¹ On iconography, LIMC Aktaion, with bibl.; Leach passim; Trendall, /Cambitoglou, BICS Suppl. xlii (London 1983) 104Google Scholar no. 59a; Schlam 87–95, 98–105; Davies, M., JHS cvi (1986) 182–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

² Acknowledged pre-Roman representations of the offense decorate Hellenistic relief bowls. Siebert, G., Recherches sur les ateliers de bols à reliefs du Péloponnèse à l'époque helláenistique (Paris 1978) 248–50Google Scholar; and a 1st-century BC gem, LIMC Aktaion, no. 115a, p. 464, pl. 362; and Schlam 98–9 and n. 73; but for a Roman date, Schefold, K., Die Göttersagen in der klassischen und hellenistischen Kunst (Munich 1981) 144 and n. 43.Google Scholar

³ Hesiod: fr. 217A, West, M. L., The Hesiodic Catalogue of women (Oxford 1985) 87–8, 178Google Scholar; first published by Renner, T., HSCP lxxxiii (1978) 277–93.Google Scholar Probably also the fr. 346; see esp. Casanova, A., RivFil xcvii (1969) 31–46Google Scholar; Cirio, A. M., ‘Fonti letterarie ed iconografiche del mito di Atteone’ BPEC xxv (1977) 44–60Google Scholar; Janko, R., Phoenix xxxviii (1984) 299–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar Stesichoros: PMG 236; for the attribution to the Europeia, Bowra, C. M., Greek lyric poetry ² (Oxford 1961) 99Google Scholar; Studies 16. Akousilaos; FGrH ₂ F₃₃; on Akousilaos generally, ibid. 47–58, 375–86; Fränkel, H., Dichtung und Philosophie des frühen Griechentums (New York 1951) 448–50Google Scholar; Bower, D., Who was who in the Greek world (Oxford 1982)Google Scholar s.v. ‘Acusilaus’.

⁴ Phrynichos; Suda s.v. Φρύνιχος. Aeschylus: fr. 417–24 Mette; Séchan, L., Études sur la tragédie grecque dans ses rapports avec la céramique (Paris 1926) 132–8Google Scholar; Mette, H. J., Der verlorene Aischylos (Berlin 1963) 134–6Google Scholar; Kossatz passim; Gantz, T., AJPh ci (1980) 147, 156–8.Google Scholar Iophon: Suda s.v. Ἰοφῶν. Kleophon: Suda, s.v. Κλεοφῶν.

⁵ Deinarchos: FGrH 399 F I. Some scholars postulate a Hellenistic epyllion to explain the Apollodoran fr. (n. 3) and P.Med. inv. 123, also to provide a Greek model for Ovid's account; Powell, J. U., Collectanea Alexandrina (Oxford 1925) 71–2 (Apollod.)Google Scholar; Daris, S., in Proc 12 Intern Cong Pap (Toronto 1970) 99–111Google Scholar; Otis, B., Ovid as an epic poet (Cambridge 1966) 396–98Google Scholar; Schlam 84 n. 5, 97; esp. Grilli, A., PP xxvi (1971) 366–7Google Scholar, suggesting attribution to Nikandros, who identified dogs of the ‘Indian’ breed as descendants of Aktaion's pack (Pollux v 38 = Nik. fr. 7 Sehn.), no guarantee that he actually told the story; Gow, A. S. F. and Scholfield, A., Nicander. The poems and poetical fragments (Cambridge 1953) 215.Google Scholar

⁶ P. Mich. inv. 1447, verso, col. II. 1–6 ( = Hesiod fr. 217A, [n. 3]:

Ἀκταίων ὁ Ἀρισταί[ο]υ καὶ Αὐ[τονόης, τῶν Σεμέ-]

λης ἐφιέμενος γάμων αυτ[ [ca. 14]

το πρὸς τοῦ μητροπάτορο[ς [ca. 6 μετεμορ-]]

φώθη εἰ[ς] ἐλάφου δόκησιν διὰ βο[υλὴν] Ἀρτέμ[ι-] δος καὶ διεσπαράσθη ὑπὸ τῶν ἐ[α]υτ[οῦ] κυνῶν, ὥ[ς]

φησιν Ἡσίοδος ἐν Γυναικῶν Κα[τ]αλ[ό]γωι.

⁷ …ἵνα δὴ μὴ γυναῖκα Σεμέλην λάβοι; Paus, ix 2.3 (= Stes. PMG 236 [n. 3], trans. Frazer, J. G., Pausanias' description of Greece i–vi (London 1913).Google Scholar

⁸ …ὅτι ἐμνηστεύσατο Σεμέλην; Apollod. bibl. iii 4.4 (= AKous. FGrH ₂ F ₃₃.

⁹ Bacchae 337–41:

ὅ μὴ πάθῃς σύ·

Cf. 228–30; 1227–8; 1290–2. On Aktaion in the Bacchae, Studies 102–80.

¹⁰ Kall. Hy. v. 113–14, trans. Bulloch.

¹¹ Diod. iv 81. 4.

