, puny, insignificant; her great achievement,the foundation of Carthage, celebrated in book 1and so admired by Aeneas, here is scorned andridiculed. She acquired the territory in which sheestablished her city by paying for it - pretio posuit -in Iarbas’ world she would have conquered it!

He sees himself as her landlord - cuique loci legesdedimus - and he scoffs at the barren, sandy strip ofa site that he had given to her: cui litus arandum .Alliteration (pretio posuit, loci leges), enjambement(quae nostris….posuit, cui litus….dedimus) andanaphora (cui…cuique), all combine to underlineIarbas’ mounting disgust. He cannot quite believethat Dido has rejected him in favour of Aeneas:look at how the verb reppulit is enjambed, the fullforce of its meaning underlined by diaeresis.

Meanwhile the verb recepit stands at the end of theline in glorious antithesis: both words are linked byalliteration but refer to diametrically opposedactions on Dido’s part. Aeneas is described as Dido’smaster or lord (dominum) so that the queen ofCarthage, whom Virgil has so insistently describedas regina in both books 1 and 4, becomes thedoting and servile possession of a foreigninterloper.

Iarbas is equally scathing of Aeneas and his Trojancompatriots. He refers to Aeneas as Paris implyingthat he himself is the cuckolded Menelaus, the

Hammon was the epithet of Jupiter in Africa ; he was probably originallya local god whom the Romans identified with their own Jupiter

JUPITER, REMEMBER, WAS THE ROMAN EQUIVALENT OF THE GREEK ZEUS, THE FATHER OF GODS AND MEN

16

rightful husband of Helen/Dido who has beenstolen (rapto potitur) by an unwarlike Trojanprince. Aeneas’ questionable status as a warrior isunderlined by Iarbas’ claim that he is accompaniedby an entourage of eunuchs - cum semivirocomitatu. This charge of effeminacy reflectscontemporary Roman attitudes towards thepeoples of the eastern Mediterranean who werefrequently dismissed as inferior, as feeble and asunmanly.

Look carefully at the four syllable line ending ofcomitatu - very much a “Greek type” ending butunusual in Latin hexameter verse adding to thecharge of outlandishness and foreign “otherness”.Aeneas is caricatured as an oriental degeneratewhose hair is dripping with scented oil and whowears a Phrygian cap. The alliterated “m” inMaeonia mentum mitra crinemque madentemconveys Iarbas’ contempt in a highly audiblemanner.

Iarbas now returns to his personal relationship withJupiter and with heavy sarcasm contrasts Aeneasand his ability to take what does not belong tohim, i.e. Dido, with impunity and his own offeringof gifts to the supreme god. Finally Iarbas’resentment is reflected in the alliteration of ferimusfamamque fovemus and the emphatic position ofthe adjective inanem. In this way Iarbas makes itclear that Jupiter is acting in a similar manner toDido herself – that he has abandoned his own famaor reputation and is undeserving of religiousdevotion.

Jon AllenHead of Classics

HeLiCoN

Artemis and Actaeon

17

The image above is on a redfigure bell krater which isin the Museum of Fine Artsin Boston. It dates fromabout 470BC, and it is bythe so-called Pan Painter

(named after the image on the other side of thisvase: the god Pan chasing a goatherd). In myopinion, the side of the vase pictured is themore interesting, as it provides an excellentexample of composition and red figure artistry.

Actaeon was a character from classicalmythology who, according to most versions ofthe myth, happened to be in the wrong place atthe wrong time. He was hunting with hishounds when he stumbled upon the goddessArtemis bathing naked in a pool. She wasfurious and punished the unfortunate man byturning him into a stag. His beloved dogs nolonger recognised him and, thinking that hewas an animal, tore him to pieces. If you areinterested in reading the story in more detail,you can find a very good version in OvidMetamorphoses Book 3.

