“Nonnus and the Novel”

Brill’s Companion to Nonnus of Panopolis Edited by Domenico Accorinti LEIDEN | BOSTON For use by the Author only | © 2016 Koninklijke Brill NV Contents Acknowledgements xi List of Abbreviations xvi List of Illustrations xix List of Contributors xxiii Introduction: Becoming A Classic 1 Domenico Accorinti Part 1 Author, Context, and Religion 1 The Poet from Panopolis: An Obscure Biography and a Controversial Figure 11 Domenico Accorinti 2 Nonnus’ Panopolis 54 Peter van Minnen 3 The Religious Background of Nonnus 75 Jitse H.F. Dijkstra Part 2 The Dionysiaca 4 Nonnus and Dionysiac-Orphic Religion 91 Alberto Bernabé and Rosa García-Gasco 5 The Poet of Dionysus: Birth of the Last among the Gods 111 Pierre Chuvin 6 Major Themes and Motifs in the Dionysiaca 125 Fotini Hadjittoiji 7 Minor Characters in the Dionysiaca 152 Berenice Verhelst For use by the Author only | © 2016 Koninklijke Brill NV viii contents 8 Narrative and Digression in the Dionysiaca 173 Camille Geisz 9 The Psychology in the Dionysiaca 193 Ronald F. Newbold Part 3 The Paraphrase of St John’s Gospel 10 Nonnus and Biblical Epic 215 Mary Whitby 11 Approaching the ‘Spiritual Gospel’: Nonnus as Interpreter of John 240 Roberta Franchi 12 Nonnus’ Paraphrastic Technique: A Case Study of Self-Recognition in John 9 267 Scott Fitzgerald Johnson 13 Nonnus and Christian Literature 289 Christos Simelidis 14 Nonnus’ Christology 308 Fabian Sieber 15 The Mystery Terminology in Nonnus’ Paraphrase 327 Filip Doroszewski Part 4 Metre, Style, Poetry, and Visual Arts 16 The Nonnian Hexameter 353 Enrico Magnelli 17 Nonnus’ Conventional Formulaic Style 372 Gennaro D’Ippolito For use by the Author only | © 2016 Koninklijke Brill NV ix Contents 18 Nonnus and the Play of Genres 402 Anna Maria Lasek 19 Nonnus’ Poetics 422 Daria Gigli Piccardi 20 Nonnus and the Poetry of Ekphrasis in the Dionysiaca 443 Riemer A. Faber 21 Nonnus and the Art of Late Antiquity 460 Troels Myrup Kristensen Part 5 Nonnus and the Classical Tradition 22 Nonnus and the Homeric Poems 481 Herbert Bannert and Nicole Kröll 23 Composing the Masters: An Essay on Nonnus and Hellenistic Poetry 507 Benjamin Acosta-Hughes 24 Nonnus and Imperial Greek Poetry 529 Calum Alasdair Maciver 25 Nonnus and the Novel 549 Laura Miguélez-Cavero Part 6 An Interpretation of Nonnus’ Work 26 Christian Themes in the Dionysiaca 577 Robert Shorrock 27 Pagan Themes in the Paraphrase Konstantinos Spanoudakis 601 For use by the Author only | © 2016 Koninklijke Brill NV x contents 28 Nonnus and Prophecy: Between ‘Pagan’ and ‘Christian’ Voices 625 Jane L. Lightfoot 29 Nonnus and Late Antique Society 644 Gianfranco Agosti Part 7 The Transmission and Reception of Nonnus’ Poems 30 Brief Notes on the Manuscript Tradition of Nonnus’ Works 671 Claudio De Stefani 31 The Reception of Nonnus in Late Antiquity, Byzantine, and Renaissance Literature 691 Francesco Tissoni 32 The Influence of Nonnus on Baroque and Modern Literature 714 David Hernández de la Fuente Bibliography 755 General Index 832 Index of Principal Nonnian Passages 864 For use by the Author only | © 2016 Koninklijke Brill NV Chapter 25 Nonnus and the Novel Laura Miguélez-Cavero Nonnus’ productive interaction with the novel has been a given in Nonnian studies since Rohde related the descriptions of the rape of Europa (Nonn. Dion. 1.46–136 ~ AT 1.1.2–13) and the discovery of the purple (Nonn. Dion. 40.304–310 ~ AT 2.11.4–8) by Nonnus and Achilles Tatius (AT).1 The twentieth century was fertile in joint approaches to Nonnus and his novelistic readings, coming to a number of general conclusions: Nonnus’ poetics of poikilia, as launched in the proem (esp. 1.13–15), are put into practice by interspersing in the epic narrative samples of fashionable genres such as the novel;2 Nonnus shows a distinct preference for AT when treating erotic episodes,3 as well as for his excursuses of geographic or historical content,4 natural history or paradoxography.5 The connection is not restricted to speciijic passages. Some shared stylistic and narrative strategies have emerged: emotional speeches (with the rhetorical progymnasma of the ethopoeia perhaps as an intermediary),6 the interweaving of primary and secondary narratives,7 the deployment of description under the influence of rhetorical ekphrasis,8 the generous use of (paradoxical) antithesis,9 1 Rohde (1914) 504, 512 n. 4. Rohde thought that Achilles Tatius had imitated Nonnus. 2 Collart (1930) 60, 271; Gerstinger (1943–1947) 86–87. 3 Collart (1930) 99, 193, 197, 198, 238; Castiglioni (1932) 328–333; Keydell (1936) 906–907; Gerstinger (1943–1947) 83; Vian (1976) xlviii; Gigli (1978); Gigli Piccardi (1985) 21–27. D’Ippolito (1964) 29–30, 41–42, 139, 192 downplays the influence of the novel. 4 Tyre in AT 2.14.1–6 and Nonn. Dion. 40.311–365 (see Chuvin 1991, 224–228 and 2013); the Nile in AT 4.12.1–8, Hld. 9.22, Nonn. Dion. 26.222–249. See Keydell (1932) 188; Dostálová-Jeništová (1962) 203–204. 5 E.g. the discovery of the purple (Nonn. Dion. 40.304–310 ~ AT 2.11.4–8), descriptions of the elephant (AT 4.4.1–4.5.3 ~ Nonn. Dion. 26.295–333), the hippopotamus (AT 4.2.1–4.3.5 ~ Nonn. Dion. 26.236–244). See Keydell (1934) 448; Dostálová-Jeništová (1962) 203–204; Gigli (1978) 433; Frangoulis (2014) 131–144. 6 Wifstrand (1933) 145–148; Keydell (1934) 447–448. 7 Cataudella (1936) 177, 181; Gerstinger (1943–1947) 85–86; Vian (1976) xlviii. Also Frangoulis (2014) 93–129, on novelistic paradigms. 8 Castiglioni (1932) 332; Gerstinger (1943–1947) 83–85; Dostálová-Jeništová (1962) 204–206; Gigli (1978) 433. 9 Wifstrand (1933) 145; Dostálová-Jeništová (1962) 204. © koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2016 | doi 10.1163/9789004310698_027 For use by the Author only | © 2016 Koninklijke Brill NV 550 Miguélez-Cavero and the insertion of contemporary morsels in the literary recreation of the distant past.10 The twenty-ijirst century has seen a notable improvement in the studies on the topic with the detailed commentaries on relevant passages in the now complete Budé edition and in the Italian series BUR Classici Greci e Latini,11 to which we should add the publications by Faber (2013), Fayant (2003a), Frangoulis (2006, 2009, 2013b, 2014), Giraudet (2011, 2012) and Hadjittoiji (2014). This chapter offers an introduction to the subject, focusing primarily on AT’s Leucippe and Clitophon (L&C), the main novelistic referent of the Dionysiaca, as well as Longus’ Daphnis and Chloe (D&C) and Heliodorus’ Aethiopica.12 The influence of the last two seems at ijirst less visible, but they are essential to an understanding of the novelistic discourse that forms the background of the Dion.13 I shall proceed from the analysis of how Nonnus relies on the novel in his initial programmatic space, especially in the episode of Europa (1), to two more general topics: the reception of the novel as the genre of narrative eros (2),14 and Nonnus’ use of the novels as models for rhetorical and literary success (3). 1 The Proem and Episode of Europa: Programmatic Spaces The proem of the Dion. establishes ποικιλία (‘variety’) as its stylistic motto and the changing Proteus as its symbol (1.13–33), before abruptly transitioning to the episode of the rape of Europa (1.45–139, 321–361). Poikilia is a touch-stone 10 11 12 13 14 Chuvin (1991) 13, 271–272. Vian et al. (1976–2006) and Gigli Piccardi (2003), Gonnelli (2003), Agosti (2004c), Accorinti (2004), respectively. For AT: Garnaud (1991); Whitmarsh (2001). For Longus: Morgan (2004). For Heliodorus: Lumb/Maillon/Rattenbury (1960–1994); the English translation is from Morgan (2008). For the Dion.: Vian et al. (1976–2006); the English translation is from Rouse (1940). For lack of space I leave out the possible influence of novelistic narrative strategies on the Paraphrase, and of Christian narratives on e.g. Dion. 30.209–225 (Morrheus kills a group of Bacchantes), 34.223–248 (torment of the Bacchantes), 35.204–222 (a snake protects Chalcomede’s virginity—see Gerlaud 2005, 254–255; Giraudet 2012; Hadjittoiji 2014; Accorinti 2015, 55–61), 35.223–241 (Hermes rescues the Bacchantes), 45.273–285 (Bacchantes jailed in Thebes flee unharmed). Again, for the sake of brevity, I will refrain from quoting the commentaries of the Budé and BUR editions, which should in any case be consulted for a full understanding of any passage of the Dion. See also Frangoulis (2014) 43–84. For use by the Author only | © 2016 Koninklijke Brill NV Nonnus and The Novel 551 of the poetic virtues appreciated in Late Antiquity,15 but Proteus was also an image of a sophist whose meandering narrative ijits well with the novelistic mesh of plots and subplots, as Heliodorus indicates in his Aethiopica,16 which gives a clear starting point to the study of the Dion. as an epic seeped in novelistic paradigms. Poikilia is enacted in the ijirst episode (Zeus and Europa 1.46–136, 321–362) with the combination of poetic sources, mainly Moschus, Apollonius Rhodius,17 and AT’s initial description of a painting on the same topic (1.1.2–13).18 Nonnus does not initiate his narrative with a proper ekphrasis, but his ijirst episode can be understood as a narrativised version of AT’s ekphrasis.19 A comparison of the two passages serves to illustrate the stylistic differences between the two authors. In AT the two onlookers read the painting as an image of the power of love, suggesting that under the tyranny of Eros men and gods cannot control their erotic passions, and that women enjoy the attention they receive (both Europa and her friends seem to ijind the whole episode an advantageous affair, though the girls also look scared). In the Dion., by contrast, Europa is scared,20 and the multiple focalisation21 dramatises a variety of interpretations: the transformation of Zeus into a bull is an image of the power of Eros, 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Roberts (1989) 12–24, 36–38, 45–57. For a detailed analysis of how the episode of Europa reflects contemporary stylistics, see Schmiel (1998b) esp. 397–400. Hld. 2.24.4 ‘You very nearly succeeded in bringing me straight to the ending of the story with your talk, before I realized what you were up to, wheeling on this subplot which, so the saying goes, has nothing to do with Dionysos. So take your narrative back to what you promised. So far I have found you just like Proteus of Pharos, not that you take on false and shifting forms as he did, but you are forever trying to lead me in the wrong direction!’ For Moschus, see Whitby (1994) 101–105. For Ap. Rh.: Dion. 1.48a γλυκὺν εἶχε μύωπα ~ Ap. Rh. 3.275–277; Dion. 1.56a δείματι παλομένη ~ Ap. Rh. 4.752; Dion. 1.58b εὐνέτιν Ἐννοσιγαίου ~ Ap. Rh. 4.96 Διὸς εὐνέτις; Dion. 1.84a παρθενίην πόρφυρε παρηίδα ~ Ap. Rh. 1.791 παρθενικὴ ἐρύθηνε παρηίδας; Dion. 1.133a Μητέρι βόστρυχα ταῦτα κομίσσατε ~ Ap. Rh. 4.27–31 (offering of a lock of hair to her mother). Dion. 1.50 βαιὸς Ἔρως ~ AT 1.1.13 Ἔρως, μικρὸν παιδίον; Dion. 1.51 ἐπιβήτορι κούρῃ ~ AT 1.1.10 ὥσπερ ἡνίοχος χαλινοῦ; Dion. 1.64 θαῦμα φόβῳ κεράσας ~ AT 1.1.7 τὸ σχῆμα ταῖς παρθένοις καὶ χαρᾶς καὶ φόβου; Dion. 1.65–71, 89–90 (sailing) ~ AT 1.1.12; Dion. 1.79–83 (Eros) ~ AT 1.1.13. A ‘notional ekphrasis’ (based on an imagined work of art) or a ‘metadescriptive ekphrasis’ (based on a textual description of a work of art which may or may not exist): de Armas (2005) 21–22. Nonn. Dion. 1.56 δείματι παλομένη, 67 τρομέουσα, 128–136 (speech). Frangoulis (2014) 171– 172 suggests that Europa’s fear preludes later women’s negative attitudes towards Eros. Focalisers: anonymous (57b–59 Ἰδὼν δέ μιν ἦ τάχα φαίης . . .), marine deities (60–64), Athena (83b–85), Greek sailor (90–126a), Hera (326–343). For use by the Author only | © 2016 Koninklijke Brill NV 552 Miguélez-Cavero pothos (‘desire’) and himeros (‘longing’);22 it causes wonder and fear because it is unnatural (60–65, 90b–126a), jealousy because of Europa’s beauty (69–71), and embarrassment to the family of the demeaned lover.23 Nonnus’ chorus of viewers offers independent, disconnected views,24 presenting the narrative as a polyphonic construct and implying that the adoption of an external vantage impedes the (re)construction of the inner motivations of the characters.25 Where AT’s ekphrasis inaugurates a narrative dominated by the erotic saturation of the eye,26 Nonnus’ narrative saturates the reader’s eye with its multifocality, a different form of poikilia. With his initial ekphrasis AT tempts the readers to speculate on the paintings’ relation to the events that follow,27 forcing them to revise constantly their interpretation of the painting and the whole narrative. In the Dion. the initial episode anticipates the regular pattern of Zeus’ human loves,28 it justiijies and preijigures the erotic conduct of the gods,29 and presents Zeus as an erotic model for Dionysus. We could even develop a metaliterary reading of the passage: Zeus is offered as a model for Dionysus just as AT becomes a referent for Nonnus, but both Dionysus and Nonnus need to ijind their own style. Presented early in the narrative, the episode of Europa can be read as a narratorial statement on the signiijicance of the novel (especially AT’s) as the literary background and source of ijictional credibility of the Dion., while at the same time a starting point to create something completely new.30 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Dion. 1.68b Ἵμερος ἔπλετο ναύτης; 79–83a (Eros), 324 Καὶ Κρονίδην ὁρόωσα πόθῳ δεδονημένον Ἥρη. Nonnus makes up Eros’ initial intervention (1.48b–53a lifting Europa and accommodating her on the bull’s back), but relies on AT 1.1.13 for Dion. 1.80–83, and when commenting on Eros’ power over Zeus in the episode of Semele (7.268–279). Nonn. Dion. 1.83b–85 (Athena); 324–344a (Hera mixes shame and jealousy). Kuhlmann (2012) 487, 489 talks of a competition of narrating instances. Whitby (1994) 102 comments on this passage: ‘The speeches are transformed into witty and ingenious displays, which stimulate admiration rather than identiijication with the speaker.’ Bartsch (1989) 49, 155–156, 158; broadly Morales (2004). Bartsch (1989) 37–38; Reeves (2007). Persephone in 5.562–6.205; Semele in 7.110–8.33. Catalogues of Zeus’ lovers: 5.609b–621; 7.117–128; 8.132–151, 290–305, 361–366; 9.208–242; 31.212–227; 32.63–75 (after Il. 14.315–327); 47.694–704. Europa is aware of the pattern of male gods as ravishers of mortal maidens: she asks Boreas for help, but stays her voice in case Boreas does the same as the bull/Zeus (1.134–136). Nonnus often begins a text-unit with a bold overture to an important model, from which then he departs: e.g. the description of the shield of Dionysus (25.384–567), analysed in Hopkinson (1994c) 22–24. For use by the Author only | © 2016 Koninklijke Brill NV Nonnus and The Novel 553 Nonnus draws on the same descriptive techniques typical of AT,31 who has a notorious penchant for blurring distinctions that should normally be clearcut, as illustrated in the ekphrasis of Europa by the intermingling and interpenetration of land and sea (in the Dion. on land we have a seafaring bull, 1.50 ὑγροπόρος βοῦς; on the sea the bull makes furrows as if on land, 54–55, and the girl does not get wet, 57 ἀδίαντος)32 and the ambivalent presentation of Europa as victim of rape and acquiescent kidnappee (~ Dion. 1.65b–68, 89–90). Though it is not so clear in this passage,33 AT often combines expressions of surprise and the rhetorical ijigure of antithesis34 as a means to engage his readers, just as Nonnus does: the anonymous Achaean sailor (90–126a) expresses his wonder35 at the novelty/strangeness of the phenomenon he is witnessing—the blurring of boundaries between land and sea as a bull ploughs the sea (92–97a, 110–117)—while adducing a number of similar situations (97b–109, 118–124), which illustrates how unnatural, irrational and repetitive the mythological context is. These stylistic features are, of course, common in both the Latin and Greek literature of Late Antiquity (as Michael Roberts’ magisterial 1989 book, The Jeweled Style, has indicated), but the thematic connection suggests that Nonnus links them particularly with AT. 2 The Novel as the Genre of Narrative Eros The influence of the novel on the Dion. is particularly visible in all elements related to eros, understood as a socio-cultural construct that is articulated in literary form in D&C, L&C and the Aethiopica. 31 32 33 34 35 For what follows see De Temmerman (2012) 518–523. The picture is introduced as 1.1.2 γραφὴν ἀνακειμένην γῆς ἅμα καὶ θαλάττης (‘a votive picture, a landscape and a seascape in one’). The boundary between the meadow (1.1.3–8) and the sea (1.1.8–13) is not clear and the position of the maidens in the border emphasises the absence of a clear separation between the two: see De Temmerman (2012) 518–519. More generally see Giraudet (2011). Tim Whitmarsh notes to me that this intermingling is characteristically sophistic and particularly visible in the fragments of Hadrian of Tyre and in Polemo. AT presents the painting as that of Europa (1.1.2 Εὐρώπης ἡ γραφή), a well-known iconographic motif which does not require an exegetes to interpret it. De Temmerman (2012) 523 (on AT 4.12.1–4, but generally valid for all descriptions in L&C): ‘This description is again built around antithetical poles to convey awe at the novelty of the spectacle’. Nonn. Dion. 1.93 Ὀφθαλμοί, τί τὸ θαῦμα; (cf. 126a θαμβαλέος). For use by the Author only | © 2016 Koninklijke Brill NV 554 Miguélez-Cavero Take for instance the gnomai (Lat. sententiae): they were Homeric enough,36 but AT’s sententiousness and general authorial comments on love and lovemaking37 changed the perception of their literary use and made the novelistic connection more direct. Thus, when we read (Dion. 42.178–181) πάντων γὰρ κόρος ἐστὶ παρ’ ἀνδράσιν, ἡδέος ὕπνου μολπῆς τ’ εὐκελάδοιο καὶ ὁππότε κάμπτεται ἀνήρ εἰς δρόμον ὀρχηστῆρα· γυναιμανέοντι δὲ μούνῳ οὐ κόρος ἐστὶ πόθων· ἐψεύσατο βίβλος Ὁμήρου. 180 for men can have enough of all things, of sweet sleep and melodious song, and when one turns in the moving dance—but only the man mad for love never has enough of his longing; Homer’s book did not tell the truth! we notice Nonnus responding to the well-known Iliadic statement that men reach satiety of sleep and love (Il. 16.636), but he also points towards Hld. 4.4.3 ‘I cannot agree with Homer . . . when he says that there is satiety of all things, including love. In my estimation, one can never have a surfeit of love, whether one is engaged in its pleasures or listening to tales of it.’ The case is even clearer in the references to the power of love in nature. In AT 1.17–18 Clitophon reports different instances of the power of Eros in nature for the beneijit of Leucippe who is listening nearby: the love of the viper and the lamprey (AT 1.18.3–5) makes its way to Nonn. Dion. 1.281–283, a much shorter reference and in a different context, the world in turmoil after Typhoeus’ attack; the magnet and the iron (AT 1.17.2) resurface in Nonn. Dion. 2.493–495, a comparison with the production of lightning in a thunderstorm, and 32.24 (in an erotic context). What is a central element in AT’s novel appears in the Dion. as secondary material, in summary form, proving: a) that the text of the novels (at least AT’s) was popular enough to be referred to even in brief motifs; b) that individual elements of Clitophon’s display of erotic paideia were suitable vehicles of display of epic paideia when framed differently. Moving up the scale of difijiculty we have erotic character typiijication:38 i.e. one particular character of the Dion. responds to a novelistic type, without which it is difijicult to understand his/her behaviour. For instance, when Cadmus arrives at Electra’s palace in Samothrace, Harmonia refuses to marry 36 37 38 See Lardinois (1997) and (2000). Morales (2000) and (2004) 106–130. On their influence in the Dion., see Frangoulis (2014) 104–109. For the notion see De Temmerman (2007) 97 ff. For use by the Author only | © 2016 Koninklijke Brill NV Nonnus and The Novel 555 him on account of his poverty, and needs to be convinced that he is a desirable husband by Aphrodite, who takes the shape of Peisinoe, a girl from the neighbourhood (4.4–178). Her name (a derivative of Πειθώ, ‘Persuasion’) points us to her generic function and Frangoulis has rightly noted that Peisinoe adopts with Harmonia the role of the (novelistic) masculine praeceptor amoris, and that her proactive behaviour and inquisitive gaze are similar to those of wellintentioned predatory older female characters of the novel who manage to have sex once with the protagonist (Melite in L&C, Lycenion in D&C).39 The success of both referents (i.e. of the praeceptor amoris in convincing his listener to use his method and of the predatory woman in achieving her desire) functions as a literary justiijication for the instant success of Peisinoe’s speech on Harmonia.40 Nonnus also resorts to novelistic ‘type-scenes’ to sustain the epic plot, for example in his use of dreams of love and marriage. AT41 explores the oneiric impressions of love ijirst when Clitophon cannot sleep after ijirst seeing Leucippe (the rationale behind it is that without the diurnal distractions, during the night the soul is particularly affected by the wound of love)42 and, when he ijinally falls asleep, he dreams of Leucippe, touching and kissing her as he desired to do during the day (1.6.2–6). In the Dion. the notion is simpliijied (33.264b–265 ἐν γὰρ ὀμίχλῃ | θερμότεροι γεγάασιν ἀεὶ σπινθῆρες ἐρώτων, ‘for in the darkness the sparks of the loves are always hotter’) and lovers’ dreams are never prophetic:43 10.264–266 Dionysus dreams of Ampelus, but he will die. 34.89–101 Morrheus dreams that Chalcomede acquiesces to his advances, but she will only do so in appearance. 39 40 41 42 43 Frangoulis (2006) 43–45. We should not forget Od. 6.2b-47: Athena takes the shape of the daughter of Dymas, a close friend of Nausicaa’s, to visit her in her dreams and suggest that she washes the clothing of the members of her family in view of her impending marriage. Nausicaa does as she has been told (48–84) and meets Odysseus while tending to her washing (85 ff.). The verbal strategy is then complemented with Aphrodite’s use of the cestus: 4.177–180. On dreams in L&C, see Bartsch (1989) 80–108. On dreams in the Dion., see Auger (2003). This is Clitophon’s interpretation, which we may be encouraged to think rather pretentious, but which seems to be grounded on common knowledge. Cf. Hld. 1.8.1: ‘In my opinion, the very darkness aggravated their misery, for there was no sight or sound to distract them, and they could devote themselves solely to their grief.’ Compare Artemidorus, Oneirocritica 1.1 differentiating prophetic dreams (ὄνειροι) and those that reflect momentary physical and mental conditions (ἐνύπνια). For use by the Author only | © 2016 Koninklijke Brill NV 556 Miguélez-Cavero 42.325b–34544 on a bed of perishable anemones Dionysus dreams that he marries Beroe, and when he wakes up he keeps trying to have the same dream again and making it more durable by sleeping by Aphrodite’s myrtle, but Beroe will marry Poseidon. 47.320–329 Ariadne dreams of her wedding to Theseus, but when she wakes up Theseus is gone and she realises that she can only possibly marry him in her dreams (345–349). The rationale of these dreams is that what the person does during the day, s/he dreams during the night (42.325–332), and that marriage is nice even in dreams (34.96–97, 42.345–349). It is against the novelistic background and the internal development of the motif that we need to read Aura’s dream (48.258–301): by chaste Daphne’s laurel she is said to have a delectable dream of a forthcoming marriage (262b–263 ἐσσομένων ὑμεναίων | ἱμερτὴν ἐνόησε προμάντιος ὄψιν ὀνείρου) and she is presented submitting her previous farouche nature to Aphrodite and Eros to govern. Aura herself says that this dream is inappropriate for a virgin. We are supposed to deduce: 1) that Aura is (unconsciously) thinking of marriage when she is awake and this is intensiijied in her sleep; 2) that the delectable marriage will not happen (indeed, she will be raped by Dionysus in her sleep).45 In different ways the plots of D&C, L&C and the Aethiopica are built on the polarity of loving well and loving badly (or pure love conditioned by sophrosyne and illicit desire).46 This is illustrated by the (implicit) comparison between the protagonist couple and their suitors (a third person falls madly in love with one of the lovers and tries to have him/her by force),47 arranged marriages where the incumbents are not asked for their opinion,48 secondary 44 45 46 47 48 Analysis in Chuvin/Fayant (2006) 64–65. A second oneiric paradigm shared by the novels and the Dion. is that of a divinity appearing in dreams to guarantee protection to the lovers: AT 4.1.3–4 (Artemis to Leucippe); Hld. 8.11 (Calasiris to both Theagenes and Chariclea); Nonn. Dion. 33.346 ff. (Thetis appears to Chalcomede). This is particularly visible in Hld.: see Morgan (1989) 107–111; Anderson (1997); Papadimitropoulos (2013); De Temmerman (2014) 258–277. The paradigm is also invoked in L&C, where Clitophon constantly falls short of the heroic standard: De Temmerman (2014) 152–205. Hld.: Arsace’s infatuation with Theagenes, and Chariclea’s numerous suitors. In D&C: Dorcon (1.19–20), Gnaton (4.11–12), Lampis (4.7–8). In L&C: Callisthenes (2.13–18), Charmides (4.2–14), Gorgias (4.15), Chaereas (5.3–7), Thersander (6.3–8.13). L&C: Clitophon’s father arranges his marriage to Calligone (1.11, 2.11–12); Charicles is engaged to a maiden (1.7–8). D&C: Chloe’s adoptive father is under pressure to choose For use by the Author only | © 2016 Koninklijke Brill NV Nonnus and The Novel 557 narratives that exemplify less noble forms of attraction,49 and images or narratives of mythical loves in which passions are out of control.50 The main difference with the Dion. is that we do not have a protagonist couple, but a main character, Dionysus, who does not stick to one partner. In fact, the initial episode of Europa elevates Zeus’ ‘unproblematic’ sex with young maidens51 to a paradigm for divine practitioners of love, at odds with the novelistic pattern of reciprocal love. And the erotic characterisation of Dionysus is multi-faceted: he is a lover of boys (Ampelus); a lover of maidens with some of whom he is instantly successful (Ariadne), with others he fails and admits his failure (Beroe), while others he defeats in combat (Pallene); and a rapist (Nicaea and Aura). Dionysus gets closer to the main novelistic pattern (boy and girl meet, fall in love at ijirst sight, overcome a series of obstacles and enjoy marital bliss) in his relationship with Ariadne (Book 47): he falls in love with her at ijirst sight when she is asleep on the beach in Naxos (47.272b–294); Ariadne wakes up to discover that she has been abandoned by Theseus (295–418), but when Dionysus courts her (419–452), she joins him in a happy and proliijic marriage (453–471) . . . that lasts only until the next episode, when Perseus turns her into stone (665–666). Dionysus is at ijirst extremely angry (667–672), but in the following book he launches strategies to seduce ijirst Pallene (48.90–240) and then Aura (241 ff.), much to Ariadne’s horror, as she appears to him in his dreams (530–564). Dionysus is not interested in becoming a competent novelistic lover: the novelistic paradigm of ideal love that Nonnus evokes intertextually is perverted. Nonnus also draws consistently on novelistic secondary plots. Take the homoerotic subplot in L&C.52 In the