¹² Early: Schartz, E., Annali dell'Ist. di Corr. Arch. liv (1882) 295–6Google Scholar; Preller, /Robert, GrMyth i (1894) 459.Google Scholar Recent: LIMC Aktaion 454; Leach 309–12; Lloyd-Jones, H., JHS ciii (1983) 99Google Scholar; Janko (n. 3) 300–1, 306; Schlam (1984) 83–7, 95–7.

¹³ Arguments for the wooing of Semele in fifthcentury Athens: Hoffmann, H., JbHamburg xii (1967) 9–34Google Scholar; Kossatz 142–50; Gantz (n. 4) 147, 156–8; see esp. Renner (n. 3) 284– 5.

¹⁴ Literary-historical: Guimond LIMC 454, who links the poet Stesichoros and the logographer Akousilaos (archaic sources) then attributes the boast to ‘les tragiques…et…les historiens’ (i.e. Eur. and Diod.), the bath to ‘les poètes Alexandriens’, then notes the Diodoran story, though Diodoros alone represents ‘les historiens’. Intellectual-historical: Leach 309–11.

¹⁵ Explicit, Cirio (n. 3) 44, 45; Lloyd-Jones (n. 12); cf. Kossatz 142–3, 148, who considers the courtship of Semele the earliest ‘historic’ version but postulates a lost ‘pre-historic’ version concerned with the hunt.

¹⁶ See the tentative restoration of lines 2 and 3 of the Michigan Papyrus entry (see n. 6) in Renner (n. 3) 286; and Leach 309, who calls it ‘a scrap of a plot’ based on the ‘transgression of paternal authority’, and asserts that ‘Zeus’ summoning of his virgin daughter as avenger is appropriate to the sexual politics of the family’. In Greek society the very displeasure of such a patriarch would have been enough to forestall the event (cf. the impunity with which Hippodameia's father narrowed her matrimonial options). Janko (n. 3) 301 emphasizes ‘the clement of incest’ however, as Kossatz notes,one would not necessarily frown upon such a match, since such intra-familial marriages are attested; 144 and n. 838. Also, it is clear from Pausanias' understanding of Stesichoros that Zeus was constrained to step in and prevent marriage, not the simple intent to marry; it looks as though they were betrothed. A. Brelich attributes Aktaion's death to Artemis' resentment of the hunter's desire to marry Semele, an interpretation contradicted by the anger of Zeus emphasized by Apollodoros, /Akousilaos, ; Gli eroi greci (Rome 1958) 252 n. 83.Google Scholar

¹⁷ LIMC Aktaion 454 (rivalry with Zeus); cf. Casanova (n. 3) 43–6, who rightly explains POxy 2509's reference to the birth of Dionysos as an indication that in that version Aktaion had died for wooing Semele; followed by Cirio (n. 3) 47, and Janko (n. 3) 301. To Kossatz, 145, the Deinarchos fr. suggests that Aktaion was an opponent like Pentheus and Lykourgos; if so, we may be dealing with the Attic king Aktaion and not the Boiotian hero. Wilamowitz, and now Janko, suggest a lost version of the death of Semele analogous to the story of Koronis and Ischys, with a pregnant Semele betraying Zeus; von Wilamowitz-Moellendorf, U., Hellenistische Dichtung in der Zeit des Kallimachos ii (Berlin 1924) 23 n. 2Google Scholar; Janko (n. 3) 301 n. 12.

¹⁸ Pind. P. III 96–9, O. II 22–34; and cf. e.g. Nonn. Dion, xlvi 289–303; Studies 7–21.

¹⁹ Studies 21–2, 161–3.

²⁰ Aktaion's death is not intrinsically Dionysiac, though the analogy was exploited, e.g. Bacchae 339 (διεσπάσαντο). Reference to this sort of punishment is made in the Sumerian tale of the shepherd Dumuzi (Kramer, S. N., The sacred marriage rite [Bloomington, Ind. 1969] 124)Google Scholar, as David Halperin has kindly pointed out to me. Aktaion is traditionally devoured, as by wild beasts; cf. [Hes.] fr. ap. Apollod, (n. 3) and the predatory kill of Il. xvi 156–62; on the background of the canine attack in Greek ritual, Burkert, W., Homo necans (Berkeley 1983) 83–130.Google Scholar

²¹ Cf. Dodds, infra n. 97.

²² Eur. Bacchae 339–40; Kall. Hy. v 113–14.

²³ Leach 309–10; also Mercanti, E., Neapolis ii (1914) 131 n. 1Google Scholar; Wilamowitz (n. 17); Zieliński, Th., Eos xxix (1926) 4–5.Google Scholar

²⁴ FGrH 3 F 92.