The Pan Painter has chosen to depict an imagefrom this story on the bell krater above. Artemistowers over the poor huntsman as he sinks tothe ground. She has her bow in her hand andher quiver on her back, identifying herimmediately as the goddess of hunting. She ispointing an arrow towards Actaeon, althoughthe meaning of this is in doubt. Does sheintend to provide the final wound that will endhis life? Or is she just indicating to the viewerthat she is responsible for Actaeon’spunishment? Her body is stretched away fromthe suffering man, perhaps reflecting herdisgust, or allowing her a better aim with herbow. In doing so, the shape of her body

conforms to the curve of the vessel. Actaeonhimself looks towards the heavens, with an armoutstretched in supplication. This serves threefunctions: it emphasises his desperation, and interms of composition it balances out Artemis’bow and fills space that would otherwise be leftundecorated. His cloak is beautifully depicted,with fluid lines to show the way the fabric isfalling, and the fact that we can only see the tophalf of his legs gives the illusion of depth (weimagine the bottom half of his legs tuckedbehind).

The most striking thing about the depiction ofActaeon is the fact that the Pan Painter has notchosen to show him as a stag - an interestingdecision. I think that we are shown the hunteras a man firstly because it is easier (both for usand for an ancient viewer) to understandwhich story is being represented:

Artemis + man in hunting cloak + dogstearing into the man = Artemis and Actaeon.Secondly (and more importantly) I think thatwe understand the suffering of the man moreclearly this way. Red figure vase painters at thistime were getting to grips with the idea ofdepicting emotion and Actaeon’s head thrownback and eye looking desperately upwards helpto suggest his pain and misery. It is interestingto note that Actaeon in this image is the nakedone, rather than Artemis - maybe this is tohighlight his vulnerability.

The dogs themselves are small and it is clearthat three of them are sinking their teeth intohis flesh. The fact that there are four of them ondifferent parts of his body show that he is beingoverwhelmed and can do nothing to stopthem. A stag being torn apart by hounds wouldnot have the same emotional impact.

A bell krater was a vessel used for mixing wineand water at an ancient Greek symposium (amale-only drinking party). A specimen such asthis one would have taken pride of place in theandron (men’s room) where the symposiumtook place, and I am sure that the image wouldhave sparked discussion of issues such as thevengeful nature of the gods. Looking at thisimage made me think of other stories to dowith Artemis’ punishments, such as theCalydonian boar and the turning of Niobeinto rock. The punishment of Actaeon,however, was probably the most appropriateand the most cruel, and as such was anexcellent subject for a vase painting.

Kiran O’BrienClassics Department

The Pythagorean Theorem is oneof the most well-known anduseful mathematical formulae inthe world today. Before moderntechnology, many people wouldhave used it to work out road

lengths in right angled triangles, and how long roofsand other such structures needed to be. However,Pythagoras’ influence stretches far beyondmathematics and right-angled triangles to music,philosophy and science.

Pythagoras is probably most well-known for hismathematics. However, although many peoplethink that the formula A2 + B2 = C2 only appliesto right angled triangles, Robert Metcalfe, the co-inventor of the Ethernet, has created a formulawhich he believes gives an accurate valuation forsocial networks. Metcalfe’s law states that the valueof the network is proportional to the number ofusers squared. For example, a network with fiftymillion users is just as valuable as two networks offorty and thirty million users. Some networks,including Facebook, actually use this particularformula to calculate how much they are worth.

Aside from working on mathematics, Pythagorasspent his time thinking like a philosopher. In fact,when he died, he stated that he did not want to beremembered as a wise man, but instead as a lover ofwisdom. In Greek this is “philosophos”, and this isfrom where the English word ‘philosopher’originates. Pythagoras was the first man ever to becalled a philosopher and was the inspiration forothers after him, such as Plato and Aristotle. In thisway Pythagoras has made a very importantcontribution to the development of philosophy.

Of course, Pythagoras could not have been aphilosopher without his own beliefs and theories.One of the most important concepts thatPythagoras came up with is the ‘Transmigration ofSouls’. This is a very important belief in religionssuch as Buddhism and Hinduism and many peoplestill believe in this today; that after death, the soul isreborn in a different body.