Dion. Dionysus ijirst falls in love with a satyr boy of his same age, Ampelus (10.175–176). Nonnus develops a full 49 50 51 52 from a number of suitors and her adoptive mother insists in marrying her off to the highest bidder (3.25). Hld.: Charicles tries to get Charicleia married to his nephew Alcamenes (4.7, 11, 13); Hydaspes wants her to marry his nephew Meroebus (10.24). Particularly visible in the relationships described in Cnemon’s Athens in Hld.: see Morgan (1989). L&C: painting of Europa (1.1); painting of Philomela, Procne and Tereus (5.3, 5). D&C: mythical narratives (1.27.1–4, 2.34.1–3, 3.23.1–5). Mainly Europa (1.46–136, 321–362), Persephone (5.563–6.168) and Semele (7.110–8.33). It is ‘unproblematic’ in the sense that, whenever he sees a female he fancies, he approaches her and she acquiesces to have sex with him. In all three episodes he is said to follow Eros’ instructions (1.48b–53a, 5.591–592 Aphrodite, 7.110–136, 190–209); in none are the female’s feelings mentioned. Unhappy relationships of Clinias (1.7–8, 1.12–14) and Menelaus (2.33–38). For use by the Author only | © 2016 Koninklijke Brill NV 558 Miguélez-Cavero narrative of homoerotic courtship with a number of contests in which the young lover excels, inviting constant comparison with the mythical paradigm of the young handsome man loved by a god who perishes in tragic circumstances (10.321–11.55). The death of Ampelus (11.185–350) clearly parallels that of Charicles, Clinias’ eromenos (L&C 1.12.1–1.13.4):53 Ampelus rides a bull which, pricked by a gadfly, runs into a frenzied gallop like a horse until Ampelus hits the ground, breaks his neck and is trampled by the animal, just as Charicles loses control of his horse, scared by a sudden noise, is tossed about until he hits a tree and is trampled by the animal.54 Dionysus’ response to the news of Ampelus’ death is built upon Clinias’.55 But where AT emphasises the unrecognisable state of Charicles’ body,56 Nonnus insists that Ampelus has retained all of his beauty after death, in fact not looking dead at all (11.244–252). The subsequent transformation of the young satyr into a vine makes Dionysus consider himself luckier and more powerful than those gods who lost their lovers without compensation (12.193–291).57 The novelistic motif enriches the epic thread embedded with mythical comparisons and calls readers to search for wide literary connections. Where the tweaking with novelistic paradigms is more visible is in how Nonnus plays with novelistic narratives of feminine virginity. The legend of Rhodopis in AT 8.12.1–8 is a good example of this type of narrative: a maiden takes pleasure in hunting, she is a member of Artemis’ circle and committed to remain a virgin (8.12.1–2); Aphrodite feels slighted and promises to retaliate 53 54 55 56 57 And ultimately Hippolytus’ death in the homonymous play by Euripides: 1218–1248. Nonnus could be referring to Euripides ‘through’ AT, in a form of ‘conflation’ or ‘multiple reference’: Thomas (1986) 193–198. I should like to thank Tim Whitmarsh for this notion. AT 1.12.3 ψόφος κατόπιν γίνεται, καὶ ὁ ἵππος ἐκταραχθεὶς πηδᾷ ὄρθιον ἀρθεὶς καὶ ἀλογίστως ἐφέρετο ~ Dion. 11.191–193 καί οἱ πέμπε μύωπα βοοσσόον. Αὐτὰρ ὁ πικρῷ | ἄστατα φοιτητῆρι δέμας κεχαραγμένος οἴστρῳ | δύσβατον ἀμφὶ τένοντα κατέτρεχεν εἴκελος ἵππῳ; description of the gallop of the animal and how it affects its driver in both AT 1.12.3–6 ~ Dion. 11.194–195, 215–223 (esp. AT 1.12.6 κατεπάτει τὸν ἄθλιον, ἐκλακτίζων τὸν δεσμὸν τῆς φυγῆς ~ Dion. 220– 221 Καί μιν ὑπὲρ δαπέδοιο παλινδίνητον ἑλίξας | θηγαλέῃ γλωχῖνι κατεπρήνιξε κεραίης). AT 1.13.1 διωλύγιον ἐκώκυσε καὶ ἐκδραμεῖν ἐπὶ τὸ σῶμα μὲν ἠπείγετο ~ Dion. 11.226 Καὶ θεὸς εἰσαΐων ταχὺς ἔδραμεν εἴκελος αὔραις, 230b–231 Ἐν δὲ κονίῃ | κείμενον ἔστενε κοῦρον ἅτε ζώοντα δοκεύων. AT 1.12.6 ὥστε οὐκ ἂν αὐτόν τις ἰδὼν οὐδὲ γνωρίσειεν, 1.13.2 ὅλος γὰρ τραῦμα ἦν, ὥστε μηδένα τῶν παρόντων κατασχεῖν τὰ δάκρυα, and his father’s speech (1.13.2–4). The idea is ampliijied in the episode of Hymenaeus, whom Dionysus manages to keep alive despite his being wounded (29.15–178): Dionysus transcends the paradigm of the lost male lover. For use by the Author only | © 2016 Koninklijke Brill NV Nonnus and The Novel 559 (8.12.2); Aphrodite recruits Eros (8.12.4–6); a handsome young man in the area is also described (8.12.3); they experience love at ijirst sight (8.12.7); they break the oath (8.12.7); in response to this triumph of Aphrodite, Artemis punishes the girl with loss of her human form (8.12.8).58 The mythical scheme is to be read against the main narrative: Clitophon narrates how he falls in love with Leucippe at ijirst sight; she is beautiful but not committed to preserving her virginity (Clitophon goes into her room at night and only her mother’s sudden appearance prevents her from losing her virginity—2.23.4–6); after their elopement her virginity is compromised a number of times, but Leucippe ijinds the means to preserve it, under the protection of Artemis, who appears in a dream to her (4.1.1–4). Rhodopis’ tale is inserted at the end of the novel, before Leucippe undergoes a virginity test: if she is proved a virgin, she will be free, back to his father, who will allow her to marry Clitophon; if not, she will remain a slave, subject to her master’s sexual whim. Both Artemis’ and Aphrodite’s powers are to be feared and the myth illustrates the difijiculties of the transition from the former’s to the latter’s patronage and commends Leucippe’s success by highlighting in how many turning points her narrative could have gone astray. The episode of the Dion. which best reflects this novelistic pattern of virginity and marriage is that of Beroe: she is a beautiful girl (41.230–262) whose mother Aphrodite recruits Eros to bewitch Poseidon and Dionysus to love her (41.400–42.39). Dionysus, who happens to be in the area, sees the girl and falls in love instantly with her (42.40–137). He tries to seduce Beroe by comparing her with the goddesses, but in her innocence she does not understand what he means (138–174). Dionysus suffers in silence and does not know how to proceed (175–195), then asks Pan for counselling about courtship, just as Clitophon had requested Clinias’ help to court Leucippe (AT 1.10 ~ Nonn. Dion. 42.196–274):59 58 59 The narrative of Chariclea’s virginity in Hld. follows a similar pattern: both Chariclea (2.33.4–5) and Theagenes (2.35.1–2) cherish their chastity; they fall in love at ijirst sight (3.5.4–3.6.1), but then they choose to channel their love through chastity towards lawful marriage (1.25.4, 4.10.5–6, 5.4.4–5). The Aphrodite/Artemis polarity is again channelling Euripides’ Hippolytus (esp. lines 10–28, 1282–1439). In D&C the protagonist couple are ijirst theoretically instructed by Philetas on the nature of love, and later Lycaenion introduces Daphnis to sex. For use by the Author only | © 2016 Koninklijke Brill NV 560 Miguélez-Cavero AT’s theory AT’s practice 1.10.1–2 Lovers need no instruction, except the general rules in order not to depend on luck 1.10.2–4 Do not talk of sex to maidens—they ijind it shameful [2.4–5 Clitophon’s timidity corrected by Satyrus] 1.10.5 ‘Maintain for the most part the silence of a mystery cult’ 1.16–18 Rhetorical display on the power of love in nature [2.6.1 Clitophon blushes before Leucippe] 1.5.4–7 Clitophon inflamed by hearing about Apollo and Daphne Nonnus’ theory Nonnus’ practice Seeking advice on love (42.199, 202–203) Advice on deception in love given (42.208) 42.209–216a 42.275–314 Speech Women hide desire with sexual doubles entendres60 42.216b–220 Deceptive shame/ modesty 42.231–237 Charm the maiden to love in silence with meaning signs61 42.251–271 Sing of mythical loves, e.g. Daphne 42.124–120 Dionysus looks shameful before Beroe 42.363–428 Dionysus warns Beroe about despising love, with mythical examples Dionysus puts into practice Pan’s counselling, addressing Beroe a speech plagued with sexual innuendos (42.275–312), which the girl, again, does not understand (314–315), thus illustrating the gap in knowledge and intentions between them. A third, ijinal strategy follows: he abandons all disguise and tells her who he is, invoking the power of Eros over all beings to encourage 60 61 Compare the bottom-line of Dionysus’ speech (‘I shall provide your every need’) and Hld. 6.3.2 ‘[A]t the moment my whole life is directed towards a single end—namely, doing as I am bidden in the service of my lady, Isias of Chemmis: I work my land for her; I supply her every need; she allows me no rest by day or night; whatever service Isias demands of me, be it great or small, I accept, whatever the cost to me in money and hardship.’ Also Hld. 1.11.3 ‘And although she had often rejected my advances, she now began to lead me on in every way she could, with looks, gestures, and various other tokens.’ For use by the Author only | © 2016 Koninklijke Brill NV Nonnus and The Novel 561 her to acquiesce to his desire and avoid Eros’ retribution.62 Now Beroe understands (because the speech is plain enough or because she too has learned about courtship?) and her rejection identiijies her generically as a maiden who pledges long-term virginity.63 The narrator’s subsequent commentary runs as follows (42.432b–437): Ποθοβλήτῳ δὲ Λυαίῳ μόχθῳ μόχθον ἔμιξε. Τί κύντερόν ἐστιν ἐρώτων, ἢ ὅτε θυμοβόροιο πόθου λυσσώδεϊ κέντρῳ ἀνέρας ἱμείροντας ἀλυσκάζουσι γυναῖκες καὶ πλέον οἶστρον ἄγουσι σαόφρονες; Ἐνδόμυχος δέ διπλόος ἐστὶν ἔρως, ὅτε παρθένος ἀνέρα φεύγει. 