Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Edited by
Andrew Faulkner
Owen Hodkinson
leiden | boston
Acknowledgements vii
Glossary viii
Introduction 1
A. Faulkner and O. Hodkinson
part 1
The Homeric Hymns
part 2
Hellenistic Hymns
part 3
Imperial Greek Hymns
part 4
Orphic Hymns and Magical Hymns
Bibliography 269
Index of Ancient Passages 290
General Index 295
Both the Orphic Hymns and the Orphic Argonautica share the fortune of being
complete texts, rather than fragments, and of having been traditionally con-
sidered as sorry rehash[es].1 The recent interest in both writings related to
the important Orphic discoveries of the last fifty years is in harmony with the
manuscript tradition which sees these two often copied alongside other hymns
such as the Homeric Hymns, the hymns of Callimachus and those by Proclus.
The Orphic Hymns, handed down under the name of Orpheus, are coherent in
composition, in all likelihood come from Asia Minor, and should probably be
assigned to the second or third century ad.
Proceeding from the general to the particular, the opening section of my
paper will deal with narrative techniques in the Orphic Hymns. Within this, the
first part will be dedicated to the ways in which the different Orphic Hymns
relate to one another. It will be followed by a study of an individual hymn,
that to Protogonos. This will lead to an examination of the structure of the
hymns, their word order and to threads of continuity in the parataxis. The
second section will be dedicated to a comparison between the beliefs found
in the hymns and other Orphic texts. Texts other than the Orphic Hymns will
be referred to in the first section but only in order to understand allusions; the
second section will focus on the parallelism between the hymns and other texts
in order to grasp fully the way allusions operated in a larger framework of texts
and beliefs.
* I would like to thank Kale Coghlan, Andrew Faulkner, Owen Hodkinson and an anonymous
reader for their remarks on my paper.
1 Lesky 1966: 812. Sorry rehash refers to the Orphic Argonautica, but also summarizes what is
said by Lesky on the Orphic hymns.
questioned from an early date.2 This will determine whether our focus is on
the proem and the individual hymns or only on the latter. The two are clearly
separated in the manuscripts.3 In the palaeographical tradition, the inclusion,
at the end of the proem, of what has become the first hymn, addressed to
Hecate, reveals that the separation is artificial.4 Despite this, the gods listed
in the proem and in the individual hymns differ: for instance Dionysus is
mentioned in passing, as the father of Semele in pr. 34, whereas Demons
occupy three lines (pr. 3133). As Martin West points out, the word open-
ing and closing the poem, , a ritual usually linked with sacrifice, is
not found in the rest of the corpus.5 Despite these discrepancies, some sim-
ilarities are striking. In the proem, the use of epithets, in the few instances
where they appear, is similar to the characterisation of the gods in the indi-
vidual hymns. For instance , , , And you,
Poseidon, who bears the earth, dark-haired (pr. 5) resonates with , -
, , listen, Poseidon, who bears the earth, dark-haired
(17.1).6
In addition, the ritual () performed in close connection with the
prayer () mirrors what is found in the hymns where the appropriate fumi-
gation is named in the titles. In sum, the vocabulary used and the order in which
the gods appear are strong arguments for coherent composition. The end goal
of both sections is different. The proem includes all the gods who are sum-
moned to the mysteries, as the all-encompassing , Beginning
and End (pr. 42), makes clear, whereas the separate hymns are aimed at one
god or a clear group such as the Nereids (24). Yet despite this difference in aim,
the theme of Beginning and End is close to that of Life and Death found at
both ends of the individual hymns.
The same conclusion about continuity between the poems can be drawn
from the final demand inviting various deities to:
2 Maass 1895: 184; Kern 1940: 2026; Petersen 1868: 389; West 1968: 288289. On the proem, cf.
in this volume Herrero, pp. 224226.
3 Cf. for instance, Laurentianus xxxii 45, ff. 131r132r.
4 The first to notice this was Wilhelm Canter, which explains the discrepancy between the
numbers ascribed to each hymn in the manuscripts and in the editions. Cf. Ricciardelli 2000:
xliixlv with a different opinion on the place of the first hymn and West 1968: 288289
separating the proem and the individual hymns.
5 West 1968: 288.
6 Unless stated otherwise, for the Orphic Hymns, I will be using the edition by Gabriella
Ricciardelli 1995. The translations of the Orphic Hymns are my own.
7 The word is more specific than ritual; it is linked with an offering such as a
sacrifice, but it also includes the whole festival and the hymns themselves.
