DOI10.1515/jah-2013-0002 JAH2013;1(1):3–26 TeresaMorgan Divine-Human Relations in the Aesopic Corpus Abstract: This paper argues that Aesopic fablesare an under-used but valuable resourceforthestudyofGraeco-Romancognitivereligiosity.Theworldoffables isruledbyarestrictedgroupofdivinities–an‘oligotheon’–dominatedbyZeus, the largely benign creator who gives living beings their characteristic qualities andregulatestheirbehaviour.Divine-humanrelationstypicallytakeplaceinfor- mally and/or in private, rather than in public and/or through cult acts. Fables present the gods as spontaneously interested in human beings and as having a tendency to interfere uninvited in their affairs; one can sometimes even detect developmentinadivine-humanrelationshipinthecourseofastory.Afewfables play with the tensions endemic in divine-human relations, such as the unequal valueofwhateachpartybringstotheother,andtheparadoxofhumanstories’ powertocaptureinnarrativewhatinprincipleisbeyondtheboundsofhuman control. Carefully handled, fables can be taken seriously as evidence of one, sometimes unexpectedly sophisticated strain in Graeco-Roman religious think- ing, which persisted over a long period of time and across a wide spectrum of society. Keywords:Aesop,Fables,Gods,Monotheism,Cognitivereligiosity TeresaMorgan:OrielCollege,UniversityofOxford,Oxford,OX14EW,UK, E-Mail:[email protected] FablesholdadistinctiveplaceinGraeco-Romanculture.Poetsandprosewriters told and retold them, drawing new morals from traditional stories or allowing audiences to draw their own. Collections under the name of Aesop were made fromatleastthefourthcenturyBCE,1andtheearlyprincipatesawthedevelop- mentofanewgenre,thefablebook.Philosophers,rhetors,moralists,education- alists and religious writers all used fables to inform, broaden or challenge the imaginations of those they addressed. Socio-educational elites, moreover, were notfables’only,orevenmainaudience.Fablesareoneofthefewgenresrepeat- 1 West(1984). Unauthenticated | 86.134.53.36 Download Date | 5/3/13 5:31 PM 4 TeresaMorgan edly described in antiquity as originating in the lower strata of society and as popular there: as vulgar, primitive, and especially suitable for slaves and the uneducated.2 Giventheirpopularityacrosssocialgroups,theiruseateverylevelofeduca- tionandtheirextensivedeploymentbylitterati,itisperhapssurprisingthatfables have not been more studied by cultural historians as expressions of Greek or Romanmentalité.3Theyhaveobvious,ifnotunproblematic,potentialasevidence for assumptions about many aspects of the ancient world: physical and social, cultural,economicandreligious.4Thisessayaimstobegintoexplorethispoten- tialbyinvestigatingwhatfablesmaybeabletocontributetothestudyofjustone aspect of ancient mentalité: the way Greeks and Romans conceptualized their relationshipswiththedivine. FableshavenotfeaturedlargelyinthestudyofGreekandRomanreligions, for understandable reasons: they contain few references to cults or specific rituals, they tend to be less complex and varied than myth, and they are often impossibletolocateinaparticularsocialcontext.5Divine-humanrelations,how- ever,playasignificantroleinfables,andgivenfables’culturalomnipresenceand 2 E.g.Liv.2.32.9,Phaedr.3Prol.43–7,Quint.11.19–21,Philostr.Im.1.3,VA5.14–16,Quint.1.9.2. Proverbs, closely related to fables, are also regularly characterized as popular: e.g. Arist. ad SynesiusEncom.calv.22p. 229;Dem.Deeloc.232,Quint.5.11.21;Sen.Ep.94.1–2,5–6;Ps.