435 So she made trouble upon trouble for lovestricken Lyaios. What is more shameless than love, or when women avoid men who yearn with the heart-eating maddening urge of desire, and only make them more passionate by their modesty? The love within them is doubled when a maiden flees from a man.64 This seems to justify the mythical tradition of rape, as illustrated by the secondary narratives in the novel, but, instead, Dionysus detaches himself from the commonplace and keeps away from the girl (42.438–439). The novelistic 62 63 64 42.380–393 ‘[S]ave yourself from the dangerous wrath of the bridal Loves! Harsh are the Loves when there’s need, when they exact from women the penalty for love unfulijilled [381–382 Νηλέες εἰσὶν Ἔρωτες, ὅτε χρέος, ὁππότε ποινήν | ἀπρήκτου φιλότητος ἀπαιτίζουσι γυναῖκας]. For you know how Syrinx disregarded ijiery Cythera, and what price she paid for her too-great pride and love for virginity [384 μισθὸν ἀγηνορίης φιλοπάρθενος ὤπασε Σύριγξ]; how she turned into a plant with reedy growth substituted for her own, when she had fled from Pan’s love, and how she still sings Pan’s desire! And how the daughter of Ladon [Daphne], that celebrated river, hated the works of marriage and the nymph became a tree with inspired whispers, she escaped the bed of Phoibos but she crowned his hair with prophetic clusters. You too should beware of a god’s horrid anger, lest hot Love should afflict you in heavy wrath. Spare not your girdle, but attend Bacchos both as comrade and bedfellow.’ Disobedience to Eros is enough for the nymphs of Tyre to attract his punishment: 40.538–573. 42.429b–432a καὶ οὔατος ἔνδοθι κούρη | χεῖρας ἐρεισαμένη διδύμας ἔφραξεν ἀκουάς, | μὴ πάλιν ἄλον ἔρωτι μεμηλότα μῦθον ἀκούσῃ, | ἔργα γάμου στυγέουσα (‘and the girl pressed the ijingers of her two hands into her ears to keep the words away from her hearing, lest she might hear again another speech concerned with love, and she hated the works of marriage’). Escalating the comment on Beroe’s reaction to Dionysus’ ijirst speech to her: 42.169–174. For use by the Author only | © 2016 Koninklijke Brill NV 562 Miguélez-Cavero intertext is completely abandoned as Aphrodite asks the two lovers to compete in a naval battle for her daughter’s hand (42.497–525). Also relevant here are the three aetiological myths which Longus inserts in his novel (all three concerning a beautiful maiden who undergoes metamorphosis as a result of the actions of a male; Pan is involved in the three stories)65 for how they stage a crescendo movement of eroticism and violence linked to virginity and gender gap:66 (a) The ijirst story lacks a reference to eroticism (there is only a musical competition, no rape, voluntary transformation into an animal) reflecting the innocence of Daphnis and Chloe at the initial stages of the novel; it is said to be known by everybody but Daphnis has to tell Chloe about it (1.27.1), revealing their asymmetry of knowledge, just as the story stresses the dissimilarity in strength between the boy and the girl in their competition (which serves as a contrast to the cooperation of Daphnis and Chloe). (b) Daphnis and Chloe re-enact the tale of Pan and Syrinx (2.37.1–3) suppressing the reference to Pan’s violence (they are aware of the existence of love, but not of sex). The inequality of the mythical couple (Pan cuts reeds ‘unequal as their love had been unequal’) warns of the disastrous consequences for a maid of disregarding male sexuality (men outrun women and take by force what they have not been willingly given)67 and for both partners ‘of a sexual desire not grounded in mutual love’.68 65 66 67 68 1.27.1–4 a beautiful girl who keeps cows in a wood, controls them with her music, singing of Pan and Pitys; a boy enters in musical competition with her and steals her eight best cows because his song, being a male, is stronger than hers; she asks to be transformed into a wood-dove (φάττα) to avoid punishment. 2.34.1–3 Philetas tells the tale of Syrinx, a beautiful maiden, whom Pan offered a gift in exchange for her virginity; she rejected him on account of his deformity and he resorted to violence; when Pan was about to catch her, she was transformed into the reeds; Pan cut reeds of different lengths and bound them together to form the syrinx. 3.23.1–5 Daphnis teaches Chloe the tale of Echo. She was beautiful and excelled in music, but shunned all males because she loved virginity. Pan gets angry at the girl, envying her musical talent and for failing to win her beauty, and casts madness on the shepherds who tear her limb by limb. Analysis in Hunter (1983) 52–57; Morgan (2004) 171–172, 195–197, 214–215. Compare Alciphron, Letters 2.35 (a young widow who rejected a suitor in numerous occasions), § 2: ‘I didn’t know that, in refusing him, I was to bring upon myself a forced bridal and to ijind my marriage chamber in a wooded dell [ἐλάνθανον δὲ ὑβριστὴν ὑμέναιον ἀναμένουσα καὶ θάλαμον νάπην εὑρίσκουσα]’ (trans. Benner/Fobes 1949). Morgan (2004) 196. For use by the Author only | © 2016 Koninklijke Brill NV Nonnus and The Novel 563 (c) In the third tale, Pan gives Echo a terrible death, warning of the dangers of uncontrolled masculine sexuality, especially when opposed to a feminine emphasis on virginity.69 Daphnis, again, narrates the third story to Chloe, illustrating the gap in the knowledge between them, broader now that he has been initiated into sex (3.15.1–3.20.3). A rejection of a suitor who cannot restrain his passion seems enough reason for him to rely on violence to get what he wants (sex, not mutual love), but certain elements can add further motives for the rape: in the third tale, Pan envies Echo’s musical abilities (3.23.3), and the commitment to virginity contributes to a harsher punishment than in the previous narrative, where the maiden rejected one suitor on account of his deformity. These narratives and that of Rhodopis are key to understand the episodes of Nicaea (Books 15–16) and Aura (Book 48).70 Nicaea is young and beautiful (15.160–203), and leads the life of a hunting virgin, and (this is important for her characterisation as a person dominated by hybris) thinks herself better than Artemis because, unlike her, she hunts big animals (15.187–189).71 Enter Hymnus, an attractive lad who falls in love with Nicaea at ijirst sight, under the auspices of Eros, who, however, does not make Nicaea fall in love with him (15.209–243). Hymnus courts Nicaea in the usual pastoral fashion: staying close to her (233–243), he pronounces a speech in which he says that he would like to be one of her weapons in order to be close to her (258–276), and asks her to accept him as a lover, just as some goddesses had got engaged with young shepherds (277–286). No response follows. Hymnus takes her weapons away, utters a second sorrowful speech playing on mythical narratives (290–302) and plays a wedding tune to her (303–304). As Hadjittoiji notes, Hymnus’ behaviour evokes the amorous pastoral behaviour of Daphnis and Chloe in D&C Book 1, with the difference that what in the novel is an expression of mutual love in the Dion. is one-sided infatuation.72 69 70 71 72 Echo’s denial of her sexuality contrasts Chloe’s readiness to accept hers (3.24.2–3), Daphnis’ self-restraint contrasts Pan’s lack of it, and emphasises the difference between rape (enforced by Pan, but also human characters such as Lampis or Gnathon) and mutual affection. Basic bibliography: Schmiel (1993); Gerlaud (1994) 102–107; Lightfoot (1998); Hadjittoiji (2008). She compares herself with Artemis and Athena: 16.148–154a. See Gerlaud (1994) 55–56. Hadjittoiji (2008) 119–120. Daphnis and Chloe neglect their flocks (1.13.6, 1.17.4), as does Hymnus (Dion. 15.214). Daphnis and Chloe see each other naked while bathing (1.13, 1.32), as does Hymnus with Nicaea (Dion. 15.249, 270–272). Daphnis and Chloe touch For use by the Author only | © 2016 Koninklijke Brill NV 564 Miguélez-Cavero Nicaea refuses to be assimilated into Hymnus’ marital version of the pastoral genre and reminds him of the unhappy loves of Pan and Echo, the oxherd Daphnis, and Apollo and Daphne (305–311). Hymnus draws on the line ‘if you cannot love me you might as well kill me’ (313–362), but Nicaea takes it literally and kills him (363–370). Nature mourns Hymnus and several divinities take active steps to have Nicaea punished for her crime (killing Hymnus pointlessly, not choosing virginity as a form of life).73 Book 16 follows the same narrative pattern as Book 15: Eros sends an arrow to Dionysus (16.1–11a), who, passing nearby while Nicaea swims naked, falls madly in love with her (11b–18). He makes two long speeches full of amatory topoi (21–70, 75–143), ostensibly in the air, and ijinally catches up with Nicaea with a short message: 145b Μένε, παρθένε, Βάκχον ἀκοίτην (‘Wait, maiden, for Bacchos your bedfellow!’). Dionysus’ behaviour is similar to Hymnus’ in the previous book, but Nicaea’s verbal response escalates the violence, as compared to her speech of rejection to Hymnus (15.305–311): she now puts herself on a par with Artemis and Athena (16.148–154a), threatens to kill Dionysus as she killed Hymnus (even though aware that Dionysus is a god: 154b–169), and refuses Dionysus because he is not manly enough (171–175), just as Pan was rejected by Syrinx for his deformity in Longus’ novel (2.34.1–3). Nicaea ijinishes her speech rejecting the possibility that the god may chase her and rape her as usual in virginity narratives (179–182): Τί σπεύδεις; Ἀκίχητον ἔχεις δρόμον, ὥς ποτε Δάφνην Λητοΐδης ἐδίωκε καὶ ὡς Ἥφαιστος Ἀθήνην. Τί σπεύδεις; Δρόμος οὗτος ἐτώσιος· ἐν σκοπέλοις γάρ ἐνδρομίδες πολὺ μᾶλον ἀρείονές εἰσι κοθόρνων. 