²⁵ Schwartz (n. 12); Ziehen, J., in Bonner Studien Reinhard Kekulé gewidmet (Berlin 1890) 184Google Scholar; Preller, /Robert, GrMyth ii 1 (1920) 128 and n. 3.Google Scholar

²⁶ L. Castiglioni cites the essentially antiquarian stance of the Hellenistic poets and hypothesizes that Hy. v first versifies an older mythographic tradition; “Studi alessandrini II—Atteone e Artemis”, in Studi critici offerti da antichi discepoli a Carlo Pascal nel suo XXV anno di insegnamento (Catania 1913) 63–9; cf. Otis (n. 5) 397–8. For Wilamowitz, (n. 17) 22–4, the strongly Artemisian character of the Teiresias story in Hy. v reflects Pherekydes' creation of Teiresias' intrusion on the analogy of Aktaion's discovery. Kleinknecht, H., “ΛΟΥΤΡΑ ΤΗΣ ΠΑΛΛΑΔΟΣ’, Hermes lxxiv (1939) 334–9Google Scholar; followed by McKay, K.J., The poet at play. Kallimachos: The bath of Pallas (Leiden 1962) 45Google Scholar; Bulloch, A. W., Callimachus: The fifth hymn (Cambridge 1985) 19Google Scholar; cf. Casanova (n. 3) 44 and n. 2. Zieliński (n. 23) 1–7, and now Schlam, 96, argue that Kailimachos recasts both myths, making Athena, Chariklo and Teiresias hunters as he makes Aktaion see Artemis. The brief but cogent remarks of Cahen, E. seem to have gone unnoticed; Callimaque et son œuvre poétique (Paris 1929) 359Google Scholar; Les Hymnes de Callimaque (Paris 1930) 238–9.

²⁷ Roux, J., Euripide, Les Bacchantes ii (Paris 1972) 361Google Scholar; Blome, P., AK xx (1977) 43.Google Scholar M. W. Haslam has also maintained the pre-Kallimachean origin of Artemis' bath in his paper ‘The baths of Pallas: callida iunctura in Callimachus Hymn 5’, delivered at the Annual Meeting of the American Philological Association, Washington, D.C., 30 Dec. 1985.

²⁸ Paus. x 31. 4, trans. Frazer.

²⁹ The creation of paradigmatic myths is welldocumented for Homer; Willcock, M. M., CQ xiv (1964) 144–54.Google Scholar Also documented, however, is the strict relationship of this invention to the technique of oral composition, which tends to elaborate a comparison by progressively modifying the main story as well as a selectively presented tradition adduced; ibid., HSCP lxxxi (1977) 41–54; Lang, M. L., in Approaches to Homer (Austin 1983) 140–64.Google Scholar

³⁰ For the expression and its history, Eur. fr. 484; cf. Kleinknecht (n. 26) 323–4, 334, who asserts that the creation of a new offense does not violate the principle ἀμάρτυρον οὐδὲν ἀείδω because only one clement is altered, not the whole tale; and Bulloch (n. 26) 161–2.

³¹ It is sometimes suggested that the statement is made ironically to cloak the creation of a new version, e.g. Schlam 96.

³² The dogs' aftermath is attested both earlier and later than the exempla: POxy 2509 (Hes. Ehoiai [?]); Nik. fr. 97; Apollod. 4.4; iii Pollux v 38 (= Nik.); and cf. the Boiotian pyxis, infra n. 37. Dog catalogue: ‘Hes.’ fr. ap. Apollod, (n. 3); Aischyl.fr. 423 Mette; P.Med. inv. 123; Ov. met. iii 206–36; Pollux v 47 (= Aischyl.). On canine problems, Casanova (n. 3); Grilli (n. 5) 354–67; Colonna, A., Sileno i (1975) 297–300Google Scholar; Janko (n. 3); and esp. Cirio (n. 3), with further bibliography.

³³ ὁρᾷς τὸν Ἀκτεωνος ἄθλιον μόρον…ὃ μὴ πάθῃς σύ, says Kadmos (Bacchae 337, 341); on consolation, e.g. Kleinknecht (n. 26) 338.

³⁴ Cf. McKay (n. 26) 46 n. 13: ‘The real reason [that there is no metamorphosis] is that he is not telling the story for its own sake'. Transformation first appears in the 2nd and 3rd quarters of the fifth century on a South Italian terracotta relief and relief vessel, in a series of Kyzikene coins and on the Attic Lykaon Painter's splendid red-figured bellkrater in Boston; LIMC Aktaion no. 76, p. 461, pl. 356 (relief); no. 77, p. 461 (vessel fr. ); nos 41 and 42,pp. 458–9, pl. 353 (coins); no. 81, p. 462, pl. 357 (krater). See Studies 232–3.

³⁵ Cf. Öhler, R., Mythologische Exempla in der älteren griechischen Dichtung (Diss. Basel 1925) 121Google Scholar; Pfeiffer, R., SB München (1934 Heft 10) 34 and n. 3Google Scholar; Bulloch (n. 26) 218.

³⁶ A Boiotian pyxis, dated c. 470, depicts the recovery of Aktaion's body by his family as Artemis departs and the dogs search (Athens, National Museum 437 [or 3554]); LIMC Aktaion no. 121, p. 465, pl. 363; and esp. Bethe, E., AthMitt xv (1890) 240–2, pl. 8Google Scholar; cf. also Séchan (n. 4) 138. On a volute-krater by the Painter of the Woolley Satyrs the bad tidings are borne to Autonoe and Aristaios (Louvre CA 3482); LIMC Aktaion no. 16, p. 456, pl. 348; and esp. Devambez, P., MonPiot lv (1967) 77–104Google Scholar; K. Schauenburg sees Kadmos rather than Aristaios, , ‘Aktaion in der unteritalischen Vasenmalerei’, JDAI lxxxiv (1969) 35.Google Scholar See also Studies 14–15 and (on the sacrifices offered in Hy. v) 11 n. 10

³⁷ The bond of affection emerges from the dogs' search for their master, their lamentations at the news of his fate and the solace found in the image of Aktaion made by Cheiron ([Hes.] fr.POxy 2509; Apollod, [n. 8]); also fifth- and fourth-century iconography (n. 63 and LIMC Aktaion no. 122, p. 465; no. 124, p. 465, pl. 363).

