Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T11:34:10.809Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A woman of consequence: Pandora in Hesiod's Works and Days*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 March 2012

Lilah-Grace Fraser
Lilah-Grace Fraser
Affiliation:
Durham University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The Pandora myth as told in Hesiod's Works and Days (59–105) has been criticised since antiquity as internally inconsistent. In the nineteenth and most of the twentieth century this led editors to propose radical atheteses and emendations to resolve the inconsistencies. Although in recent decades the impetus has swung more towards conservative editing, and seemingly endless work has been done on the myth, the passage still has not been fully understood in terms of its purpose within the Hesiodic corpus. In this paper I argue that the ‘suspect’ lines are perfectly consistent when understood in terms of the intertextual relationship between Hesiod's Works and Days and his Theogony, a relationship which has been established by scholars such as Jean-Pierre Vernant (1980), Glenn Most (1993) and Jenny Strauss Clay (2003). I argue that, in representing Pandora in Works and Days, Hesiod is engaged in a project of expansion which had its roots in his Theogony. Pandora is of more importance to the Iron Age Works and Days than to the divine Theogony; so she is described in greater detail and becomes more of a prominent figure in her own right. Furthermore, I argue that Hesiod does not stop there, but enacts an expansion of the expansion within Works and Days itself, from Zeus' commands to the gods for Pandora's creation at Op. 60–68, to the execution of those commands at 70–80.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Cambridge Classical Journal , Volume 57 , December 2011 , pp. 9 - 28
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s). Published online by Cambridge University Press 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