180 Why all this haste? This race is not for you to win; so Latoïdes once pursued Daphne, so Hephaistos Athena. Why this haste? This race is vain; for among the rocks, buskins are far better than slippers. 73 and try each other’s accoutrements (1.24.2), while Hymnus touches Nicaea’s weapons (Dion. 15.234) and takes them away (15.290–296). Eros decides to punish her with being raped by Dionysus (Nonn. Dion. 15.383–385). Adrastea/Nemesis (15.392–394), Pan and Apollo (15.416b–419) call Eros and Aphrodite into action. Even Artemis takes pity on the dead shepherd (420–422). Note the whispering of the trees against the maiden: 15.390b–391 Τί σοι τόσον ἤλιτε βούτης; | Μή ποτέ σοι Κυθέρεια, μὴ Ἄρτεμις ἵλαος εἴη (‘How did the oxherd offend you so much? May Cythereia never be merciful to you, Artemis never!’). For use by the Author only | © 2016 Koninklijke Brill NV Nonnus and The Novel 565 I.e. she rejects the paradigm maiden-raped-by-despised-god, noting the mythical exceptions of the paradigm and that Dionysus cannot possibly outrun her. Dionysus keeps pursuing Nicaea (245b–247a), and would have continued to do so if she had not drunk of the waters of a river polluted with wine, which causes her to fall into a drunken sleep (247b–262). Eros gives Dionysus the order to rape her in punishment for killing Hymnus (263–264). The pastoral setting is then perverted: Hymnus taunts Nicaea in her drunken stupor (292–305),74 and, although the natural elements tower up to give Dionysus some privacy (270–280), Pan and a satyr peek at the scene, aware of its unnatural elements.75 Both give speeches (satyr 312–319; Pan 321–338) in which they present Dionysus as the ultimate seducer, because thanks to wine no maiden will escape from him.76 Nonnus seems to be alluding to the myths in Longus’ novel, when he has Pan mentioning Syrinx and Echo (332–335): Σύριγξ Πανὸς ἔφευγεν ἀνυμφεύτους ὑμεναίους καὶ γάμον ἀρτιτέλεστον ἀνευάζει Διονύσου αὐτομάτοις μελέεσσι· τὸ δὲ πλέον ἠθάδι μολπῇ φθεγομένης Σύριγος ἀμείβετο σύνθροος Ἠχώ. 335 Syrinx escaped from Pan’s marriage and left him without a bride, and now she cries Euoi to the newly-made marriage of Dionysos with melodies 74 75 76 He is envious of Dionysus’ victory (16.305) and does not draw a line between a consensual long-term relationship and casual sex without the consent of the lady. 16.306–311 Καὶ λιγυροῖς δονάκεσσι γαμήλιον ἦχον ἀράσσων, | ζῆλον ὑποκλέπτων ὑποκάρδιον, ὑμνοπόλος Πάν | μεμφόμενον μέλος εἶπεν ἐς ἀλοτρίους ὑμεναίους. | Καί τις ἐρωμανέων Σατύρων παρὰ γείτονι λόχμῃ | θηητὴρ ἀκόρητος ἀθηήτων ὑμεναίων | Βακχείην ἀγόρευεν ἰδὼν εὐπάρθενον εὐνήν (‘Pan also piped a bridal tune on the shrill reeds, hiding secret envy deep in his heart, Pan the master of music; and made a defaming lay for the unnatural union. And one of the lovemad Satyrs in a thicket hard by, staring insatiate upon the wedding, a forbidden sight, declaimed thus, when he saw the bed of Bacchos with his fair maiden’; emphasis is mine). Esp. the ijinal lines in Pan’s speech (16.336–338 Νυμφιδίης Διόνυσε μέθης θελξίμβροτε ποιμήν, | ὄλβιος ἔπλεο μοῦνος, ἀναινομένης ὅτι Νύμφης | εὗρες ἀοσσητῆρα γαμοστόλον οἶνον Ἐρώτων, ‘O Dionysos, charmer of mortals, shepherd of the bridal intoxication! you alone are happy, because when the nymph denied, you found out wine, love’s helper to deck out the marriage’) and the narrative conclusion of his speech (339–340 Τοῖον ἔπος κατέλεξε δυσίμερος ἀχνύμενος Πάν, | ζῆλον ἔχων καὶ ἔρωτα τελεσσιγάμοιο Λυαίου, ‘Such were the words of Pan, in sorrow for his thwarted desire, and in envy and love of Lyaios, the achiever of marriage’). For use by the Author only | © 2016 Koninklijke Brill NV 566 Miguélez-Cavero unasked: while Syrinx gives voice, and to crown all, Echo chimes in with her familiar note.77 When Nicaea wakes up, she immediately realises that she has been raped and that Dionysus is the rapist (343–351). She mourns her lost maidenhood (352–365), and thinks of suicide and revenge (366–392); but when her pregnancy starts to be visible she leaves the forest to give birth to Dionysus’ daughter (393–402).78 The twin episodes of Nicaea–Hymnus and Nicaea–Dionysus cover a similar ground as the narratives of Phatta and Syrinx in Longus, illustrating the gradual loss of (pastoral) innocence and the dangers of uncontrolled masculine sexuality allowed to the gods. There is no mention of the feelings of Syrinx, and no reference to the horrible dismembering of Echo, nor is there any sign of commiseration with Nicaea. Nonnus transfers the violence from the novelistic secondary narratives into his own primary one: where the novels use myth to reveal fantasies of violence that are repressed in the ‘real’ story,79 in the Dion. the reality is myth and violent elements of myth are exposed without remorse or restraint or palliative comment. Violence and eroticism escalate further in the episode of Aura in Book 48, both in the behaviour of the maiden and in the divine retribution for her ‘sin’, just as in D&C the narrative of Pan and Echo builds upon the narrative of Pan and Syrinx. Aura (48.241–257) is a beautiful maiden of Artemis’ circle, who hunts lions like Nicaea and not small prey like Artemis. The main differences with Nicaea are 1) that Aura is the daughter of Titan Lelantos (245–247), which gives readers an idea of the rebellious, riotous blood running in her veins, and 2) that, despite being Artemis’ companion, one day she dreams that she submits to Eros and to Aphrodite (258–301), which in the narrative economy of the Dion. means that she is considering love/sex during the day, even if unconsciously. Aura is not punished for killing a male suitor: in a scene with a homoerotic air, she touches the naked breasts of Artemis and accuses her of having the breasts of a matron and not those of a maiden (349–369). Extremely offended, Artemis betakes herself to Nemesis and asks for the maximum punishment (370–438). Nemesis offers to deprive her of her virginity and turn her into a fountain perpetually weeping for the loss of her maidenhood (445b–448). 77 78 79 For Syrinx, see also 42.383–386. Compare Alciphron, Letters 2.35 (young widow raped by dejected suitor), § 4: ‘It is well not to experience undesired things; but whoever has not that good fortune must keep his affliction to himself’ (trans. Benner/Fobes 1949). Morales (2004) 178–184. For use by the Author only | © 2016 Koninklijke Brill NV Nonnus and The Novel 567 Nemesis then curses Aura (449–471a) and Eros causes Dionysus to fall in love with her (471b–473). Dionysus does not talk to Aura (only his suffering is recorded: 474–513) and Aura does not even reject Dionysus: her insult to Artemis and intractable nature seem to be a sufijicient narrative justiijication for her rape (497–509), mostly because the episode replicates Nicaea’s narrative.80 At the same time, Nonnus works on Aura’s behaviour after the rape as a justiijication for her punishment: she kills all possible suspects of the rape (690–702); she desecrates the temple of Aphrodite and insults all the gods (703–722); when she discovers herself pregnant, she seeks suicide unsuccessfully (723–748), delays the birth of her children and curses virgin goddesses (786–810); and when her twins are born, she tries to get them killed and ijinally she herself kills one of them and cannibalises him (890–924a). Only then does she throw herself into the river Sangarios, where she becomes part of the river bank, her breasts perpetually jetting water, and still remorseful for the loss of her maidenhood (928–942). The end of the narrative is a brutal expansion of the shorter virginity tales accounted for in the novels, with the aggravating circumstance that Dionysus expresses pride in the rapes of Aura and Nicaea (48.866–889). But here we are not dealing with cautionary tales about what may happen when maidens do not balance the protection of their virginity before marriage with the need to acquiesce to the right man in marriage (i.e. when they lose their virginity before marrying or when they reject marriage altogether), and when men cannot control their sexuality and destroy unattainable females. In the Dion. this is the main narrative and contrasts the success of Zeus with other females (he does not need to rape them when they are asleep—Dionysus falls short of his father’s model in this regard) with Dionysus’ behaviour towards Beroe (he courts her following the ‘standard’ etiquette of courtship) and Ariadne, whom he seduces on the spot (47.265–471). The transference of the narrative of virginity with a mixed cast of divine and mortal characters from secondary novelistic plot to the main epic plot comments on the unsweetened elements of both epic and myth in contrast with the (at least superijicial) happy end of the novels and other narratives with mortal protagonists. The inevitable question of what is a Christian poet making of all of this (and the concomitant one of how his at least partially Christian audience received it) remains a thorny one, but from a literary point of view Nonnus comments on the impossibility of assuming novelistic paradigms as 80 Dionysus says ‘I think Athena will listen sooner; and not intrepid Artemis avoids me so much as prudish Aura’ (48.510–511), picking up on Nicaea’s comment that Artemis and Athena are likelier to submit to his desires than herself (16.149–154a). For use by the Author only | © 2016 Koninklijke Brill NV 568 Miguélez-Cavero they appear in their original literary context without distorting them with the brutal/perverse elements inherent to the epic. Nonnus pushes further the novelistic paradigm by embedding a secondary narrative on virginity with two mortal protagonists, the so-called ‘novella’ of Morrheus (the black Indian chieftain, son-in-law of the Indian king) and the Bacchante Chalcomede (Books 33–35). Aphrodite recruits Eros for an erotic mission (33.55–180a) and he inspires in Morrheus an unwelcome desire for Chalcomede (180b–194); Morrheus is instantly afflicted by love (195–200), but his eye is not met by Chalcomede, who deludes him into believing that she is in love with him, but cites as a model Apollo’s unsuccessful love for Daphne (201–224); Thetis promises to help Chalcomede in preserving her virginity from the assault of the Indian chieftain (33.346–387);81 Morrheus confers with his servant Hyssacos and tries to ijind a cure for love (34.5–88), just as Arsake confesses her passion for Theagenes to her servant Cybele (Hld. 7.10) or the Great King confesses he is in love with Callirhoe to his eunuch Artaxates (Chariton 6.3). The chase of the maiden by the potential rapist is transformed by Chalcomede into a strategy to lure Morrheus out of the battle, where he is massacring the Bacchic army (34.269–358, 35.98–159), and when he is about to rape her a snake magically darts out of her bosom to put him in flight (35.185– 226). This episode is similar to those of the novels in which the female protagonist manages to keep an unwanted suitor at bay while using her beauty to conjure the dangers he poses for herself and her beloved,82 but 1) here there is no beloved and Chalcomede preserves her virginity in the service of a god (just as Christian virgins preserved theirs for God) and 2) the ijinal element (the protective snake) seems to be borrowed from a Christian narrative.83 This shows how the canon of the novel had opened to encompass Christian texts. 3 The Novel as a Model for Rhetorical and Literary Success Nonnus also draws on the novels as successful texts, i.e. as literary creations that seduced his fellow pepaideumenoi with their mastering of rhetorical and literary techniques. A good example of Nonnus’ borrowing of the rhetorical strategies of the novel is the episode of Tyre (40.298–580). The initial, brief account of the dis81 82 83 For novelistic instances of a divinity protecting the feminine protagonist, see above n. 45. E.g. in Hld., Chariclea plays on Thyamis’ expectations (1.18–26) and seduces Pelorus to conjure Trachinus’ advances (5.29–31). The Acts of John 63–86: see Gerlaud (2005) 254–255; Giraudet (2012); Hadjittofiji (2014); Accorinti (2015) 55–61. For use by the Author only | © 2016 Koninklijke Brill NV Nonnus and The Novel 569 covery of the purple in the town (40.304–310) sums up AT’s longer narrative (2.11.4–8),84 and the description of the site (40.311–326)85 looks to AT for his application of the precepts for the encomium of a town, as transmitted by Menander Rhetor. In particular he develops AT’s competition between the sea and the land and the surprise this causes to the viewer (as suggested by Men. Rh. for towns in coastal areas: 348.30–349.1, 351.13–19): AT 2.14.2–3 ἐρίζει δὲ περὶ ταύτης γῆ καὶ θάλασσα. Ἕλκει δὲ ἡ γῆ, ἡ δὲ εἰς ἀμφότερα αὑτὴν ἥρμοσε. Καὶ γὰρ ἐν θαλάσσῃ κάθηται καὶ οὐκ ἀφῆκε τὴν γῆν ~ Nonn. Dion. 40.316b–317 ἐπεὶ Τύρος εἰν ἁλὶ κεῖται | εἰς χθόνα μοιρηθεῖσα, συναπτομένη δὲ θαλάσσῃ AT 2.14.4 καὶ γίνεται τὸ θέαμα καινόν, πόλις ἐν θαλάσσῃ καὶ νῆσος ἐν γῇ86 ~ Nonn. Dion. 40.315–316a Καί οἱ ὀπιπεύοντι μέσην χθόνα σύζυγον ἅλμῃ | διπλόον ἔλαχε θάμβος, 338a Νῆσον ἐν ἠπείρῳ πόθεν ἔδρακον; The same happens with the identiijication of geographical accidents and human body parts (the anthropomorphic metaphor is already present in Men. Rh. 345.31–346.1, 351.30–352.1): AT 2.14.3 συνδεῖ γὰρ αὐτὴν πρὸς τὴν ἤπειρον στενὸς αὐχήν, καὶ ἔστιν ὥσπερ τῆς νήσου τράχηλος ~ Nonn. Dion. 40.318–326 (developed into a complete anthropomorphic description, see especially 320 καὶ κεφαλὴν καὶ στέρνα καὶ αὐχένα δῶκε θαλάσσῃ, 326b αὐχένα νύμφης).87 84 85 86 87 AT 2.11.4 οἵον μυθολογοῦσι Τύριοι ~ Nonn. Dion. 40.304 Τυρίῃ . . . κόχλῳ; AT 2.11.4 τοῦ ποιμένος εὑρεῖν τὸν κύνα (and 5 ἁλιεὺς ἀγρεύει τὴν ἄγραν ταύτην) ~ Nonn. Dion. 40.306 ἧχι κύων ἁλιεργὸς ἐπ’ αἰγιαλοῖσιν; AT 2.11.5 εὑρίσκει δὲ κύων τὸ ἕρμαιον καὶ καταθραύει τοῖς ὀδοῦσι ~ Nonn. Dion. 40.306b–307 ἐρέπτων | ἐνδόμυχον χαροπῇσι γενειάσι θέσκελον ἰχθύν; AT 2.11.5 καὶ τῷ στόματι τοῦ κυνὸς περιρρέει τοῦ ἄνθους τὸ αἷμα, καὶ βάπτει τὸ αἷμα τὴν γένυν καὶ ὑφαίνει τοῖς χείλεσι τὴν πορφύραν ~ Nonn. Dion. 40.308–309 χιονέας πόρφυρε παρηίδας αἵματι κόχλου, | χείλεα φοινίξας διερῷ πυρί. Analysis in Simon (1999) 137–138. Later also in AT 4.14.7–8. Compare Longus 1.1.1 ‘There is a city on Lesbos called Mitylene, of great size and beauty; it is transected by channels which bring the sea right into the city, and graced by bridges of polished marble. It will give you the impression of an island rather than a city [Νομίσαις οὐ πόλιν ὁρᾶν ἀλὰ νῆσον]’. The opposition land-water is absent in the description of the marshes of the Nile in Hld. 1.5–6, 30, but developed in Hld. 9.5.5. For Berytus, Nonnus rejects the image isthmus = neck (41.15b–17), but later introduces an equally anthropomorphic description (41.28–31). For use by the Author only | © 2016 Koninklijke Brill NV 570 Miguélez-Cavero The theme of the closeness of sailor and shepherd, ijirst introduced by the narrator (40.327–336) and then ampliijied in Dionysus’ speech (337–352),88 recalls the paradoxical nature of the Nile as described by AT (4.12.1). More generally, Dionysus’ wonder before Tyre is similar to Clitophon’s on arriving to Alexandria,89 and the combination of verbs of sight and wonder in Clitophon’s approach to this city (AT 5.1.4–5) recurs in Dionysus’ approach to Tyre (Nonn. Dion. 40.353–365). Nonnus makes also use of one of AT’s Tyrian myths. The transfer of the vine and wine into human hands in Tyre, similar to the Athenian myth of Icarius (2.2.1–6),90 becomes the matrix for a number of passages in the Dion.: Dionysus’ visit to the shepherd Brongus, to whom the god also gives the wine as antidoron for his hospitality (17.37–86), and the Indians’ and Aura’s reaction on ijirst trying wine (14.417–437, 48.602–606).91 Nonnus’ capacity to see the literary and rhetorical potential of a given text is not limited to longer episodes, but also applied to the construction of brief scenes. A good example of this is the description of Electra’s palace in Samothrace (3.131–179).92 The garden is similar to that in which Clitophon stages a seductive speech for the sake of Leucippe: they share the interlacing 88 89 90 91 92 Analysis in Simon (1999) 139–140; Accorinti (2004) ad loc.; Chuvin (2013) 544–545. This disordered mix of land and sea is ‘corrected’ in the description of Berytus (41.14–49), where Nonnus applies the rhetorical principle of description of a country’s position by orientation: Men. Rh. 344.29–30, 345.22–31, 347.2–7, 347.14–20, 349.2–13, 349.31–351.18. AT 5.1.1 ἀνιόντι δέ μοι κατὰ τὰς Ἡλίου καλουμένας πύλας συνηντᾶτο εὐθὺς τῆς πόλεως ἀστράπτον τὸ κάλος καί μου τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς ἐγέμισεν ἡδονῆς ~ Nonn. Dion. 40.337–339 Καὶ τάδε παπταίνων πολυθαμβέα ῥήξατο φωνήν· | ‘Νῆσον ἐν ἠπείρῳ πόθεν ἔδρακον; Εἰ θέμις εἰπεῖν, | τηλίκον οὔ ποτε κάλος ἐσέδρακον’. Fayant (2000) 16, 38–43; Frangoulis (2014) 115–118. AT 2.2.1 ~ Nonn. Dion. 17.42–61a (Brongus receives Dionysus) and 47.38b–41a (Icarius and Erigone entertain Dionysus). AT 2.2.4 ‘Dionysus complimented the shepherd on the warmth of his welcome, and proffered him the cup of friendship. The drink was wine’ ~ Nonn. Dion. 47.41b–44a. AT 2.2.4 Πόθεν, ὦ ξένε, σοὶ τὸ ὕδωρ τοῦτο τὸ πορφυροῦν; ~ Nonn. Dion. 47.78 and 48.602. AT 2.2.4 οὐ γάρ ἐστιν ἐκεῖνο τὸ χαμαὶ ῥέον ~ Nonn. Dion. 47.79–82 (+ 83–88, comparison with honey, milk, kykeon; also 14.419b–422, comparison with other drinks). AT. 2.2.5 (effect on drinker) ~ Nonn. Dion. 14.423–429 (the Indians trying wine), 47.106–115 (Athenian farmers), 48.605–606 (Aura, on ijirst trying wine). Analysed in Faber (2013; see also the chapter by the same author in this volume); Frangoulis (2014) 179–182. I shall stress the parallels with the novel, but the passage is rich in interactions with the description of the palace of Alcinous (Od. 7.81–133) and Cadmus’ arrival to the palace recalls Ap. Rh. 3.927–938. The dogs wag their tales like the tame animals in Circe’s forest (Od. 10.210–219). For use by the Author only | © 2016 Koninklijke Brill NV Nonnus and The Novel 571 of the plants93 (which in AT anticipates Clitophon’s success).94 The reference to the songs of the cicadas (myth of Eos and Tithonus) and swallows (myth of Tereus, Procne and Philomela)95 as a reminder of the disgraces of love is the same strategy followed by Nonnus when he introduces Hyacinth in the garden and develops a longer account of the aition (3.153–163). To add to this, the ijigure of the gardener opening a channel to irrigate the plants (Nonn. Dion. 3.164– 169) is imported from the initial painting of the novel (AT 1.1.6).96 However, the ijinal result of the description is completely different, as Nonnus transforms the luscious description into a typology of love and erotic interactions described through their vegetal counterparts:97 142b–143 Καὶ ἄρσενα φύλα πελάσσας | θηλυτέρῳ φοίνικι πόθον πιστώσατο φοῖνιξ (‘Male palm stretched his leaves over female palm, pledging his love’): courtship, no reference to outcome. 