³⁸ Cf. Kleinknecht (n. 26) 335: ‘Der Ort, wo den Aktaion sein Verhängnis ereilt, ist ganz unbestimmt gelassen’. It is sometimes assumed that the circumstances corresponded to those surrounding Teiresias' sight, e.g. REI 1 (1893) s.v. ‘Aktaion’1210; Leach 310.

³⁹ Kithairon is named as the site of Aktaion's death, presumably after his flight from the hounds, Eur. Bacchae 1290–2; Apollod, bibl. iii 4.4; Philostr. iun. im. 1.14.

⁴⁰ Gargaphia, Ov. met. iii 155; Hyg. fab. 181(with fons Parthenius). Perhaps the original setting was the spring shown to Paus, at ‘Aktaion's Bed’ (Ἀκταίωνος κοίτη ix 2.3). If so, poetic tradition may have transferred the myth to the much more widely known sanctuary because of the role both Aktaion and Gargaphia played in the conflict which culminated in the battle of Plataiai; Spano, G., Atti dell'Accademia di Archeologia, Lettere e Belle Arti x (1928) 34–5Google Scholar; Kossatz 152; Studies 82–3. On Aktaion's Bed, Edmondson, C. N., JHS lxxxiv (1964) 153–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁴¹ Blome (n. 28) 43.

⁴² Trendall, A. D. and Webster, T. B., Illustrations of Greek drama (London 1971) 62Google Scholar, probably based on the interpretation given by Mette to fr. 420–1, concerned with the virtue of certain women, and to fr. 423, with four of the dogs' names attributed to Aeschylus by Pollux repeated or echoed in Hyginus' much longer list; Mette Verlorene (n. 4) 134–6. See also Kossatz 145 and n. 851; Gantz (n. 4) 157 and n. 88; Schlam 85 n. 9.

⁴³ On Apollod, and his sources, Frazer, J. G., Apollodorus. The Library (Cambridge, Mass. 1921) ix–xx.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ On Asklepiades, , RE ii 2 (1896)Google Scholar s.v. ‘Asklepiades (27)’ 1628.

⁴⁵ Cf. Frazer's ‘the more general opinion’. Only L. Malten deals with the Apollodoran passage per se and not just the fr. of Akousilaos; Kyrene, Sagengeschichtliche und historische Untersuchungen, Philolog. Untersuch, xx (1911) 19 and n. 1. While his discussion of its structure is sound, that of its implications is not, so strong is his desire to establish the archaic exclusivity of the story of Semele, thus making it the inevitable Hesiodic choice: ‘Zwei Versionen werden hier geschieden, ein älterer des Akousilaos, und eine vulgäre’ so also Mette Verlorene (n. 4) 134.

⁴⁶ Malten (n. 45), who identifies οἱ πλείονες with the subject of καί φασι, again, as late sources, ‘in erster Linie Kallimachos’.

⁴⁷ Also Cahen (Hymnes, n. 26) 238–9; cf. Wilamowitz (n. 26) 23 and n. 2; Colonna (n. 32) 298.

⁴⁸ On sources, Oldfather, C. H., Diodorus of Sicily (New York 1933) i, pp. xvi–xxiiiGoogle Scholar; ii, pp. viii–x; Canfora, L., Diodoro Siculo, Biblioleca storica (palermo 1986) pp. ix–xxv.Google Scholar

⁴⁹ On the myth in Campanian wall-painting, Leach passim; LIMC Aktaion 469.

⁵⁰ On the ethical orientation of Diodoros, Oldfather (n. 48) i, pp. xx–xxi; Canfora (n. 48).

⁵¹ On the nailing up of spoils to trees or posts for divinities, E. Saglio, Dictionnaire des antiquités grecques et romaines i. 1 (1879) s.v. ‘agroteras thysia’ 168; Rouse, W. H. D., Greek votive offerings (Cambridge 1902) 50–1Google Scholar; Stengel, P., Opferbräuche der Griechen (Leipzig and Berlin 1910) 200–1Google Scholar; Meuli, K., in Phyllobolia für Peter Von der Mühll (Basel 1946) 262–4 and n. 5. 263Google Scholar; ibid., AntK Beih. iv (1967) 159–61. Cf. the mural in the ‘House of Livia’, Simon, E. and Bauchhenss, G., LIMC ii (1984)Google Scholar s.v. ‘Artemis/Diana’ no. 39, 810, pl. 579.

⁵² As rape, e.g. Renner (n. 3) 283; Oldfather (n. 48) iii 75, is closer with the translation, ‘consummate’.

