Fables and Fabulists: Ancient and ModernNewbigging, Thomas
History
Fables and Fabulists: Ancient and Modern
Newbigging, Thomas
Didactic literature -- History and criticism; Fables -- History and criticism
Not only was Æsop unfortunate in his death: his personal appearance has
suffered disparagement. The most trustworthy chroniclers in ancient
times describe him as a man of good appearance, and even of a pleasing
cast of countenance; whereas in later years he has been portrayed
both by writers and in pictures as deformed in body and repellent in
features. Stobæus, it is true, who lived in the fifth century A.D., had
written disparagingly of 'the air of Æsop's countenance,' representing
the fabulist as a man of sour visage, and intractable, but he goes no
farther than that.
It is to Maximus Planudes, a Constantinople monk of the fourteenth
century, nearly two thousand years after the time of Æsop, that the
burlesque of the great fabulist is due. Planudes appears to have
collected all the stories regarding Æsop current during the Middle
Ages, and strung them together as an authentic history. Through
ignorance, or by intention, he also confounded the Oriental fabulist,
Locman,[22] with Æsop, and clothed the latter in all the admitted
deformities of the other. He affirmed him as having been flat-faced,
hunch-backed, jolt-headed, blubber-lipped, big-bellied, baker-legged,
his body crooked all over, and his complexion of a swarthy hue. Even
in recent years, accepting the description of the monk, Æsop has
been thus depicted in the frontispiece to his fables. This writer is
untrustworthy in other respects, for in his pretended life of the sage
he makes him speak of persons who did not exist, and of events that did
not occur for eighty to two hundred years after his death.
That the story of Æsop's hideous deformity is untrue is clear from
evidence that is on record. Admitted that this evidence is chiefly of
a negative kind, it is sufficiently strong to refute the statements
of the monk. In the first place, Planudes, as we have seen, is an
untrustworthy chronicler in other respects, and an account of Æsop,
written after the lapse of two thousand years, could only be worthy of
credence issuing from a truthful pen, and based on documentary or other
unquestionable evidence. Of such evidence the Constantinople monk had
probably none.
Again, it is related that during the years of his slavery Æsop had as
mate, or wife, the beautiful Rhodope,[23] also a slave--an unlikely
circumstance, assuming him to have been as repulsive in bodily
appearance as has been asserted. At all events, any incongruous
association of this kind would have been remarked and commented on by
earlier writers.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account