8 Ricciardelli 1995: 6368; Rudhardt 2008: 174 express doubts about the common authorship.
9 The phrase , use it favourably, friend is not found in all the manu-
scripts, but the dedication of Orpheus to Museaus is present in the good ones. Cf. West
1968: 288289; Ricciardelli 1995: 6368. On the titles in the manuscript tradition, Morand
2001: 103110.
10 On pseudoepigraphy in relation with Orphic writings, Morand 2001: 9294.
11 The Orphic Argonautica, in a strikingly similar way, also plays on this double level: they are
both inspired by the Muse, but are addressed to Musaeus, (Argonautica 7 and 308, Vian
1987: 74 and 96). On the address to Musaeus, cf. in this volume Herrero, pp. 232233.
The reference to Calliope revives the presence of the author, the inspiration
of the Muses, and of the poem itself, as the word of many hymns
(76.12), suggests a few lines later (obviously in echo of Polyhymnia, 76.9).14 In
terms of narration there is a shift, or confusion, between the I referring to
Orpheus the author and the orans, the person addressing the request who bids
12 Boudon-Millot 2007: 134. Bassus is probably a friend () of Galen, cf. n. 1, 175. The
habit of dedicating ones work to a friend or patron is found at earlier dates but becomes
more prevalent in Roman times.
13 Maass 1895: 184185. In Ps. Apollodorus, Library 1.3.2, Apollo is mentioned as the father of
Orpheus.
14 Cf. Maass 1895: 184185; Ricciardelli 1995: n. 12, 330, n. 10, 511. The name Orpheus also
appears at the end of hymn 59: , , here ends the
song of the Moirai woven by Orpheus (59.21). Johann Matthias Gesner is probably right to
assume that the person who added this had an incomplete manuscript (1764: 258). Some
of the surviving manuscripts contain only selections of hymns.
the deity to come to the varied festival for those who reveal the mysteries. A
similar shift happens at the end of the hymn, where the praying I presents a
request in the name of the community at large or for more restricted groups.
The orans thus defines his position vis--vis both the group and the god the
hymn is addressed to. At this stage, Orpheus becomes a figure of inspiration
rather than the person actually speaking, just as the Muses in the Homeric texts.
The confusing identity of the I sets all the elements in place for the orans to
feel that he is re-enacting the song once performed by Orpheus. The parallel
between Orpheus and the later performers is even stronger than in the case of
the Homeric Hymns in the absence of a direct reference to any inspiration by
the Muse. This also provides a further explanation for the difference between
the proem and the rest of the poems.
The proem is followed by eighty-seven short hymns in hexameters. The col-
lection is laid out according to various thematic threads. The second hymn is
dedicated to Prothyraia, a deity closely connected with birth, and the collec-
tion closes with the final word, , old age of the hymn to Thanatos (87.12).
The progression from birth to death is clear, yet the first hymn is dedicated to
Hecate. In the manuscripts preserving the whole corpus, the hymn to Hecate is
found directly following the proem and attached to it. This gives the appear-
ance that the individual hymns open with Prothyraia. Although there is no
doubt that the hymn to Hecate needs to be separated and taken as the first
hymn, the confusion by the scribes in itself is an indication that the coherence
between birth and death was evident. The reason for the presence of Hecate at
the opening of the individual hymns may be related to the particular location
of this goddess in between different worlds; it could also be related to ritu-
als.15
The gods appear in a certain order: the primal entities, such as Night (hymn
3), Ouranos (hymn 4) and Ether (hymn 5) appear first. These gods, including
Protogonos (hymn 6), play an important role at the beginning of the Orphic
cosmogony. Hymns 7 to 9 are addressed to various elements of the sky, the
Stars, the Sun and the Moon. Then come hymns to Nature (hymn 10), to an
all-encompassing Pan (hymn 11), and to Heracles (hymn 12), a deity related to
the cosmos in his allness,16 but also to the sky since his labours are interpreted
as twelve trials leading from East to West, from Dawn to Night. Immediately
after, Cronos (hymn 13), Rhea (hymn 14), Zeus (hymns 15, 19 and 20), Hera
(hymn 16), Poseidon (hymn 17), and Pluto (hymn 18) follow the logic of cos-
mogonies in a way comparable to Hesiods Theogony.17 As can be expected,
Dionysus and his cortge are prominent. Fritz Grafs suggestion to follow a
more ritual and at times architectural approach to interpretation is excellent.18
Furthermore, attention to night and day and their function in mystery cults
and the allusions to nocturnal rituals also add to our understanding of the
text.19
The hymns close to one another often share a connection; allness is a fea-
ture of the hymns dedicated to Pan (hymn 11) and to Heracles (hymn 12).