⁵³ MacDougall, J. I., Lexicon in Diodorum Siculum (Hildesheim 1983)Google Scholar s.v. γάμος; the use of κατεργάζεσθαι, rather than ποιεῖν, expresses the intent to complete the union but in particular the loftiness of Aktaion's aspiration (refs. s.v. κατεργάζεσθαι); for sex, s.v. μιγνύειν, ἐπιπλοκή; for rape, s.v. βιάζεσθαι, ὑβρίζειν. The case of Ixion is instructive; cf. iv 69.3 (marriage) and iv 69.5 (propositioning of Hera). Canfora, (n. 48) 242, rightly translates, ‘realizzare il connubio’.

⁵⁴ Millin, A. L., Monuments antiques inedits ou nouvellement expliqués i (Paris 1802) 33Google Scholar; Panofka, Th.Archäol. Zeitung (Feb. 1848) 221–2Google Scholar; Nestle, W., ARW xxxiii (1936) 251Google Scholar; Kleinknecht (n. 26) 336–7; Bomer, F., P. Ovidius Naso, Metamorphosen i (Heidelberg 1969) 487Google Scholar; LIMC Aktaion 454.

⁵⁵ The commemorative epigrams of the Palatine anthology testify to the pride with which the ancient hunter would point to his dedicated akrothinia; discussed by Meuli, (n. 51) 263 n. 5. As private trophies, vs. dedications: Euripides' Agaue, in her euphoria, plans to nail the head of her prey to the triglyphs of her own house (Bacchae 233–43); for cynegetic parallels, Dodds, E. R., Euripides, Bacchae ² (Oxford 1960) 226–7.Google Scholar Herakles wears the skin of the Nemean lion, his first great kill; Schefold, K., Götter-und Heldensagen der Griechen in der spätarchaischen Kunst ii (Munich 1978) 89.Google Scholar Peleus and Atalanta wrestle to possess the skin and head of the Kalydonian boar, which they both helped slay, on a Chalkidian hydria of c. 540; Simon, E. and Hirmer, M., Die griechischen Vasen (Munich 1976) 62–3, pl. 39.Google Scholar

⁵⁶ Kypria fr. 1 (= Proklos 1); Kall. fr. 6 Pf., and Diod. iv 22.3

⁵⁷ Cf. Atalanta's requirement that she be beaten at her own game, for Apollod, a footrace with cynegetic overtones: the suitor was pursued and speared; bibl. iii 9.2; and Hyg. fab. 185.

⁵⁸ Oldfather (n. 48) iii 75; Leach 312 n. 25; Schlam 87 and n. 18. Cf Vinet, E., Dictionnaire des antiquités grecques et romaines i (1877)Google Scholar s.v. ‘Actaeon’ 52: ‘…pour lui avoir offert les prémices de la chasse en prétendant la contraindre à l'épouser…’; Fontenrose, J., Orion: the myth of the hunter and the huntress, (Berkeley 1981) 36.Google Scholar

⁵⁹ Naples SA 31; LIMC Aktaion no. 110, p. 464, pl. 361. Enigmatic: Séchan (n. 4) 136.

⁶⁰ Mercanti (n. 23) 131–4, esp. 134; followed by Séchan (n. 4) 136–7; Schauenburg (n. 36) 41; Kossatz 152; Schlam 94 and n. 55.

⁶¹ Fontcnrose (n. 58) 36 n. 7; LIMC Artemis 733. Early: Müller, K. O. and Wieseler, F., Denkmäler des alten Kunst ii (Göttingen 1877) 261Google Scholar; and Reinach, S., Cultes, mythes et religions iii (Paris 1908) 26–8Google Scholar, whose ritual–oriented treatment of the myth underlies Zieliński's reading of Kallimachos (n. 26) and is followed by Jacobsthal, P., ‘Aktaions Tod’, MarbJbKW v (1929) 18.Google Scholar

⁶² LIMC Aktaion 468–9.

⁶³ Stamnos, Bibl. Nat. 949, LIMC Aktaion no. 112, p. 464, pl. 361; Trendall/Cambitoglou BICS Supp. xlii 428–9 no. 71, pls 158.3–4, 159.3. Situla, Bloomington 70–97–1, LIMC Aktaion no. III p. 464, pl. 361.

⁶⁴ Buchholz, H.-G., ‘Jagd’, in Jagd und Fischfang, Arch. arch. Hom. 2J (1973) J44–55, J73–4Google Scholar; Anderson, J.K., Hunting in the ancient world (Berkeley 1985) 48–51Google Scholar; Schauenburg, K., Jagddarstellungen in der griechischen Vasenmalerei (Hamburg and Berlin 1969) 15–18Google Scholar; Bizzari, M., StEtr xxxiv (1966) pl. 8a–bGoogle Scholar; Kurtz, D. C., Athenian white lekythoi (Oxford 1975) pls 58.1a–c, 67.4bGoogle Scholar; Isler, H. P., JDAI xcviii (1983) 19–23. 35–7.Google Scholar

⁶⁵ Schauenburg (n. 64) pl. 16 (cup); Proietti, G., Il Museo Nazionale Etrusco di Villa Giulia (Rome 1980) fig. 409 (cista).Google Scholar

⁶⁶ The Naples krater in fact gives the only Hellenic depiction of Aktaion without his hounds, excepting coins and a plastic vase, which show only the hero's head, and the gem (n. 51), which shows him catching sight of the bathing Artemis inside the spring sanctuary; LIMC Aktaion nos 41–3, p. 458, pl. 353 (coins); Jentel, M.-O., Les gutti et askoi à reliefs étrusques et apuliens (Leiden 1976) 268 and n. 9Google Scholar; LIMC Aktaion no. 51a (rhyton).

