著者

呉 茂一

出版者

日本西洋古典学会

雑誌

西洋古典學研究 (ISSN:04479114)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.11, pp.1-9, 1963-03-30

---

Pherekydes in Strabon XIV asserts the Ionian migration to be later than the Aeolian (according to XIII, ibid by 4 generations), its reputed leader being Androclos, son of Codros, a Neleid king of Athens from Pylos He founded Ephesos, while many other sons of Codros and the Pylians became founders of various Ionian cities As to its contingents, the land of Achaia is called by many authors their fatherland, its 12 cities being the pattern of the Ionian 12 , while it is curious that its inhabitants, the former Aigialeis, are propounded there as emigrants from overpopulated Athens, changed their name to the Ionians after Ion, and forced to evacuate the land by the Doric Achaeans, removed to Asia Minor This seems to be mere fiction, but the narrative of Herodotus 400 years earlier makes us think of the strength of such traditions and some truth implied in them On the other hand, the celebration of Pan-ionia at Cape Mycale, with its presiding god Poseidon Heliconios, the strongest bond of religious fraternity for Ionian cities, reminds us again of their connection with Achaia, as the appellation of the god was recognized universally as derived from Helike in Achaia, the episode of Eratosthenes testifying to such belief, though linguistically better to consider it a derivative of Helicon The consitution of the Ionian immigrants, too, calls for our attention, with its many Boiotian elements along with others (the so-called Ionians and Athenians excepted) Poseidon-cult was indeed very powerful in Boiotia, the Neleids of Pylos being a branch of Boiotian-S Thessalian Poseidonic rulers We have to examine the history of P -cult in Athens, how it, once strong as surmised from the remaining legend of his struggle with Athena over the guardianship of Acropolis or the existence of a month called Poseideon, faded to some scanty survivals, in the former case to a more name of P χαμαιξηλοζ or P Erechtheus, in the latter to nothing more than 8 th day offerings The P -cult in Boiotia must also be taken into consideration A difference in kind between the P -worship and that in Attica may then be recognized In short, Ionian P -cult may be due less to its constituent races than to the inclination of its ruling houses, viz religious kings, the decline of which was accompanied by the secularization of the feast The age-worn meaning of P as Earth-king had been disappearing long before The understanding of the close connection of Chios to Boiotia and S Thessaly will help to elucidate the origins of epic poems

著者

呉 茂一

出版者

日本西洋古典学会

雑誌

西洋古典學研究 (ISSN:04479114)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.6, pp.1-13, 1958-05-10