Further examples of this kind are countless. For instance, in the hymn to
Dionysus Bassareus Trieterikos the first epithet , born from fire
(hymn 45.1), is used to mark this Dionysus as the son of Semele, the goddess
addressed in the previous hymn (hymn 44). In the same way, Protogonos-
Phanes is announced in the hymn to Ether, qualified as , glowing in
heights (5.4).
As I consider further the ways in which the hymns relate to one another and
operate as a whole, a closer look at one text, the sixth hymn to Protogonos, will
be helpful:
6.
, , ,
, ,
, ,
, , ,
, , ,
,
.
, , , ,
.
17 On the logic of the order in which the hymns appear, cf. Petersen 1868: 389390; Dieterich
1891: 7886; Ziegler 1942: 13211323; Ricciardelli 2000: xlxlii.
18 Graf 2009: 169173. The ritual logic of the hymns has the consequence that a structuralist
approach to the offerings or to the succession of gods is quite unhelpful, Martin 2007:
8082; Morand 2001: 151152.
19 Graf 2009: 179.
The request is made for the , those who reveal the mysteries to
come rejoicing. This is parallel to other hymns, where a demand is presented
for a group of members of the religious hierarchy: for the initiates (), for
the people at large (), the new initiates (, ,
), the boukolos () or the performer of initiations ().22
As in this hymn to Protogonos, the Orphic hymns can be divided into an
invocation, a main body or amplification, and a request to the god. In the great
majority of cases, the invocation takes the form of a verb followed by the name
of the god, or sometimes an epiclesis appearing in the vocative. Without any
transition the invocation is followed by the body of the text, or amplification,
composed of a long string of epithets and sometimes a short participial or a
relative clause. The hymns end with a request addressed to the god named in
the title.
The invocations are fairly formulaic in the sense that they are limited to only
a few terms of request, such as I call, I invoke, , or as is
found in the hymn to Protogonos (6.1). Other hymns ask the deity to listen or to
come, with verbs such as or /, in the imperative or the optative.
A few open with only the name of the addressee of the hymn at the beginning of
the verse.23 The amplification derives from the invocation in such a way that it
is often unclear where one ends and where the other begins. In many cases, I do
not believe that we can reach a decision regarding the end of the invocation.24
Since the final request often uses the same vocabulary as the invocation,
this part will be discussed before the main body of the text. In the concluding
section, the Orphic Hymns call upon the deity and ask for his or her presence or
attention. This section differs from the invocation in the sense that it presents
a full request such as a favourable presence at a ritual, prosperity, peace or
health. Characteristically, it begins with the formula, , /
but blessed , which is followed by the actual demand. These words are found
at the beginning of the line and are specific to final requests. In contrast with
the amplification that flows out of the invocation, the final demand is clearly
separated from the rest of the hymn, with the particle , but or with a
verb in the imperative calling the deity. In all cases, attention is drawn through
the change in tone to the content of the demand. The fact that the temporal
particle now , now, blessed (3.12),
, I beg you now (21.6), , , , goddess, I beg you now
(44.10), I call you now (50.10)is found only in this part of
the hymn shows that we are in a different temporal space; we are moving out of
the mythical time of the hymns narrative to a more present and earthly time,
the present shared by the hymns narrator and its external audience.25 On the
other hand, the expressions , , therefore, blessed (73.7),
, , , therefore, we beg you, blessed (82.6) at the same time
clearly define the beginning of the request and announce the conclusion.
In terms of content, it has been observed that in the requests little attention
is paid to the afterlife. As Walter Burkert has shown, mysteries offer promises
for this life as well as for the next one.26 According to both Paul Veyne and
Francis Vian, the only anxieties of these hymns are related to this world,
to the crudest reality.27 I would not go quite so far. There is an interest in
the Underworld, for the gods, as well as for life on earth. True enough, the
requests do not show great interest in the afterlife, but the abundant use of
words incorporating the euphemistic adverb proves a general apprehension
related to divine manifestations. The gods are able to manifest themselves in
human life and with gruesome effect. Fritz Graf reveals a dark side of the Orphic
Hymns, in an illuminating study of the meaning of the epithet , good
31 of 122 Bernab. References to Orphic fragments are given in Bernab 20042007: pars 2.