WORKS CITED

Allen, T. W. (1915) ‘The date of Hesiod’, JHS, 35, 85–99.Google Scholar
Arrighetti, G. (1998) Esiodo: Opere, Turin.Google Scholar
Beall, E. F. (1989) ‘The contents of Hesiod's Pandora jar: Erga 94–98’, Hermes 117.2, 227–30.Google Scholar
Blümer, W. (2001) Interpretation archaischer Dichtung. Die mythologischen Partien der Erga Hesiods, Münster.Google Scholar
Brown, A. (1997) ‘Aphrodite and the Pandora Complex’, CQ 47.1, 26–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Byrne, S. (1998) ‘Ἐλπίς in Works and Days 90–105’, SyllClass 9, 37–46.Google Scholar
Clay, J. S. (2003) Hesiod's Cosmos, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clay, J. S. (2009) ‘Works and Days: tracing the path to Arete’, in Montanari, F., Rengakos, A., Tsagalis, C. (eds.) Brill's Companion to Hesiod, Leiden, 71–90.Google Scholar
Farnell, L. R. (1896) The cults of the Greek states vols.1, 2, Oxford.Google Scholar
Goettling, C. (1843) Hesiodi Carmina, London.Google Scholar
Graziosi, B., Haubold, J. (2005) Homer: the resonance of epic, London.Google Scholar
Haubold, J. (2010) ‘Shepherd, farmer, poet, sophist: Hesiod on his own reception’ in Boys-Stones, G., Haubold, J. (eds.) Plato and Hesiod, Oxford, 11–30.Google Scholar
Hays, H. B. (1918) Notes on the Works and Days of Hesiod, Chicago.Google Scholar
Heath, M. (1985) ‘Hesiod's didactic poetry’, CQ 35.2, 245–63.Google Scholar
Heitsch, E. (1963) ‘Das Prometheus-Gedicht bei Hesiod’, RhM 1–15.Google Scholar
Kirchhoff, A. (1889) Hesiodos' Mahnlieder an Perses, Berlin.Google Scholar
Koning, H. (2010a) ‘Plato's Hesiod: not Plato's alone’, in Boys-Stones, G., Haubold, J. (eds.) Plato and Hesiod, Oxford, 89–110.Google Scholar
Koning, H. (2010b) Hesiod: the Other Poet, Leiden.Google Scholar
Lehrs, K. (1837) Quaestiones Epicae, Regimontii Prussorum.Google Scholar
Lendle, O. (1957) Die Pandorasage bei Hesiod, Würzburg.Google Scholar
Lisco, E. (1903) Quaestiones Hesiodeae criticae et mythologicae, Göttingen.Google Scholar
Marquardt, P. (1982) ‘Hesiod's ambiguous view of women’, CPh 77, 283–91.Google Scholar
Martin, R. (2004) ‘Hesiod and the didactic double’, Synthesis 11, 31–54.Google Scholar
Mazon, P. (1914) Les Travaux et les Jours, Paris.Google Scholar
Mazur, P. S. (2004) ‘Παρονομασία in Hesiod Works and Days 80–85’, CPh 99.3, 243–6.Google Scholar
Mondi, R. (1986) ‘Tradition and innovation in the Hesiodic Titanomachy’, TAPhA 116, 25–48.Google Scholar
Most, G. (1993) ‘Hesiod and the textualization of personal temporality’, in Arrighetti, G. and Montanari, F. (eds.) La componente autobiografica nella poesia greca e latina fra realtà e artificio letterario, Pisa, 73–92.Google Scholar
Most, G. (2006) Hesiod: Theogony, Works and Days, Testimonia, Harvard.Google Scholar
Most, G. (2008) ‘Two Hesiodic papyri’ in Bastianini, G., Casanova, A. (eds.) Esiodo: cent'anni di papiri, Florence, 55–70.Google Scholar
Musäus, I. (2004) Der Pandoramythos bei Hesiod und seine Rezeption bis Erasmus von Rotterdam, Göttingen.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelson, S. (1997) ‘The justice of Zeus in Hesiod's fable of the hawk and the nightingale’, CJ 92, 235–47.Google Scholar
Oldfather, C. H. (1968) Diodorus of Sicily in twelve volumes I: Books I and II Ch.1–34, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
Paley, F. A. (1861) The epics of Hesiod, London.Google Scholar
Panofsky, D. and E., (1956) Pandora's box: the changing aspects of a mythical symbol, New York.Google Scholar
Parker, R. (2005) Polytheism and society at Athens, Oxford.Google Scholar
Pertusi, A. (1955) (ed.) Scholia vetera in Hesiodi Opera et Dies, Milan.Google Scholar
Pirenne-Delforge, V. (1994) L'Aphrodite grecque: contribution à l'étude de ses cultes et de sa personnalité dans le panthéon archaïque et classique, Kernos Supplement 4, Athens.Google Scholar
Pucci, (2009) in Montanari, F., Rengakos, A., Tsagalis, C. (eds.) Brill's Companion to Hesiod, Leiden, 37–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rowe, C. (1983) ‘“Archaic thought” in Hesiod’, JHS 103, 124–35.Google Scholar
Rzach, A. (1958) Hesiodi carmina, (3rd. edn.) Stuttgart.Google Scholar
Sinclair, T. A. (1932) Hesiod Works and Days, London.Google Scholar
Solmsen, F. (1949) Hesiod and Aeschylus, Cornell.Google Scholar
Solmsen, F., Merkelbach, R., West, M. L. (1990) Hesiodi Theogonia, Opera et Dies, Scutum, Fragmenta Selecta, (3rd. edn.) Oxford.Google Scholar
Sussman, L. S. (1978) ‘Workers and drones: labor, idleness and gender definition in Hesiod's beehive’, Arethusa 11, 27–41.Google Scholar
Twesten, A. (1815) Commentatio critica de Hesiodi carmine quod inscribitur Opera et Dies, Kiel.Google Scholar
Verdenius, W. J. (1971) ‘A “hopeless” line in Hesiod, Works and Days 96’, Mnemosyne 24, 225–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verdenius, W. J. (1980) A Commentary on Hesiod Works and Days vv.1–382, Leiden.Google Scholar
Vernant, J. P. (1980) transl. Lloyd, J., Myth and society in ancient Greece, Sussex.Google Scholar
Walcot, P. (1961a) ‘The composition of the Works and Days’, REG 74, 1–19.Google Scholar
Walcot, P. (1961b) ‘Pandora's jar, Erga 83–105’, Hermes 89, 249–51.Google Scholar
Walcot, P. (1966) Hesiod and the Near East, Cardiff.Google Scholar
West, M. L. (1966) Hesiod Theogony, Oxford.Google Scholar
West, M. L. (1978) Hesiod Works and Days, Oxford.Google Scholar
Wickkiser, B. L. (2010) ‘Hesiod and the fabricated woman: poetry and visual art in the Theogony’, Mnemosyne 63, 557–76.Google Scholar
Wilamowitz-Moellendorf, U. von (1928) Hesiodos' Erga, Berlin.Google Scholar
Wolkow, B. M. (2007) ‘The mind of a bitch: Pandora's motive and intent in the Erga’, Hermes 135, 247–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zarecki, J. P. (2007) ‘Pandora and the good Eris in Hesiod’, GRBS 47, 5–29.Google Scholar
Zeitlin, F. (1996) Playing the other: gender and society in classical Greek literature, Chicago.Google Scholar