---

The lord of seas and waters in Gr. mythology, Poseidon has been the object of much speculation, recently esp. by Schachermeyr in his "Poseidon .etc." 1950. The paper seeks to find some more elucidations about his nature and attendant myths after Schach. The etymology offered for his name by Kretschmer, followed by Wilamowitz, Nilsson and Schach. too, seems quite plausible, that of combining ποσει- (voc. to ποσει-) with Δα&b.sigmav; (gen. of Da, the Earth-mother), which however requires the crystalisation of the annexation the meaning of the compound submerged beneath the consciousness of people. The writer gathers together, after Schach. etc., examples of the combination of Poseidon with Demeter in various parts of Greek peninsula recorded by Pausanias, Plutarch etc., notably at Thelpusa, Phigaleia, Akakesion, Pheneos, Gythion, Hermione, Troizen, Kalauria, Athenai (Kolonos, Kerameikos, Akropolis), Eleusis, Lebadeia, Delphoi and many others, which can not be fortuitous, while in many places, mostly in Arcadia but at Kolonos and others too, they appear as, or related to, horses. It should be noted again that either of the Gods is often turned into forms of Hypostaseis, as a result of both religious syncretism and disintegration, resulting at times in an accumulation of various fossilized epicletic names. Such is, for example, the case with the "Demeter on the Pron" at Hermione, founded by one Klymenos and his sister Chthonia, with a temple of Klymenos opposite, while the goddess is called Chthonia, too. The townsfolk think that the God Klymenos is the lord of infernal regions and different from the founder Klymenos. The Phytalos who welcomed D. at Lacius' grove by Cephisus, must be P. too, a by-form of P. Phytalmios, worshipped at Troizen and Athens. Or the Trophonios, noted for his mantic power at Lebadeia, must be a hypostasis of P. as situated by and in a cave, which is a peculiarity of P. worship, with a fountain-nymph Herkyna, a by-form of Demeter, the nurse-mother of Kore. The statues therein with snakes are called Asklepios and Hygieia (for snakes), or Troph. and Herkyna, which ought to be P. and D. The Nymph Melantheia at Kalauria, the Eumenides (Erinys as at Thelpusa) at Colonus, should or may be D. too, while Erechtheus and Erichthonios, which must be by-forms, on the Akropolis, called opponents to P. by Schachermeyr, ought to be hypostaseis of P., in view of the tradition, pertaining to P. and Athena's dispute, and the chthonic character and appelation of P. such as Erysi-, Elelichthon etc., as Erichthonios simply means 'the great Earth-lord', the mate of Chthonia-Demeter. The writer invites attention to Medusa and Medeia also, a form without eury-, "the wideruling " -lady or goddess, which can be epikleseis of D. as Eurymedon, Iphimedeia, Agamede etc. may prove. Next two chapters are concerned with Orchomenos, as an example of P. worshipping clans, the dynasties of which show manifest confusion resulting from frequent and apparent intrusion of P. and his Hypostaseis, while Theban traditions usurp many items thereof-Klymenos, Klymene, Persephone, Almos (<Phyt-alm-ios) being mere names of hypostaseis, brought together as means of connecting various heroes under Poseidonic influences with Orchomenians or Minyans. The writer again ventures a hypothesis that the husband's name of these ladies, viz. lasos or lasios (1) may mean. Poseidonic incarnation, or a daimon of the like chthonic nature (maybe Preachaean), which brings also lasion within its circle, a figure in direct communication with D.. lason, too, is not far away from lasios: lason, who is also a Minyan and coupled with a Medeia (though presumably a Corinthian deity). Lastly it may be advanced that Pluton (from Plutos, but usually Aides (2)) was in reality the greatest of P.'s hypostaseis, serving as his substitute when he was changed into a Sea-god, inheriting his chthonic dominion, caves, passages to the nether world (Tainaros, Pylos etc.), the title of Klymenos etc., even renowned for horses, but without any shrine originally, being the double of P., with Kore-Persephone as his consort, the Demeter-Chthonia in her daughter's capacity. The chthonic character of Poseidon held in awe by his worshippers is best attested by his appellation itself, an euphemistic substitute for the apparent, at the same time easily deduced from his many other epikleseis such as εννοσιγαιο&b.sigmav;, ασψαλειο&b.sigmav;, αλωευ&b.sigmav;, γαιειο&b.sigmav; etc. This process, perfected by the time of Homer, may have fairly been advanced by the commencement of Mycenean supremacy, esp. on the eastern coast exposed to Minoan influences, obliterating the Horse for the Bull, together with his connection with Demeter, the Goddess consort. (1) This ias- could possibly stand in some relation to 'lawones,' -s(i) on-being collateral to -won- as nominal formans. (2) The development of Aides must be the next question, established firmly by the time of Homer (perhaps not yet in Mycenae), by gradual transformation within those several centuries.

著者

永井 龍男

出版者

日本西洋古典学会

雑誌

西洋古典学研究 (ISSN:04479114)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.41, pp.59-69, 1993