32 Aristophanes, Aves 695. The meaning of is unfertilized, in de Lacy 1992.
33 of 114 Bernab.
34 Hopman-Govers 2001: 3549; Morand 2005: 223233.
35 Morand 2010a: 157176.
36 Rudhardt 2008: 206207.
37 For further accounts on the beliefs, cf. Rudhardt 1991: 263289; Morand 2001: 153199;
Rudhardt 2008: 251325.
38 In particular, of Bernab 8081, 9699, 121167.
39 Other authors provide fuller descriptions of the anatomy of Protogonos-Phanes, of 135
Bernab, cf. West 1983: n. 85, 202203.
40 The manuscripts have or l. Canters correction to the rare
Ericepaios is fully justified.
, , ,
, , ,
41 The trieteric periodevery two yearsis related to Dionysus presence in the Under-
world and to the mysteries related to Semele. Cf. hymns 44.7 and 54.3.
42 For further comments on the notion of assimilation in the Orphic hymns, Morand 2010b:
143153. With a different angle on the topic, cf. Herrero de Juregui 2010, esp. 9093 and
in this volume pp. 239242.
43 Macrobius, Saturnalia 1.18.22 ff. (cf. of 540 f Bernab).
44 Lang 1881: 27.50 suggests with some doubts () to connect it to .
G. Ricciardelli connects the name Priapus with 6.7. Cf. Ricciardelli 2000:
255; Hunsucker 1974: 158160.
45 Parker 1995: 494.
not make explicit reference to Zeus, we need to address the question of the
presence of this part of the myth in the Orphic Hymns.
In the Derveni papyrus the ingestion of the world is described thus (col-
umn 16):
[] [] [].
,
, (5)
, .
[] [] ,
[] [].
It has been revealed that (Orpheus) stated that the sun is a genital
organ. He says that the things which now are arise from existent
things:
of the penis of the first-born king, and on him grew all the immortals,
blessed gods and goddesses,
the rivers, lovely springs and all the rest, all that had then been born; he
himself alone became.
In these words he hints that the things which exist have always existed,
and those which now are arise from existent things.46
On the other hand, the Orphic Hymn to Zeus alludes to the re-creation of the
world
, ,
,
O king, through your head came to light the following divine beings:
Mother Earth and the high-resounding summits of the mountains
And the sea and all that the sky set in order within.47
15.35
46 Derveni papyrus, col. 16.18. Text: Betegh 2004: 34; Translation: Janko 2001: 25.
47 Cf. of 241 Bernab.
Since the hymn is focusing on the process of the creation of the world, we
can leave aside the question of the phallophagy in the Derveni papyrus.48 The
creation happening through Zeus head is probably a reduplication of the birth
of Athena.49 The words must allude to the names of
Zeus and Phanes. Thus despite the apparent absence of Zeus in the hymn to
Protogonos, the myth related to Orphic divine rulers is in the background, as
we can observe when taking into account all the different testimonies.
Conclusions
in the Homeric Hymns, is not present, but these texts do not just lay down a
list of epithets leaving it to the gods to choose whatever suits them. A certain
rhythm can be found in some of the hymns: a particular name of the god or a
verse dedicated to a summing up of his or her qualities often create a climax
before the final demand.
Close attention to one specific hymn, that of Protogonos, has also allowed for
consideration of the literary form of these poems. Beyond a general impression
of paratactic order, they have a certain underlying syntax. This last characteris-
tic makes it at times difficult to know how to connect words, but versification
as well as a good knowledge of the ways in which the collection works provide
interpretative clues. Play on words and on sounds, as well as the use of rhetori-
cal or stylistic devices such as anaphors, alliterations, assonances, reinforce the
idea that unity is to be found beyond the words. The enigmatic nature of these
texts is appropriate for religious discourse and in particular for Orphic texts,
as can already be observed in a much earlier text, the Derveni papyrus. The
reader is invited to find threads of meanings through the intentional opacity
of the text. The allusions, the speculation on the meaning of the divine names
and the wordplay on numbers would have been an ideal ground for mystical
interpretations such as the ones attested in Pythagorean circles.
In terms of belief, the hymn to Protogonos with its allusions to both Zeus
and Dionysus shows that the Orphic Hymns are in harmony with what can be
found in other texts attributed to Orpheus. In this context, it is also possible to
show the kinds of narratives, based on that specific hymn, which could be con-
structed by an audience. Despite the difficulties arising from the fragmentary
nature of the parallels and the allusive character of the Orphic Hymns, further
investigation of these somewhat neglected texts is worthwhile.