CC BY
0
UDC 821.14
Philologia Classica. 2023. Vol. 18. Fasc. 2
What is a ypunaieto^ (Aesch. Fr. inc. fab. 422 R. )?*
Míriam Librán Moreno
Universidad de Extremadura,
avenida de la Universidad, s/n, Cáceres, 10003, Spain; mlibmor@unex.es
For citation: Librán Moreno M. What is a ypunaÍETo;; (Aesch. Fr. inc. fab. 422 R. )? Philologia Classica 2023, 18 (2), 177-189. https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu20.2023.203
The purpose of the following paper is to identify what kind of mythical creature Aeschylus' ypunaisTo; ('griffin-eagle') that caused such a scandal for 'Euripides' in Aristophanes' Frogs 928-930 (= Aesch. fr. inc. fab. 422 R.) was. The term has usually been interpreted in three ways: (a) as a poetic form of 'eagle'; (b) as a poetic form of 'griffin'; (c) as 'eagle of the griffin species'. The testimony of Aristophanes' Frogs and vase-painting suggests that it may have been an idiosyncratic, archaic type of griffin, called by modern specialists 'griffin-bird' and characterised by having two legs, not four, and the body of a bird, not a lion. This fantastic creature appeared quite frequently on Archaic black-figure vases in Athens, but had completely disappeared by the end of the 6th century BC. As a result, its appearance would be unknown to Aristophanes' public, making the term ypunaisTo; impossible to make out (Ra. 930). Thus, the following paper suggests that Aeschylus' ypunaisTo; ('griffin-eagle') is a fabulous composite beast made up of griffin and eagle parts, as its name suggests: a griffin head (with an open hooked beak, long pointed ears, a protuberance or horn over the eyes, and a curl or plume falling down one side of the neck) crowning an eagle body (two-legged, feathered, with wings and talons). Keywords: Aeschylus, Aristophanes, griffin, ypunaisTo;, griffin-eagle.
1. The problem
In Aristophanes' Frogs 911-38, during the famous agon between 'Aeschylus' and 'Euripides', the latter criticizes his rival's theatrical technique. Aeschylus, 'Euripides' argues, deceives his audience by presenting the main character sitting and silent (911-913). The chorus would break into long lyrical runs while the character remained silent (914-915). The expectant audience waited to see when the character would finally break his silence; by then, the drama had reached its halfway point (919-920). Finally, the character spoke, but what came out of their mouth, 'Euripides' complains, were dozens of imposing, warlike, fearsome words (924-925), the meaning of which was unknown to his audience (926 ayvwTa toí; Gew^evotc;).1 'Euripides' gives the following as an example of such incomprehensible and terrifying terms (928-930):
aAA' ^ ZKa^ávSpou; ^ Tá^pou; ^ 'n' aamSwv ¿nóvTa; ypunaisTou; xa^K^AáTou; Ka! p^a9' LnnÓKpn^va, a ^u^aAeív oú páSi' r|v.
* The author wishes to thank Ralph Hancock and the anonymous reader for Philologia Classica for their invaluable help.
1 Cioffi 2015, 211: "The ypunaisTot; and the innaXsKtpuwv are singled out at Ar. Ranae 928-938 for their Aeschylean obscurity"; Stanford 1963, 154: "[ayvwra] either unknown or unintelligible".
© St. Petersburg State University, 2023
Nothing but Scamanders, and moats, and shields with griffin-eagles of beaten bronze on
them, and sheer massive mountains of words that it was very hard to work out the meaning
of. (Transl. by A. H. Sommerstein.)
Dionysus nods and offers confirmation from his own experience: he once spent a whole sleepless night wondering what kind of bird the tawny InnaXeKxpuwv was, an animal mentioned by Aeschylus in one of his tragedies (932 tov ^oubov InnaXeKxpuova Zntwv Tit; ¿axiv opvi;). Aeschylus angrily reminds him that it is an emblem painted on a ship (933 a^etov ¿v Tat; vauaiv, w^aGeaxaT, ¿veyeypanxo). 'Euripides' defends his art against his rival's attacks: he certainly did not write about composite monsters like the cock-horse and the goat-stag, as Aeschylus did (937 oux InnaXeKxpuovac;, ^a Ai', ouSe xpayeXa^ouc;, anep au), creatures that the Persians embroidered on their tapestries and wall hangings (938 av xotai napanexaa^aatv Tot; MnSiKot; ypa^ouatv).