-Diog. pr.;Ath.10.86457c;seeCarnes(1988);Zafiropoulos(2001),36–41;Morgan(2007),5–8.Ancient authorsprobablyhadsomejustificationfortheirview:cross-culturally,fablesareoftenknownor believedtohaveoriginatedatlowlevelsofsocietyandtohaveremainedpopularthere. 3 WiththeimportantexceptionofKurke(2011),especiallychs.2–5onAesopicwisdomasan alternativetohighphilosophy,majorstudiesofrecentdecadesfocusonfablesasaliterarygenre: see especially Perry (1936, 1952, 1965); Adrados (1978), 1–81; Goosens and Sodmann (1981); Karadagli (1981); Adrados and Reverdin (1984); Jedrkiewicz (1989); van Dijk (1997); Adrados (1999); Holzberg(1999), 236–42; Holzberg(2002); Zafiropoulos (2001). Many individualfables havealsobeenextensivelystudiedinliterarycontexts. 4 Forthisapproachseee.g.laPenna(1961);García(1978);Gual(1977);Fisher(1987);Cascajero (1991);Adrados(1999);Zafiropoulos(2001);Morgan(2007);cf.vanDijk(1996);Hägg(1997)(on theLifeofAesop,whosefablesIomithere,alongwithotherfablesembeddedinlargerworks); Horsfall(2003),81–2.Themediaevalandmodernculturalhistoriographyofthefableisalarge andexpandingfield. 5 Evene.g.Mikalson(1983),Veyne(1983)donotdiscussthem,butVersnel(2011),327callsthem “OneoftheliterarygenreslargelyignoredasasourceforGreekcultureandsocietyandnotleast religion…”. Conversely, scholars of fables have taken little interest in their religious aspects: Nøjgaard(1964) is representative when he entitleshis brief sectionon referencesto the gods (II525–8)“Lareligionetlesilencedelafable,”andcontinues(527)“Nousnesommespasicien presenced’uneconceptionparticulièredesdieux.”Cascajero(1991)arguesthatfablestacklethe bigissuesofhumanexistencebutidentifiesthegodsasonlyaminortheme;cf.Morgan(2007), 75–7. Unauthenticated | 86.134.53.36 Download Date | 5/3/13 5:31 PM Divine-HumanRelationsintheAesopicCorpus 5 popularity,itwouldbesurprisingiftherelationshipstheypresenthadnoconnec- tion at all with wider Greek or Roman thinking. In the cases of Phaedrus and Avianus, whose collections can be approximately located in time, some work alongtheselineshasbeendone,tracingStoicideasinPhaedrusandreflectingon the absence of Christian ones in Avianus.6 In what follows, I shall focus on the larger,thematicallyrich,historiographicallychallengingbutculturallyintriguing corpusofAesopicfables,arguingthattheyhavemorepotentialthanhasusually beenrecognizedtoilluminatecertainaspectsofGraeco-Romanreligiosity. TheAesopiccorpuspresentsanumberofchallengestohistorians.Wecannot besurewhenanyfablefirstcameintocirculation.Almosteverysurvivingcollec- tion or fragment of a collection is slightly different, and the largest collections date to the later Roman Empire. We can assume that many fables have not survived.ThestoriesthathavecomedownunderthenameofAesoparetherefore insomesenseagroup,insomesensenotagroupandinsomesenseafragmen- tarygroup,andtotheextentthattheyareagroup,theycannotbelocatedinany oneplaceortime.7 Paradoxically,someofthesedifficultiesmayalsobestrengths.Fables,once incirculation,wereoftenhighlystableinformandcontentoverlongperiodsof time.8 Given their strong associations with education and popular morality, assumptionstheyincorporateaboutsocial,economicordivine-humanrelations mayplausiblybetakentohaveresonatedtosomedegreewithmanygenerations ofreadersandlistenersandinformedtheirthinking–aprocessmadeeasierby 6 Postgate (1919). Babrius’ fables are not usually seen as expressing a distinctive religious position.Karadagli(1981),80,161;Jedrkiewicz(1989),208–12;Adrados(1999),I604–35connect someAesopicfableswithCynicthinking,butcontraseeZafiropoulos(2001),36. 