⁶⁷ Leach 310, associating the scene with Aktaion's boast. Cf. the useful discussions of Schauenburg (n. 36) 35–42 and of Kossatz, 155–6, who dismiss the reading proposed here and inter pret the scenes as tableaux of tragic dramatis personae.

⁶⁸ The woman who addresses the hunter on both vases must evoke some incident-admonition or persuasion-prior to the offense; cf. Schauenburg 38–41; Kossatz 155–7; LIMC Aktaion 464, 468.

⁶⁹ On this iconography, Schefold (n. 55) 100–2, fig. 125.

⁷⁰ E.g. the Attic red-figured cup, Cleveland 26.242, CVA Cleveland i, (U.S.A. xv, 1971) 23–4, pl. 37.1; and the relief in Chalkis, Rodenwaldt, G., JDAI xxviii (1913) 326–9Google Scholar, pl. 27, with comparanda; both illus. in Aspects of ancient Greece (Allentown, Pa. 1979) ed. B. S. Ridgway and G. Pinney, no. 35, 76–7.

⁷¹ Sichtermann, H., Griechische Vasen in Unteritalien aus der Sammlung latta in Ruvo (Tübingen 1966) K53, 42, pl. 86.Google Scholar

⁷² Bologna 303, CVA Bologna iv (Italy xxvii,1957) 15–16, pls 82, 83, 94.9; ARV ² 1184–1185.6. The same hero sacrifices a bull on an Apulian vase in London, BM F66; Trendall/Cambitoglou BICS Supp. xlii 195 no. 18. Cf. the Attic red-figured cup Ferrara T 559 showing a crowned, nude youth who has brought a large deer to an altar; Tölle-Kastenbein, R., Pfeil und Bogen (Bochum 1980) 94–5, pl. 18.Google Scholar

⁷³ Were the goddess's hostility depicted, she would have been shown taking aim or drawing an arrow from her quiver; cf. e.g. LIMC Artemis nos. 1053, 1346–51, in which she does react to a hybristic boast. As Mercanti herself observes, (n. 23) 133, the bow and arrows are simply attributes, held in a variety of pacific situations, including sacrifices (e.g. LIMC Artemis nos 81, 113, 113a, 618, 619, 674, 967, 968, 970, 974, 1037, 1039, 1069).

⁷⁴ Borbein, A. H., Campanareliefs. Typologische und stilkritische Untersuchungen, Röm. Mitt. suppl. xiv (1968) 50–3Google Scholar; LIMC Artemis 653–4, nos 396–401, pl. 479, and esp. p. 748. Cf. esp. the coin type ibid. no. 400, pl. 478; Borbein 63 n. 299. The vase in Ruvo (n. 71) is tentatively included in the group by Borbein, 50–1 and n. 247. On a bronze handle relief, LIMC Artemis no. 403a, she seems to master a captured animal prior to sacrifice, and she brings a deer to the altar on ibid, nos 1025, 1026 and 1036, pl. 526.

⁷⁵ As such springs can play the role of altar; RE ²iii 2 (1929) s.v. ‘sphagia’ 1669–79; but here it probably serves simply to characterize the place.

⁷⁶ Late fifth- to fourth-century Attic votive reliefs sometimes show Artemis seated on a rock, from which she may receive worshippers (LIMC Artemis nos 671–4); on two non-Attic examples deer are led to sacrifice before her (Stengel [n. 51] 200). The rock could represent Kithairon, as suggested to me by Erika Simon; cf. the lekythos, Simon, E. and Hirmer, M., Die griechischen Vasen (Munich 1976) 137–8Google Scholar, pls XLIV, XLV. We would thus see the moment in which Artemis perceives Aktaion's gesture, perhaps Just before a descent to receive his offering.

⁷⁷ Vinet, E., Rev. Arch. v (1848) 460–75, pl. 100Google Scholar, rejecting Gerhard's (verbal) identification of the object as a spring (reinstated definitively only by Dohrn, T., in Mouseion. Studien aus Kunst und Geschichte für O. H. Förster [1960] 71)Google Scholar; also Panofka (n. 54) 221 (recognizing the spring); Vinet (n. 58) 53.

⁷⁸ Cf. Schmidt, M., ‘Medea und Herakles—zwei tragische Kindmörder’ in Studien zur Mythologie und Vasenmalerei. Festschrift für Konrad Schauenburg (Mainz 1986) ed. Bohr, E. and Martini, W., 169–74Google Scholar, documenting a similarly close correspondence in Apulian vase-painting with a mythic tradition known only from Diodoros.

⁷⁹ Fogg Art Museum 60.367, Choephoroi Ptr.; LIMC Aktaion no. 45, p. 458, pl. 353; identified as Gargaphia: de Witte, G., Boll. dell'Ist. di Con. Arch. (1869) 142–4Google Scholar; followed by Bock, M., AA (1935) 497–8Google Scholar; and Kossatz 154–5. Gothenburg, Röhss Museum RKM 13–71, Branca Ptr.; LIMC Aktaion no. 44, p. 459, pl. 353.

