Both the ancient scholiasts (see Schol. Apoll. Rhod. i. 769) and
the modern commentators, Spanheim and Heyne, seek to escape this
difficulty by supposing two Atalantas,—an Arcadian and a Bœôtian:
assuming the principle of their conjecture to be admissible, they
ought to suppose at least three.
Certainly, if personages of the Grecian mythes are to be treated
as historically real, and their adventures as so many exaggerated
and miscolored facts, it will be necessary to repeat the process
of multiplying entities to an infinite extent. And this is one
among the many reasons for rejecting the fundamental supposition.
But when we consider these personages as purely legendary, so
that an historical basis can neither be affirmed nor denied
respecting them, we escape the necessity of such inconvenient
stratagems. The test of identity is then to be sought in the
attributes, not in the legal description,—in the predicates, not
in the subject. Atalanta, whether born of one father or another,
whether belonging to one place or another, is beautiful, cold,
repulsive, daring, swift of foot and skilful with the bow,—these
attributes constitute her identity. The Scholiast on Theocritus
(iii. 40), in vindicating his supposition that there were two
Atalantas, draws a distinction founded upon this very principle:
he says that the Bœôtian Atalanta was τοξοτὶς, and the Arcadian
Atalanta δρομαία. But this seems an over-refinement: both the
shooting and the running go to constitute an accomplished
huntress.
In respect to Parthenopæus, called by Euripidês and by so many
others the son of Atalanta, it is of some importance to add,
that Apollodôrus, Aristarchus, and Antimachus, the author of the
Thebaid, assigned to him a pedigree entirely different,—making
him an Argeian, the son of Talaos and Lysimachê, and brother of
Adrastus. (Apollodôr. i. 9, 13; Aristarch. ap. Schol. Soph. Œd.
Col. 1320; Antimachus ap. Schol. Æschyl. Sep. Theb. 532; and
Schol. Supplem. ad Eurip. Phœniss. t. viii. p. 461, ed. Matth.
Apollodôrus is in fact inconsistent with himself in another
passage).
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account