7 I use Chambry’s (1925) edition of the Aesopic corpus, which includes the material of the Augustanarecensionandother collected fablesin circulationby thefirst centuryCE, adding Perry’s(1984)numbersinbracketswhereheprovidesthem,foreaseofcross-referencing.The Augustana recension is accepted as the earliest Aesopic collection surviving and dated to between the late fourth century BCE (Perry (1936), 156) and the third century CE, almost all scholarsdatingittothefirstcenturyCEorearlier(seethediscussionofAdrados(1999),60–74). Justunder80%ofthefablesdiscussedhereappearintheAugustanacollection,recension1Aor multiple Aesopic collections datable to the first century or earlier. Fourteen are not securely traceable as early as the first century, most of which are well in line with the Augustana in content(butseebelow,n.14).TheAugustanaincludesepimythia,whichwereprobablyregularly attachedtofablesbythefirstcenturyCE,sinceBabriusandPhaedrusincorporatethemintotheir stories(Perry(1940)),butwhichIshallnotdiscusshere.Anyfablecouldattractanumberof differentepimythia,sothosethatsurviveattachedtolatemanuscriptshavenospecialstanding infables’interpretation. 8 Perry(1952),(1964),419–610. Unauthenticated | 86.134.53.36 Download Date | 5/3/13 5:31 PM 6 TeresaMorgan fables’ non-specific socio-temporal location.9 We do not need to assume that everyonekneweveryAesopicfableorreadthewholeofanycollectionforfables’ dominantthemestohavebeenpartoftheirmentalset:10aswithanylanguagein anyculture,thegrammarofGraeco-Romanreligiousideastranscends,evenasit expressesandinforms,theimaginationsofindividuals.11Thisbeingso,wemay posit that Aesopic ideas about divine-human relations, especially those which appearinanumberoffables,hadadegreeofcurrencyandrepresentastratumof cognitive religiosity that co-existed over time with many other, more or less intellectually sophisticated and more socio-temporally specific strata. For the reasons already noted, it would be over-optimistic to expect fables to present a fullycoherentandconsistentpictureofthegodsordivine-humanrelations,even ifsuchathingwereafeatureofGreekandRomanreligionsingeneral.Ihopeto show,however,thatcertaintrendsandpatternsofthinkingdoemergefromthe Aesopic corpus, which have some claim to be taken seriously as elements of Graeco-Romanreligiousmentalité. Beforewecontinue,onefurtherpreliminaryquestionshouldbeconsidered. It has long been accepted that human beings are conceived, at least in some contexts, in the ancient world, as standing between gods and animals.12 Are divine-human relations, then, the only ones we need to discuss, or are divine- animalanddivine-human-animalrelationsalsoatissueintheAesopiccorpus?It isalsogenerallyacceptedthatinmostfables,animalsrepresenthumanbeings,a pointtowhichweshallreturn.Anumberofstoriesinwhichanimalsengagein obviously anthropomorphic behaviour towards the gods, such as offering in- cense,takingrefugeinatemple,oraskingZeustogivethemaking,reinforcethis assumption.13Afewfables,however,whichconcerngods,animalsandhumans, deserve closer attention. In two, animals and human beings are said, without distinction, to be created and given their distinctive characteristics by Zeus or 9 Fablesarenotaloneinthis:textssuchasHomer,whichremainculturallyimportantoverlong periodsoftime,alsocontinuetoresonatewithlistenersandreadersandinformtheirthinking despiteongoingchangeintheirsocio-culturalenvironment.ItwasonlyintheByzantineand early Mediaeval worlds that fables began to be seen as culturally problematic, collections becomingincreasinglyselectiveandattractingextensivecommentaries. 