Due to this belief, the Pythagoreans (people whofollowed Pythagoras) abstained from eating meatand were well-known for their vegetarianism. Evenin the late nineteenth century, vegetarians were saidto have a ‘Pythagorean diet’.

Another philosophical theory, which Pythagorasbelieved in, was rationalism. This is the idea thateverything in the world is governed bymathematically formable laws. He summed up thistheory by saying “all is number”.

This theory of rationalism was supported by amusical discovery which Pythagoras made. Afterexperimenting, he found that the relationship

between the pitch of a note and the length of thewire could be mathematically determined. There isa different story, which claims that Pythagoras wastaking a walk when he heard the sounds ofblacksmiths’ hammers. The sounds which he heardwere in intervals of fourths, fifths and octaves. In thiscase, he found that the intervals were determined bythe ratios of the weights of the different hammers.For example, octaves were 1:2 in weight, fifths were2:3 and fourths were 3:4.

Finally, Pythagoras made a significant contributionto science. He was the first person known to havetaught that the earth was in fact spherical, and that itrevolved around the sun. This has had a huge impactin helping later scientists such as Galileo to be moreconfident in proposing the same theory, whichhelped to shed light on the truth.

In conclusion, Pythagoras has influenced modernmathematics, religion, philosophy, music and evenvegetarianism. If he had not made his discovery ofthe famous formula for right-angled triangles soearly, there is no question that mathematics wouldnot be so advanced today. Likewise, his findings inmusic mean that for centuries people haveunderstood how to play stringed instruments andhow the intervals work. As perhaps the firstphilosopher ever to have lived, Pythagoras hasinspired many after him to think and discovertheories as to how and why the world around usworks. His idea of the transmigration of souls isbelieved in by millions of people around the world.Therefore, Pythagoras has influenced a vast amountof people around the world, and if it had not beenfor his ideas and discoveries, we would not live insuch a mathematically, musically or intellectuallyadvanced civilisation today.

Eliot TottmanLower Sixth Former

18

To what extent hasPythagorasinfluenced the world today?

When thinkingabout educationand scholarship,the world ofancient Rome inthe 2nd C BC

had some similarities with our own world of21st C Britain. Let me explain what mightseem like rather a deliberately provocative andcontentious statement.

Up to the 2nd C BC, Roman fathers taughttheir own sons and instilled the value systemand customs of the past - what was known asthe ‘mos maiorum’ - ‘the custom of theirancestors’. That phrase in itself gives an insightinto the Roman mentality of the time, since itliterally means the custom or way of thegreater men. Romans looked back to theirancestors for the values to instil in futuregenerations because there was a strong sense ofhuman degeneration from the Golden Age(where heroes mingled with gods) to a moreprimitive society where old values could belost. Those values were summed up in the oneword, with which all students of Virgil becomequickly familiar - ‘pietas’ - respect for one’sgods, one’s family and one’s state.

Although Romans had already hadconsiderable contact with the Greek cities ofSouthern Italy and Sicily, it was the conquestof Greece in 146BC that brought thousands ofeducated men to Rome as prisoners of war.Many soon became tutors to the sons ofwealthy men - and if eventually freed, as anumber were, some set up their own schools.So Rome came under the influence of Greekeducational styles, particularly the one used inthe most important city of Athens, whereintellectual debate and argument wereencouraged. In Athens, men looked forwardnot backwards to what might yet bediscovered and achieved. Athenians did notlook back with great respect to their past,because the world of their heroes was a worldof all-powerful kings and nobles who ruledtheir subjects with a rod of iron, and woebetide anyone who challenged their power!

No - Athenians had discovered a new way of life, ademocratic way of life, where all citizens were ofvalue to the state, and so they looked to the presentand the future with their ideals of justice for alland the responsibility to govern for all.

So how did this Greek influence affect the Romanconquerors? In a relatively short period of timethere was a transformation in education – fathersno longer took sole responsibility for their sons’education but allowed these educated Greeks tostimulate intellectual debate and sharpen the skillsrequired for public-speaking. Greek, not Romanliterature (of which there was not much anyway!),became the gold standard for Romans to read andfor budding authors to emulate. The expansion ofthe growing Roman Empire towards the eastmeant that the Greek language became essentialfor communication, trade and government. (It wasafter Alexander the Great’s extraordinary conquestin the 4th C BC, that so much of the easternMediterranean and Near East used Greek as itsinternational language, not unlike the businessworld’s use of English today.)

