This article proposes a fresh reading of a difficult and much-debated passage in Clytemnestra’s speech of triumph in the Agamemnon (1372–98). I argue that in lines 1395–6 Clytemnestra does not speak about herself as pouring a libation, as is generally assumed, but envisages instead the dead body of her murdered husband as the performer of this ritual. This reading, which is based on an overlooked syntactical option, avoids several inconsistencies of previous interpretations and neatly fits into the development of thought (...) and imagery in the speech. It shows how Clytemnestra’s exultation over the corpse of her husband forms a series of closely connected cynical re-interpretations of the murderous blood. (shrink)

The comparison by which the Chorus of Satyrs in Euripides’ Cyclops 469–471 illustrates its wish to participate in the blinding of the Cyclops is regarded as difficult in research on the play, due to the ambiguous expression ὥσπερ ἐκ σπονδῆς θεοῦ. There is no consensus either on the question of how the reference to libation is to be understood, nor on whether the transmitted phrasing is correct at all. In the present paper I attempt to show that doubts over the (...) transmission are unfounded and that attempts to refer the comparison not to libation but to the ritual use of water for handwashing at sacrifice are not persuasive. Rather, Euripides in this passage is engaging with the theme of libation on several levels of meaning: when we pay close attention to the context, cult-specific associations and literary applications of libation as a motif in Homer and Aristophanes, the words of the satyrs can be read, firstly, as a metaphorical reference to the two main actions in Odysseus’ plan for revenge, and secondly as a subtle allusion to the use of libation and spit-roasting in sacrificial ritual. (shrink)

The comparison by which the Chorus of Satyrs in Euripides’ Cyclops 469–471 illustrates its wish to participate in the blinding of the Cyclops is regarded as difficult in research on the play, due to the ambiguous expression ὥσπερ ἐκ σπονδῆς θεοῦ (469). There is no consensus either on the question of how the reference to libation is to be understood, nor on whether the transmitted phrasing is correct at all. In the present paper I attempt to show that doubts over (...) the transmission are unfounded and that attempts to refer the comparison not to libation but to the ritual use of water for handwashing at sacrifice are not persuasive. Rather, Euripides in this passage is engaging with the theme of libation on several levels of meaning: when we pay close attention to the context, cult-specific associations and literary applications of libation as a motif in Homer and Aristophanes, the words of the satyrs can be read, firstly, as a metaphorical reference to the two main actions in Odysseus’ plan for revenge, and secondly as a subtle allusion to the use of libation and spit-roasting in sacrificial ritual. (shrink)

This article presents an edition with introduction and commentary of two unpublished letters that Ulrich von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff wrote to the art historian and cultural scholar Aby Warburg in the 1920 s. The edition completes a correspondence that includes a letter from Warburg that has already been published several times. The two letters cast light on the hitherto barely known relation of Wilamowitz to Warburg himself and to his Kulturwissenschaftliche Bibliothek in Hamburg. They centre on the Warburg Library’s special research interest, (...) namely the influence of the ancient world on later cultural periods, especially the Renaissance. (shrink)

Euripides’Bacchaeis one of the most intensively studied Greek tragedies. Generations of scholars have explored the play from different perspectives and offered fascinating insights. But there are still aspects that have not received the attention they deserve. One such aspect is Euripides’ use of libation as a dramatic motif. Even though this motif relates directly to the question of the tragic conflict between Dionysus and Pentheus, it has never been discussed in detail and its dramatic impact has not been fully acknowledged.