10 Thoughthereissomeevidencethatmiscellaniessuchasfablecollectionsmayhavebeen readmoresystematicallythanwemightexpect:seeMorgan(2007),257–73. 11 Iassume,aftere.g.Smart(1989),12–21,thatideasaboutthegodsanddivine-humanrelations arelikelytobeadimensionofGraeco-Romanreligiosityastheyareofreligionsingeneral,and, withe.g.Luckman(1971),thatsuchideasaretypicallysociallyconstructedratherthanindividua- listic. 12 Vernant(1979);Dierauer(1977);Lloyd(2011). 13 166(323),222,66(44). Unauthenticated | 86.134.53.36 Download Date | 5/3/13 5:31 PM Divine-HumanRelationsintheAesopicCorpus 7 other gods.14 In another two, human beings and animals are alike created and endowed by the gods, but some distinction is made between them. In fable 57 (311),Zeuscreatesanimalsandhumanbeings,andattheendoftheprocess,man complainsthathehasnospecialgift.Zeusrepliesthathehasthegreatestgiftof all,onelimitedtogodsandmen:speech.Infable322(240),Prometheusmakes animals and human beings on Zeus’s orders, but finding that there are more animalsthanpeople,Zeusinstructshimtoturnsomeoftheanimalsintopeople. Prometheusobeys,butthesemenretainthesoulsofanimals.Animals,here,are treated corporately as one class of being, humans another, gods a third (and possiblyheroesafourth).Itseems,then,thatfablesshowtracesofbothabinary classificationoflivingbeingsandofVernant’striadicclassification(andconcei- vablyofatetradicone).Itseemslikely,however,thatthegreatmajorityoffables thatconcernthegodsconcerndivine-humanrelationsanddonotfurnishmateri- alforinvestigatingdivine-human-animalrelations.15 I The Aesopic Oligotheon SomeseventyAesopicfables–aboutafifthofChambry’scorpus–involvedivine beingsorreligioninsomeform.Thefirstthingthatstrikesthereaderaboutthe godswhotakepartinthesestoriesisthattheyarevirtuallyallOlympians.16The onlypre-Olympiangodtoappear(twice)isEarth.17Fablesthereforerestrictthem- selves rather more than do literary retellings of myth to gods who are widely worshippedfromthearchaicGreekworldonwards–thosewhomighthavebeen worshippedbytheirlistenersandreaders.Inadditiontothegods,asmallnumber offablesfeatureheroes–Heracles,PrometheusandonceTheseus18–anddivine 14 124(100),139. 15 Ifweweretotakethepresenceofanimalsthroughoutthecorpusasareflectionofsystematic interestindivine-human-animalrelations,wemightbeforcedtoconsidermuchmorethana triadicstructure,oroneinwhichsomeanimalsareclosertohumanbeingsthantootheranimals, sinceitisnotobvious,forinstance,thatpredatorsandpreyarealwayslessdistinctthanhuman beingsandanimalsasaclass.Iamdoubtfulthatthiswouldbejustified,butitwouldbealarger projectthanwecanpursuehere. 16 ThoughpriestsofCybelearementionedonce,infable236(164). 17 19(8),109(102). 18 Heracles:44,72(291),129(316),130(111),cf.356;Prometheus:124(100),210(259),303,322 (240);Theseus:44.Fable44,inwhichtwomenquarrelaboutwhetherTheseusorHeraclesisthe greaterhero,andeachherolayswastethehomelandofthemanwhodoesnotworshiphim,has noobviousconnectionswiththeTheseusofmythorcultorotherfablesofHeracles,andofthe storiesdiscussedhereisperhapstheleastlikelytobepre-firstcenturyinorigin. Unauthenticated | 86.134.53.36 Download Date | 5/3/13 5:31 PM 8 TeresaMorgan qualitiesorpersonifications:Horkos,Thanatos,Tyche,Polemos,Hybris,Aletheia, PlutusandMomus,alongwithWinterandSpringandTheNorthWindandSun.19 