Well enough of my brief Ancient History lesson!The point I would like you to consider is this.What might we learn from the Romanexperience I have recounted? The key Romanquality was their adaptability - the ability to moveforward rather than stagnate and degenerate.Where would the western world be without thatrevolution in Roman education caused byAthenian influence? It is near impossible to dojustice to the influence on our language, ourliterature, our oratory, our law, our politicalphilosophy. Not only impossible to judge but alsonot my primary aim in this article. What is thesimilarity with our world today as I suggested atthe start?

21st C Britain, I believe, faces an educationalrevolution just as momentous. Not only do wehave the challenge of our so-called ‘post-modernpluralistic society’ to what many see as traditionalvalues, norms and ethics, but perhaps even moreimportantly, there is the concomitant challenge ofwhat I have called in my title ‘the megabyte’ - theremarkably rapid rise of computer technology.

Our generation has a new ‘language’ (as it were) tolearn - not Greek, as the Romans did; not evenMandarin Chinese (although post the BeijingOlympics in 2008 and with a very powerfuleconomy, China exploded onto the world scene).No - the new language is the language of thecomputer, which I suspect might bring arevolution in education hitherto only partlyimagined! And a revolution, which those of usinvolved in running our schools sense might be onthe way, but, like Cato the Younger, who distrustedthe Greek influence on the Roman way of life, wemight be tempted to view the prospect withanything from mild interest to guarded suspicionto utter contempt and horror!

Imagine a world where every work of literature isaccessible from our mobile telephone? What needwill there be of libraries or even books? Imagine aworld where we can ring anywhere in the worldand the phone system will have the ability totranslate our words directly into the language ofthe person we are ringing so that we only have tospeak in English but they will hear it in Russian,Gujarati or Mandarin. What need will there be ofModern Language Departments? Imagine a worldwhere our glasses will be able to record everythingwe see 24 hours a day! What need will there be forcameras and training our memories? Imagine aworld where robots can fight wars and performoperations and cook meals.

These things are already starting to happen in ourlifetime. The Americans and Japanese governmentsare pouring billions ofdollars and yen into thisarea - for two entirelydifferent reasons: theAmericans because theadministration wants tocut down casualties inwar and the Japanesebecause they have asizeable ageingpopulation, which willneed looking after in duecourse when they aretoo old to look afterthemselves.

How will schools cope with the growth ofe-learning and video-conferencing where it willbe possible for students to sit at home in front oftheir computer and learn from the greatest expertsin their chosen field rather than sit at a desk infront of any old teacher whom the schoolemploys! We are confronted by a revolution ofpotentially huge proportions. The question is this:how should academically serious scholars view thisprospect? Can we afford to bury our heads‘ostrich-like’ in the sand and hope that this is allcomes to nothing? Or is there something to learnfrom our Roman ancestors, who adapted to achanging world and harnessed the power of thenew language, Greek, to move onward andupward. No longer will education be about theimparting of knowledge; instead its great challengewill be to educate the next generation in theapplication of that knowledge so readily accessible.

And that is where the traditional Romaneducation had some merit. Values are moreimportant than bits of information or data, and thegreat responsibility of scholarship in the futuremay well be to pass on the scholarly values ofcritical judgement, sound argumentation andobjective reasoning together with an appreciationnot of what is expedient, practical and vocationalbut of what is artistic, creative and of the soul.

David EvansClassics Department

‘From Mos Maiorum to the Megabyte’

19

HeLiCoN

DEAN CLOSE SCHOOLShelburne RoadCheltenhamGloucestershireGL51 6HE

Telephone 01242 258000Email office@deanclose.org.uk

www.deanclose.org.ukHathaGraphics Ltd. 01558 668069HeLiCoN

HathaGraphics 01558 668069