144–146 ὄγχνη τ’ ἀγλαόκαρπος ὁμήλικι σύμφυτος ὄγχνῃ . . . (‘Pear growing by pear, all of one age with glorious fruit . . .’): two youngsters of a similar age, happily married and having children. 147b–148a ἀναινομένῃ παρὰ δάφνῃ | σείετο μύρσινα φύλα (‘the myrtle waved his leaves by the reluctant laurel’): the myrtle (Aphrodite’s tree) lusts after the laurel (Daphne’s tree), just as a lusty young man chases a reluctant maiden—different species—no reference to the outcome. 150–152a ‘On the ijig-tree, mother of sweets, and the juicy pomegranate, red fruit grew rich over purple fruit beside it’: images of feminine fertility associated with sweetness. 153–163: the hyacinth triggers a digression on Apollo in love with the name-sake youth, killed by Zephyr out of jealousy—disgraceful homo-erotic loves, ending with the death of the eromenos and the mourning of the erastes. 93 94 95 96 97 Nonn. Dion. 3.140–153 amorous behaviour of palm and myrtle ~ AT 1.1.2 interlocking of plants in the garden inserted in the initial painting of Europa, 1.15.2 interlocking of plants in Clitophon’s garden, 1.17.3–4 Clitophon interprets the behaviour of the male palm lusting after the female (see Bartsch 1989, 156–157). The interlacing of plants is mentioned in Longus 4.2.5 οἱ κλάδοι συνέπιπτον ἀλήλοις καὶ ἐπήλαττον τὰς κόμας (Dionysophanes’ park), but not in Philetas’ garden (2.3.3–2.4.1). Bartsch (1989) 51–53. On spatial erotization in AT see De Temmerman (2012) 526–531. 1.15.7 ‘The singers were cicadas and swallows, and they sang respectively of the love of Eos and the feast of Tereus.’ Also in D&C 4.4.1 Lamon works as a gardener irrigating the plants. Also recalling the garden in Alcinous’ palace (Od. 7.114–131, esp. 115–116 ὄγχναι καὶ ῥοιαὶ καὶ μηλέαι ἀγλαόκαρποι | συκέαι τε γλυκεραὶ καὶ ἐλαῖαι τηλεθόωσαι and 120–121 ὄγχνη ἐπ’ ὄγχνῃ γηράσκει, μῆλον δ’ ἐπὶ μήλῳ, | αὐτὰρ ἐπὶ σταφυλῇ σταφυλή, σῦκον δ’ ἐπὶ σύκῳ). For use by the Author only | © 2016 Koninklijke Brill NV 572 Miguélez-Cavero The cultivated audience is called to appreciate Nonnus’ ‘improvement’ of AT. The novels are also part of the general literary background of the Dion. For instance, Nonnus relies on geographical notions spread by the novel in the way he describes India (and its main river the Hydaspes) as a prolongation of Egypt (and the Nile). There may be no direct connection between Heliodorus’ and Nonnus’ explanation of the sources of the Nile (Hld. 2.28; Nonn. Dion. 26.222– 249), the image of the marriage of the river waters and the land exploited in both is a common Egyptian image (Hld. 9.9.4–5; Nonn. Dion. 26.231–235) and the etymology of the Nile as νέη ἰλύς (‘new silt’) mentioned by both (Hld. 9.22.5; Nonn. Dion. 3.275–278) is trite enough, but the parallels talk of the literary and ‘scientiijic’ ground shared by Heliodorus and Nonnus. Heliodorus emphasises the similarity between Egypt and Ethiopia,98 and Ethiopia is ‘Indianised’ by the use of war elephants (9.16.3–9.17.8, 9.22.2),99 the description of enormous animals and plants and exotic peoples,100 and the ijigure of the gymnosophists (esp. 10.2.1 ff.), a transposition of the Indian gymnosophists. Hld.’s Ethiopia makes Nonnus’ India more credible: exotic peoples (26.52–64, 170–182); strange trees and exotic fauna including the elephant (183–211, 295–328); the enormous Indian champion Morrheus (34.168–191), who makes us think of the Ethiopian champion of the novel (Hld. 10.24.3–25.2, 10.30.7–32.2); Nonnus’ Brahmanes, depicted as naked sages (i.e. gymnosophists) with medical skills.101 The descriptions of animals in L&C and Hld. are key elements in the construction of the scenery (in the former Egypt, in the latter Ethiopia).102 From 98 99 100 101 102 9.22.1–7 according to Hydaspes Syene’s local particularities are shared with Ethiopia. Also suggested in AT 3.9.2 ‘The banks were suddenly ijilled with terrifying savages [the Egyptian boukoloi (‘herdsmen’)]. All were huge, black-skinned (not the pure black of the Indians, more as you would imagine a half-case Ethiopian), bare-headed, light of foot but broad of body.’ After the archetype of the Indian kings: Ael. NA 7.37, 13.22, 16.25, 17.29; Philostr. VA 2.12. Analysis in Schneider (2004) 353–357, 412–418. Hld. 10.5.1–2, 10.25.2–10.27.4. See Schneider (2004) 45–48. Nonn. Dion. 24.162–163 (σοφοὺς Βραχμῆνας), 36.344–349 Ἀλὰ σοφοὺς Βραχμῆνας ἀτευχέας εἰς σὲ κορύσσω· | γυμνοὶ γὰρ γεγάασι . . . (‘Well then, I muster against you my wise Brahmans, unarmed. For they go naked . . .), 39.357–359 (curative skills). The main literary model for Egyptian animals is Herodotus’ Βook 2, including descriptions of the crocodile (2.68–70), hippopotamus (71), phoenix (73) and ibis (76), which became school models for the exercise of the ekphrasis (Theon 118.15–17, 120.3–8). AT joins the ijictional tradition by mentioning the phoenix (3.24.3–3.25.7) and the hippopotamus (4.2.1–4.3.5), even though he also describes the crocodile (4.19.1–6), where Heliodorus more realistically mentions the crocodile (6.1.2) and the ibis (6.3.1–3). In general the Ethiopian fauna is described as enormous and exotic: Hld. 9.22.6–7, 10.5.1–2, 10.25.2, 10.26.2, 10.27.1–4. For use by the Author only | © 2016 Koninklijke Brill NV Nonnus and The Novel 573 AT’s much longer description of the hippopotamus Nonnus selects a few body parts and a reference to the animal’s voracity.103 On the contrary, for the elephant104 AT mentions a couple of curious snippets of information (4.4.2–3 pregnancy and life expectancy), focuses on the physical description of the tusks and trunk (4.4.4–5), and mentions its docility with his jockey (4.4.6), to ijinish with an anecdote related to the animal’s foraging habits (4.4.7–4.5.3), whereas Nonnus gives a brief description of the different parts of the animal, comparing them with those of better known animals to enhance the resulting image (26.301–315),105 mentions its longevity (296–299) and black skin (300—to match the equally dark Indians). Nonnus insists on its aggressive behaviour in battle (316–328), in contrast with the peaceful nature described by AT, but in consonance with Hld. 9.18. In fact Nonnus’ Indian War is described as a confrontation between Dionysus’ felines and Indian elephants,106 just as in the Aethiopica the war between the Persians and the Ethiopians becomes a confrontation between the armoured Persian horses and the Ethiopian elephants (9.12–20). 4 Conclusions As a reader of novels (at least D&C, L&C, the Aethiopica and some Christian narratives), Nonnus testiijies to the success of the genre, now classical enough to be incorporated as a major literary referent to the core Greek genre, epic. Nonnus’ choices illustrate what the novel was perceived to do best: constructing erotic plots and subplots, dissecting eros in mythical and (pseudo-)philosophical or gnomic contexts, and seducing the pepaideumenoi with the narrative exploitation of rhetorical patterns and canonical showpieces such as descriptions or paradoxographical morsels.107 103 104 105 106 107 Body parts: hoof (Nonn. Dion. 26.236 διαξύων . . . ὁπλῇ ~ AT 4.2.2 πλὴν ὅσον ἐν χηλῇ σχίζει τὴν ὁπλήν), jaws (Nonn. Dion. 26.240 μηκεδαναῖς γενύεσσιν, 242 διερὴν ἀχάρακτον . . . γένυν ~ AT 4.2.3 γένυς εὐρεῖα, ὅση καὶ παρειά), teeth (Nonn. Dion. 26.241 αἰχμῇ καρχαρόδοντι ~ AT 4.2.3 κυνόδοντας καμπύλους). Voracity: Nonn. Dion. 26.242–244 καὶ διερὴν ἀχάρακτον ἔχων γένυν ἅρπαγα καρπῶν | μιμηλῇ δρεπάνῃ σταχυηφόρα λήια τέμνει, | ἀμητὴρ ἀσίδηρος ἀμαλοφόρου τοκετοῖο ~ AT 4.3.2 ὡς ἔστι μὲν ἀδηφαγώτατον καὶ ποιεῖται τροφὴν ὅλον λήϊον. Vian (1990) 285–290; Miguélez Cavero (2014a) 265–277. Compare Hld. 10.27 (giraffe). 1.22–25, 18.235–236, 27.132–135, 27.237–238, 36.184–188, 36.313–318. I should like to thank Domenico Accorinti for his patience and encouragement, Tim Whitmarsh for constructive comments on this paper and my father for improving my English. For use by the Author only | © 2016 Koninklijke Brill NV