Amongthegods,fablesconfinethemselvestothemorepowerfulOlympians, and not all of those: Zeus, Hera, Apollo, Aphrodite, Athena, Demeter, Hermes and Hades. Most of these only appear once or twice and only Zeus, Hermes, Aphrodite, Athena and Apollo play an active part in stories. By far the greatest numberofreferencestoindividualgodsistoZeus,whoappearsintwenty-eight fables,followedbyHermes,intwelve;infourstoriestheyappeartogether.20By comparisonwiththerangeandcomplexityofcult,orofmythsandstoriesabout thegods,thisisalimited pantheon,with somenotable omissions:anumberof fables take place at sea, for instance, but there is no mention of Poseidon. Nor are the complexities of divine interactions in other genres replicated in fables: with the exception of Zeus and Hermes, fables rarely feature more than one god.21 Inahandfulofstories,thereligiousactionisasacrificeoranactofdivination: everydayactivities inthe ancient world, butones which do notinvolve gods as actorsinthestory.22Thecorpusalsoshowsawarenessofasmallnumberofmajor cults and festivals – the Olympic Games, the Eleusinian Mysteries and the Pa- nathenaia–butwiththeexceptionofonestoryaboutamantestingtheDelphic oracle,andonewhoselocationisunclear,nofableissetatapublicshrine,ritual orfestival.23Instead,nearlyalldivine-humaninteractionstakeplaceinprivateor informalcontexts.Characterssetupstatuestogodsorheroesintheirhomes.They 19 Horkos298,Thanatos133,Tyche261(174),PolemosandHybris319(367),Aletheia259(355), Plutus130(111),Momus124(100),WinterandSpring346(271),TheNorthWindandSun73(46). Seebelow,n.46. 20 Versnel(1983),328givesdifferentfigures,basedonallsurvivingancientfables.Asimilar pattern emerges in the earliest surviving Greek proverb collections, dated to the first-second centuries,inwhichZeusappearsseveraltimes,Hermesthree,Heraclesfivetimes,ascatteringof otherOlympiandeitiesonceortwiceandCronusonce. 21 Exceptionsare124(100),inwhichZeus,PrometheusandAthenastageacompetitiontocreate thebestlivingthing;121(104),acompetitionbetweenZeusandApollo;and109(102),whenZeus, HermesandEarthallplayaroleinthecreationofmenandwomen(cf.19(8)).Heraclesappears withAthenain129(316)andHadesin130(111);HeraclesandTheseusarethesubjectofaquarrel in44. 22 E.g.55(28),292(sacrifice);294(divination).246(66)referstothegodsasguarantorsofoaths. 23 10 (5) refers to the Eleusinian Mysteries and the Panathenaic festival, 51 to the Olympic games.Fable18(301)doesnotspecifywhethertheuglyslavegirlwhosacrificestoAphrodite doessoatatempleoradomesticshrine.InthefableofthemanwhotestedDelphi(50(36)),the godspeakstothetesterdirectly,notthroughthePythiaorpriests,soeveninthisformalcult settingtheemphasisisonthepersonalnatureofthedivine-humanrelationship.Kurke(2011), 53–94seestheLifeofAesopascontestingtheauthorityofDelphi,particularlyincomparisonwith Unauthenticated | 86.134.53.36 Download Date | 5/3/13 5:31 PM Divine-HumanRelationsintheAesopicCorpus 9 praytoagod,orencounteragod,athomeorwhengoingabouttheirbusiness,in theirdreams,ontheroad,inawood,onariverbank,inagarden,atseaorwhen caughtinatrap.24 Giventhatmanyfablesmusthavebeenlost,itwouldberashtoputtoomuch weightontheabsenceofsomeOlympiangodsfromthescene.Thedominanceof Zeus and Hermes, however, and the overwhelming interest of fables in divine- humaninteractionsininformalcontexts,donotlooklikelytobeaccidental.Nor doestherangeofactivitiesinwhichthegodsengage. Cosmogony and the creation of