---

In De Anima II 12 and III 1, Aristotle argues that the common sensibles (movement, rest, figure, magnitude and number)are perceived by each special sense only per accidens and they are perceived per se by a common sense. To understand Aristotle's theory of the common sense consistently, however, we must answer the following three questions. The first is whether the common sense is an independent faculty of the special senses or not. This needs consideration , because at the beginning of De Anima III 1 Aristotle denies that there is any sence faculty or any sense organ other than those of five special senses. The common sense is a part of the perceptual faculties of the primary (central) sense organ. Likewise, in the case of the special senses, their perceptions are achieved ultimately in the primary sense organ. Then, the faculty of perception which belongs to the primary sense organ is also contained in the special senses. Accordingly, for the common sense, we don't need any sense organ other than those needed for the special senses. In a way, the special senses as a whole contain the common sense. The second question is as follows : Aristotle thinks all the senses are the faculties receiving sensible forms, but what are the forms of the common sensibles? In De Anima 424a17-b3 and 426a27-b7, Aristotle insists that the sense is some sort of ratio(logos), and the former passage suggests that sensible forms are some type of ratios as well, This suggestion is confirmed by the arguments in De Sensu. Then, it is possible to take the forms of the common sensibles as some type of ratios. The interpretation above enables us to construe the form of magnitude as the external ratio of an extension of some object to the extensions of other objects, and the form of figure as the internal ratio between some parts of the extension of an object. The third question is how we can defend the commonness of the common sensibles to the special senses against G. Berkeley's arguments which deny the commonness of magnitude and of figure to sight and touch. If we regard the forms of the common sensibles not as extentions as such but as some type of ratios, we can defend the commonness. Having identified magnitude with extention, Berkeley puts two points. (1) The visible objects(colour, light)and the tangible objects (solidity, resistance)are entirely different, therefore, there are fundamental differences between the visible magnitude and the tangible magnitude and between the visible figure and the tangible figure. (2) The tangible extension(i. e. magnitude) is invariably the same, but the visible extension(i. e. magnitude)varies as you approach or recede. If we deny the identity of magnitude with extension and consider(with Aristotle)that the magnitude is a sort of ratio, then these two points are clarified. For, first, although the visible extension and the tangible extension is radically different, the ratio of some extension to other extensions can be common to sight and touch. And, secondly, it is true that the visible extension of the same object changes according to its distance, but it is possible that in different perspectives the changing extension refers to the same ratio. Thus, we can defend the commonness of the common sensibles against Berkeley's arguments.

著者

根本 英世

出版者

日本西洋古典学会

雑誌

西洋古典學研究 (ISSN:04479114)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.26, pp.23-33, 1978-03-23

---

The author has tried to examine the Nausicaa scene in ζ, in order to interpret her function in the narrative as well as to explore the poet's elaboration of her description. In the interventions of the Homeric gods we can generally recognize "a pattern" : the narration of their approach to the human world, their appearance and removal from the scene. In addition to these, the motifs of transformation and sleep(or mist)are remarkable where Athena helps and advises throughout the Odyssey. Considering these elements, her entrance at the beginning of the Nausicaa episode is a "typical" one. The process of acquaintance between Nausicaa and Odysseus and the growth of her goodwill towards him is prepared by the goddess at every stage 25f., 1121, 139f., and especially, 229f. after which she not only introduces herself but also gives him detailed advice. Here we should remember that the goddess' help and advice are given only to the main characters in the Odyssey. Her maiden beauty is fully depicted in the simile of φοινικο&b.sigmav; νεον ερνο&b.sigmav;(162 f.)as well as in 15f., 102f., and 0 457. Her inner excellence is also noteworthy; even before the unclothed foreigner she is wise enough to judge his personality from his words(187 f.). Her prudence is to be seen in her manner of leading him to the city(257 f.) , which will ward off the gossip of those whom she calls CnrspcpiaAoi (274) , while nevertheless judging their assumptions to be not unfounded (286 f.). Above all, shyness characterizes her(66). Only indirectly in the form of an imaginary rumour can she reveal her name to the hero(276f.). Though she seems rather affected towards him(239 f.) , she bids a brief but impressive farewell(461 f.). Such a farewell is also possible because they have not fallen in love with each other (cf. ε 203 f). Now she stands before him as a trial, a trial of a kind he has never experienced. He has to gain her advice, as well as food and clothes, to make his homecoming possible. Thus he gives his most eloquent speech in the entire Odyssey(149 f). The simile of the lion(130 f.) could be interpreted as preparing this demonstration of his uflTis, i.e., to introduce his apicrTEicc. He has so far been "a hero in a fairy tale" in finding his way out of danger, but is here confronted with a "realistic" trial, which leads by means of her gift of clothes to another trial in the Phaeacian court; both trials seem to make him ready for those to come in Ithaca. We should also like to note 230-4, 235b=ψ 157-61, 162b. In ψ Athena beautifies him before he is recognized by Penelope, in ζ the goddess does the same before he is received by the princess(which results in the first step of his success in homecoming)-both groups of the verses, so to speak, are preludes to the climaxes of the former and the latter half of the story respectively(cf. Athena's influence on both through dreams, the motif of marriage in both cases). Through the elaborate portrayal of Nausicaa the poet seems to have tried to represent an ideal of maidenhood.