⁸⁰ Holmberg, E. and Wehgartner, I., OpuscAthen xiv (1982) 45–6Google Scholar (Semele); Kossatz 155 (Gargaphia); Schauenburg (n. 64) 35 n. 25 (‘Ortsnymphen’). Cf. Ov. met. iii 157–60; Leach, 323, sees the Pompeian grottos as a break with a traditional use of the rocky arch as a symbol of death (rather than a flexible scenic element), but as C. M. Dawson notes, the grotto-frame for a bathing figure is attested in a late fourth-century mirror; Romano-Campanian mythological landscape painting (Rome 1965) 140 and n. 29.

⁸¹ Kossatz 152, followed by Schefold (n. 2) 144.

⁸² On Aktaion's innocence in Kallimachos, McKay (n. 26) 46.

⁸³ Eurypolos the Thessalian (image of Dionysos; Paus, vii 19.6–10); Astrabakos and Alopekos of Sparta (image of Artemis Orthia; Paus, iii 16.6– 9). Rowland, I. D. discusses visual trespass as an instrument of heroization in ‘Hieros Aner’ (diss. Bryn Mawr College, Ann Arbor 1980) 59–60Google Scholar; see also Mattes, J., Der Wahnsinn im griechischen Mythos (Heidelberg 1970) 44–5.Google Scholar Other sightings of bathing deities: Erymanthos (of Aphrodite; Ptol. nov. hist. 1, in Westermann, A., Mythographi scriptores poeticae historiae graeci (Brunswick 1843) 183.10–14Google Scholar; blinded); Siproites (of Artemis; [Nik.] ap. Anton. Lib. met. 17.5, Westermann, Mythographi 218.3–4; gets sex-change); Kalydon (of Artemis; Derkyllos, FGrH 288 F 1; made a rock and a mountain-eponym); as well as Teiresias, by far the most fortunate; RE suppl. iv (1924) s.v. ‘Epiphanie’ 320–1; Radermacher, L., Mythos und Sage bei den Griechen ² (Baden bei Wien and Leipzig 1938) 52Google Scholar; McKay (n. 26) 46.

⁸⁴ Cf. Leach 311–12: ‘Diodorus omits the naked goddess [of Kall.] in favor of Euripides' tale of Acteon's boasting or Hyginus' lust…’. Fab. 180, together with other Roman evidence, has suggested that by the Augustan period a version was current in which the hunter hides himself at the spring in order to spy upon the goddess; Dawson (n. 80) 118; Otis (n. 5) 398–400; Leach 311–12, 321; Schlam 97, 101, 105–9. Castiglioni, relying mainly upon Ov. Ibis 479, verecundae speculantem labra Dianae, and Nonn. Dion, v 287–300 (which has Aktaion climb a tree like Pentheus in the Bacchae [1058–75]) as well as Hyg., argues that such a story emerges in Attic tragedy, with the learned Kail. Hy. v, and then Ov. met., presenting an alternative tradition; (n. 26) 76– 84. However, speculari can mean simply ‘catch sight of’; it may suggest that Aktaion spied upon Artemis but not that his sight was premeditated; cf. Castiglioni 78. In Hyg. speculate est seems to explain eam violare voluit: the rapt spectator becomes a frenzied masher. Consequently, the interpretation proposed here suffices to explain fab. 180 and Ibis 479.

⁸⁵ RE viii 2 (1913) S.v. ‘Hochzeit’ 2129: ‘Die wichtigste Zeremonie war anscheinend das λουτρὸν νυμφικόν… Das wichtigere war das Brautbad…’. On weddings, Diehl, E., Die Hydria. Formgeschichte und Verwendung im Kult des Altertums (Mainz 1964) 180, 181–6, 192–3, 206Google Scholar; on Artemis and marriage, Roberts, S. R., The Attic pyxis (Chicago 1978) 5.Google Scholar The site is appropriate, since the bride must bathe in, or draw her water from, a sacred spring or stream. In Horn. h.Aphr. 56–7, a bath in a sanctuary is the prelude to a goddess's amorous encounter with a mortal.

⁸⁶ One could also hypothesize a more concrete, but equally problematic, misuse of the spoils. Fon-tenrose, (n. 58) 34–5, uses Arnob. iii 4 and Stat. Theb. iii 203 to postulate a version in which Aktaion disguises himself as a deer in order to peep undetected, and the first-century gem (n. 2) could reinforce this interpretation, since it shows the intruder not with the proleptic antlers of later representations, but wrapped, it seems, in a deer skin. Voyeurism would thus lead to erotic madness.