the world are a recurring theme in myth, where they usually involve a number of different divinities and often several divinegenerations.Infables,thiscomplexityisradicallysimplified:thecreative powerisalwaysZeus,occasionallyhelpedbyEarthorahero.Infable19(8),for example, Zeus causes Earth to create the mountains and plains.25 In fable 109 (102), he creates human beings and sends Hermes to show them how to till the earth(towhichEarthobjectsandwhichshemakesasdifficultaspossible).26In fable57(311),aswehaveseen,Zeuscreatesanimalsandhumanbeings,andgives eachtheirdistinctivecharacteristics.27 The idea that Zeus gives every creature its special qualities – strength or speed,flight,speechorintelligence–recursinseveralstories,andisevidentlya significantpartoffables’worldview.28Thesequalitiesarealmostalwayscharac- terizedasusefulanddesirable,implyingthatZeusisnotonlypowerful,butalso benevolent.29Men,horses,oxenarevariouslypresentedinfable139,forinstance, asbeingpureandgood(ἀκεραίουςτεκαὶἀγαθοὺς),gloriousandproud(ἀλαζόνας τεκαὶὑψαυχένας),andwillingtoacceptdiscipline(ἀρχικοὺςὑπάρχειν).30“Recog- nizing the god’s gift [of speech],” ends fable 57 (311), “the man did obeisance and left rejoicing.” (καὶ τότε ἐπιγνοὺς τὸ δῶρον ὁ ἄνθρωπος προσκυνήσας καὶ thatofindividuals’dreams;infable50(36)theauthorityofDelphiisupheld,butbothsharea senseoftheimportanceofinformaldivine-humaninteraction. 24 Athome:61(285),76(50),131;ontheroad:72(291);inawood:74;onariverbank:253(173); in a garden: 273 (179); at sea: 53 (30); caught in a trap: 166 (323). Prayers are always simple requestsforhelp,butwhengodsappearandengagemortalsinconversation,moreextendedand variedexchangesoccur(seebelow). 25 Thisisoneofasmallnumberoffables-within-fables,thisoneputinthemouthofAesop himself. 26 Cf.118,120. 27 Cf.139,322(240). 28 118(109),120(108),139. 29 ParalleledinGreekproverbs,e.g.Zen.1.26,2.44,2.48,4.20,4.99;Ps.-Diog.2.84. 30 Thoughdogsaregrumblingandbad-tempered(ὀργίλουςκαὶὑλακτικοὺς). Unauthenticated | 86.134.53.36 Download Date | 5/3/13 5:31 PM 10 TeresaMorgan εὐχαριστήσας ωἰχ͂ ετο.) Just one fable of creation is darker in tone, and shows Zeus’sactionsinamoreambiguouslight:31 Prometheus,atthecommandofZeus,createdhumanbeingsandanimals.ButZeus,seeing thatanimalswerefarmorenumerousthanpeople,orderedhimtodestroyanumberofthe animalsandconvertthemtohumanbeings.Whenhehadcarriedoutthisorder,itemerged thatthosemenwhohadnotoriginallybeenmadeasmenhadtheformofmenbutthespirits ofbeasts. In this story, Zeus’s orders are carried out by Prometheus, and it may be the involvementoftheherowhichcausescreationtotakeamoreproblematicturn,a themetowhichweshallreturn.32 LinkedwithZeus’spowerandhisroleasthecreatorofanimalsandhuman beingsishisregularappearanceasthereceiverofcomplaintsandappealsfrom his creatures, and arbiter of their disputes. In fable 99 (302), the oak trees complain because they are constantly being cut down. In fable 291 (198), the snakecomplainsthatheisforeverbeingtroddenon.Thefrogs(66(44)),dissatis- fiedwiththeanarchyinwhichtheylive,appealtoZeustogivethemaking.The camel(146(117)),enviousofthebullwithhisfearsomehorns,asksZeustogive him horns too. The bees (234 (163)) apply to Zeus for more powerful stings, to deter people from stealing their honey, while the asses (262 (185)), tired of carryingheavyburdens,sendadelegationtorequestthatalimitbeputontheir workload.Intheworldoffables,itseems,notonlyarelivingbeingscreatedby Zeus, but they take a high view of his continued interest in their affairs and responsibilityforthem. In literary retellings of myth, the gods sometimes respond to complaints or appeals,andsometimesdonot,whileincultpracticeitislefttotheworshipperto infer from subsequent events whether a communication has been favourably received.Infables,whetherornotZeusactsinresponsetoaplea,heconfirmshis interest in mortals by seldom missing the opportunity to give advice, deliver a hometruthortickasuppliantoff.Heblamestheoaktreesfortheirownproblems, because they supply the wood that makes axe handles, and tells the asses that theywillnotlosetheirburdensuntiltheycanmakeariveroftheirurine(which explainswhywheneveroneassstopstourinate,othersfollowsuit).Thegods,it seems, have little patience with creatures who do not accept the role for which 31 322(240);firstattestedelsewhereatPl.Prt.320d. 32 Prometheusisknownelsewhereasatrickster(Hes.Theog.506–616,Aes.PV442–525)and creator(firstinAr.Av.686).IntheAesopiccorpus,heisalwaysassociatedwithcreation(210 (259),303,322(240)).Onlyonefable(303)hintsathischaracterasatrickster,whenhemakes humanbeingssothattheycanseeeachothers’faults,butnottheirown. Unauthenticated | 86.134.53.36 Download Date | 5/3/13 5:31 PM Divine-HumanRelationsintheAesopicCorpus 11 theirnaturehaspreparedthem.Thesnakehascausedhisownproblemsbynot beingassertiveenough:Zeustellshimthatifhehadbittenthefirsthumanbeing who trod on him, he would have had no more trouble. The frogs appear to be makingareasonablerequestforhelpwithapoliticalchangewhichtheycannot makebythemselves,andareheardsympathetically.33Thebees’requestseemsto beinsomewaysreasonableandinothersselfish,sotheygetwhattheyaskfor, butataprice:Zeusgivesthemstings,butsodesignsthemthatwhenthestingis used,thebeedies. MuchofZeus’sadvice–standupforyourselfwhenyoucan,andacceptyour lotwhenyoucannot–echoesthemesfamiliarfrompopularmoralizinginother contexts.Itbelongsto“ethicswide,”theclassofallthewaysinwhichitisright for us to behave.34 In a few stories, Zeus rewards or punishes suppliants onthe basisofqualitieswhichwemightcharacterizeasethicalormoralinanarrower sense. He is angered, for instance, by the greed of camel and the bees’ envious reluctancetosharetheirhoney.35 Zeusisalsoportrayedasmoralwhenhedispensesjustice,consistinginthe punishment of misdeeds. One of the most vivid images in the corpus is that of Zeus in fable 126 (313), sitting beside a box of ostraka on which Hermes has inscribedthemisdeeds(ἁμαρτίας)ofhumanbeings,andworkinghiswaythrough it,“sothathemaydojusticetoeach”(ὅπωςἑκάστουτὰςδίκαςἀναπράσσηι).The ostrakagetmixedup,saysthefable,“andsomecomesooner,somelaterintothe handsofZeus,forhimtomakejustjudgements”(εἴποτεκαλῶςκρίνοιτο).36Fable 240 describes an act of summary justice by the god, when he turns a greedy farmerwhostealshisneighbour’swheatandbarleyintoanant.(Ζεὺςδὲἀγανακ- τήσας κατὰ τῆς πλεονεξίας αὐτοῦ μετεμόρφωσεν αὐτὸν εἰς τοῦτο τὸ ζῶιον ὃς μύρμηξκαλεῖται). Occasionally,amoralmessageismoreambiguous.Fable123(312)tellshow Zeusenclosedallgoodthingsinajarandgavethemtoamantolookafter.The man wascuriousand openedthejar,whereon allthe good things flewawayto thegods.37Ononelevel,thisstoryseemstosaythatZeusisgenerousanditisnot 33 Theirrequesthaswell-knownparallelsinGreekhistory(e.g.Hdt.4.161,Diod.70.5,82.6). 34 EdelandEdel(1959);inGreekpopularmorality,therightwaytobehaveisalwayspartly determinedbyone’ssocialposition(Morgan(2007),163–9). 