⁸⁷ On Panic possession, Borgeaud, Ph., Recherches sur le dieu Pan, Bibl. Helv. Rom. xvii (1979) 156–75, and esp. 163 and 177–92Google Scholar, on lust; also Mattes (n. 83) 44 on the particular connection with the unexpected sight of a divinity. The Pan Painter's name vase shows the ithyphallic god's pursuit of a shepherd boy—with the death of Aktaion on the reverse; ARV ² 550.1; Paralipomena 386; LIMC Aktaion no. 15, p. 456, pl. 348; Simon, E., Die Götter der Griechen ² (Munich 1980) figs 159–60.Google Scholar A bone relief in the Vatican (ML 1437) shows a shepherd(?) boy molesting a naked nymph(?) as she bathes in a rustic spring sanctuary; behind him a histrionic Pan; Herbig, R., Pan (Frankfort 1949) pl. 35.4.Google Scholar The hour of wilderness panolepsis, noon, recurs in Kall. Hy. v 72–4 (Teiresias) and in Ov. met. iii 144 (Aktaion). Borgeaud interprets the Italiote association of Pan with Aktaion as an indication of the hounds' madness (166–7), but this is traditionally Lyssa's role, as on the Gothenburg krater (n. 79), the Berlin amphora (infra n. 89), and probably LIMC Aktaion no. 48b; Studies 187, 228–9; also on Attic vases, LIMC Aktaion nos 2, 81, and cf. 83 (Hekate). Pan's recurrence, and especially his arrival on the Naples krater, better represents the desire that will possess the hunter as well as a noontime peril encountered in the wilds.

⁸⁸ As it is for Kadmos, Pind. (n. 18); cf. the transitions, Ov. met. iii 131–7; Apollod, bibl. iii 4.4–5.1.

⁸⁹ Berlin, Pergamonmuseum F 3239, Darius Per.; LIMC Aktaion no. 88, pl. 358, esp. p. 468; with the rape of Chrysippos just above.

⁹⁰ Kossatz 164; similarly, Schauenburg (n. 36) 42.

⁹¹ LIMC Aktaion 468, following Kleinknecht (n. 26) 337, who, however, sees eroticism as a post-Kallimachean development. Bethe, E., in Genethliacon Gottingense (Halle 1888) 48 n. 2Google Scholar, and Nestle, (n. 54) 251, have also seen in the Diodoran ‘wed ding’ a possibly early tale. For Cirio, (n. 3) 57, boast and attempted marriage both evolve from the Semele story ‘attraverso un processo di sempli ficazione, e forse proprio per l'influenza delle fontiiconografiche’. Schauenburg (n. 36) 31–2, suggests that both bath and desire for Artemis emerge between the Greek and Roman iconographies, and RE, (n. 38) 1210, also links Diodoros with later stories of the hero's lust for Artemis.

⁹² Schlam 97 and n. 63.

⁹³ Naples 128525; Gabriel, E., MonAnt xxii 2 (1913) 735–9.Google Scholar pl. 120.2; rejected by Schauenburg (n. 36) 29 n. 5; ‘incertaine’ in LIMC Aktaion, no. 129, p. 466.

⁹⁴ Cf. the nymph attendants (perhaps the Aeschylean toxotides ) of certain of the Roman depictions of Artemis' bath, e.g. LIMC Aktaion no. 117b, p. 475 and (s.v. ‘Aktai’) pl. 345; no. 118a, p. 465, pl. 362; and Ov. met. iii 165–72 (prepara tion) and 177–81 (reaction at intrusion). Erotes assist the goddess on the Louvre sarcophagus, LIMC Aktaion no. 106, 464, pl. 360.

⁹⁵ Plut. vit. Aristeid. 11.3–4.

⁹⁶ For example, the bath story could be a local elaboration around an aboriginal notion of hybristic rivalry. Perhaps the boast began with the violent, rock-wielding Aktaion venerated at Orchomenos; his remains too were gathered and a simulacrum fashioned, but to pacify the hero; on the cult, Marx, F., Berichte der Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften, Leipzig. Philologisch-historische Klasse lviii (1906) 101–23.Google ScholarVice versa, the ‘Plataian’ tale could be the context from which a primarily ethical, versus sacral, transgression is extracted. For Lloyd-Jones (n. 12), both are secondary, the vaunt based on those of Agamemnon and Orion, the bath of Artemis on that seen by Teiresias; conversely, to Radermacher (n. 83) the abundant parallels to the bath espied suggest extreme antiquity, and thus priority.

⁹⁷ Burkert (n. 20) and esp. 109–16, on the cults of Zeus at the Cave of Cheiron and on Keos; on the more specific connection with male initiation, see also Broadbent, M., Studies in Greek genealogy (Leiden 1968) 41–51Google Scholar; Lloyd-Jones (n. 12); Studies 75–83. Cf. Casanova (n. 3) 45–6.

⁹⁸ Either one attempted marriage replaced another or the courtship of Semele was introduced as an explanation, with the fatal sight of Artemis arranged by the infuriated Zeus. This process may also account for a second reconstruction, Autonoe's collection of Aktaion's remains (n. 36), followed by her own wanderings (Paus. i 44.5). Adaptation of the canine coda to this tradition is legible in the Hesiodic fr. POxy 2509 (n. 3); Athena(?) arrives at Cheiron's cave to remove the pack's lyssa, making them aware of what they have done, but she also announces the birth of Dionysos, who will be their new master until his godhead is established. Cf. Dodds Bacchae 113; ‘When Semele became Actaeon’s aunt [his courtship of her] was no longer suitable, and he transferred his attentions to Artemis…’

⁹⁹ plut. (n.95); studie s 82–3, 241–2.