35 Boththecamelandthebeessufferfromφθόνος;thebeesalsofromβασκανίαcf.124(100) (ZeusisangeredbyMomus’jealousyofwhatothergodshavecreated),125(106)(Zeusisangered bytheingratitudeofthetortoisewhomhehasinvitedtoafeast). 36 DerivedfromIl.24.527–8andrelatedtoHesiod’sPandorastory(Op.90–8). 37 OtherwiseearliestattestedatBabr.58;anepimythiumintheAugustanacollection,influenced by Hesiod, adds that hope remained with human beings. Hesiod’s version, of course, has Unauthenticated | 86.134.53.36 Download Date | 5/3/13 5:31 PM 12 TeresaMorgan his fault if human beings fail to enjoy the good things of life.38 On another, we maywonderhowgenerousitisofthegodtogivegiftswhichcannotbeaccessed withouttheirtakingflight.39 Even taking into account difficult cases such as this, however, in the large andcomplexfieldofGraeco-Romancognitivereligiosity,fablesrevealsomewell- definedanddistinctivefeatures.Theirworldisdominatedbywhatwemightcall anoligotheon:arestrictedgroupofdivinitiesinwhichonepowerful(ifnotquite all-powerful) god, Zeus, plays by far the largest part, supported principally by Hermes, the traditional mediator between Olympus, earth and the underworld. Zeus is on the whole a benign, if sometimes formidable figure, creating living beings, giving them their characteristic qualities, and regulating their beha- viour.40 Access to Zeus is open to all, however lowly, and typically takes place informallyand/orinprivate,ratherthaninpublicand/orthroughcultacts.Apart from Zeus and Hermes, Aphrodite and Athena appear most often as actors in fables, suggesting that after existence itself, the social order, justice and com- merce, (practical) wisdom and love or sex are the areas of life in which human beingsimaginethemselvesasinteractingmostwiththedivine.41Thecomplexity ofancientpublic,electiveanddomesticcult,myth,literatureandphilosophy,are reducedtoasimple,insomewaysreassuringsystem,whichoffersanaccountof existence and morality, affirms the interest of the divine in human affairs, and presentsthedivineasaccessibletohumanbeings–thoughitalsosuggeststhat Zeus’ concern is more often with maintaining the order of creation as a whole thanaccommodatingthedesiresofindividualmortals.42 generatedlongandrichdebateoverthesignificanceofPandora,herjaranditscontents;Aesop’s versionhasbeenlessdiscussed,beyondthedrawingoftheparallel. 38 Cf.99(302). 39 GivingthejartoPandora,andidentifyingherwithEarth(e.g.Harrison(1900))simplifiesthe paradoxslightly,especiallyif,aswehaveseen,ZeusandEartharesometimesatodds.Harrison (p. 108)notesthatBabriusgivesthejartoZeusandfillsitwithgoodthings,butseesthistradition as late and minor; its presence in the Aesopic corpus suggests it may be earlier and more important. 40 Teixidor(1977),7–17arguesthatNearEasternpopularreligionintheGraeco-Romanperiod showsthegodsasgenerallybenignandhelpful,andhasatendencytowardsmonotheism(cf. MitchellandvanNuffelen(2010)).HedoesnotdiscussfablesbutsuggeststhatLucian’ssatire IcaromenippusattestsasimilarstrainofthinkingintheGreekworldandnotesthatthegodsin Greekareoftencalledοἱἐπηκόοι,“thosewholistentoprayers.”Cf.Karadagli(1981),140–87on thedominanceofZeusinfables,andOsborne(2007),24–40.Seefurthern.46,below. 41 Both,especiallypracticalwisdom,arealsocentralthemesinotherwisdomgenres(Morgan (2007),168–9,172–3). 42 AlsotheconclusionofLloyd-Jones(1983),thoughhispictureofZeusisharsherthantheone whichemergesfromfables,perhapsbecausehefocuseson“high”literature,whichmayproble- Unauthenticated | 86.134.53.36 Download Date | 5/3/13 5:31 PM