All three fantastic animals mentioned in Aristophanes' lines come from Aeschylus' fragments: the InnaXeKxpuwv or cock-horse from Myrmidones fr. 134 R. (fano S' aixef ^ouBo; InnaXeKxpuwv / axaZet fKrpoBev xwvf ^ap^aKwv noXu; novo;), the ypunaiexo; or griffin-eagle from fr. inc. fab. 422 R. (ypunaiexo; (xaXK^Xaxo; ¿n' aaniSo; ¿nwv) and the xpayeXa^o; or goat-stag from fr. inc. fab. 444 R. (xpayeXa^o;). Although to be fair it ought to be acknowledged that only fr. 134 R. is ever quoted outside of Frogs, or independently from it.
The purpose of this article is to imitate Dionysus and to ask what kind of bird the Aeschylean ypunaiexo; was, or more precisely, what kind of animal this term, which 'Euripides' found so incomprehensible and shocking, designates.
Although it is an extremely rare word,2 ypunaiexo; seems at first sight to have an obvious meaning: 'griffin-eagle' (DGE s. v.). But what exactly is a 'griffin-eagle'? Stephanus (TLG II, 1830, 794 "monstrosam avem ... mixtam ex aquilarum et gryphum ... genere, ut yunaiexov") and Italie (1964, 59 "monstrosa avis mixta ex grype et aquila") follow the interpretation of sch. rec. Ar. Ra. 929a: an animal composed of parts of eagles and griffins ((«a auvBexa ¿k ypunwv Kai aexwv). However, since a griffin is a composite monster with the body, paws and claws of a lion and the beak and wings of an eagle,3 it could be understood that the part (the eagle or the lion) is already included in the whole (the term ypu^, griffin).4 That is, it would not be permissible to define the ypunaiexo; as a mixture of griffin and eagle, because the griffin itself is already partly an eagle.
The scholiasts to Ra. 928-9 noticed this non sequitur and tried to explain it in various ways. According to some, the term simply referred to unusual or strange shield-devices, especially the eagles that were usually engraved or drawn on shields (sch. Ra. 929'Eman^a aaniSo; aXXoKoxa. eiwBaat yap (wypa^etv ei; xa; aaniSa; aexou;). According to Johannes Tzeztes (sch. rec. Ar. Ra. 928b ypunaiexou; Se ^ "ypunou; aexou;" ... ^ "ypuna;
2 It is attested solely in Ar. Ra. 929 and its scholia. One might of course wonder whether ypunaiexo; is a genuine fragment, or a mock Aeschylean word coined by Aristophanes to parody his style. Given that Ar. Ra. 929-930 cites it in the same breath as Aesch. fr. 380 R., which is independently attested elsewhere (sch. Il. 16.380), it is safe to assume that both are authentic Aeschylean fragments and not coinages by Aristophanes. Ever since Butler (1816, 259) first identified it ("hoc fragmentum ... certe ex Aeschylo desumptum videtur apud Aristophan. Ran. v. 959"), ypunaiexo; has been included in almost all editions of Aeschylus' fragments.
3 E. g. Leventopoulou 1997, 609; Arnott 2007, 90.
4 Cf. e. g. Paus. 1.24.6 ypuna; Se Br|pia Xsouaiv eiKaa^sva, nxepa Se sxeiv Kai axo^a aexou. Both Thompson (1895, 47: "a fabulous bird") and LSJ s. v. ("a kind of griffin or wyvern") are noncommittal about the nature of the ypunaiexo;.
^ aexou;" — ou ^v Se "ypuna; dexou;"), ypunaieTo; should be understood in one of two ways: either ypun- does not come from ypu^, but from ypuno; ('hooked'), so that the device was a 'hook-beaked eagle' (cf. sch. rec. Ar. Ra. 928b "ypunou; deTou;", ¿mra^n^ Ta pd^^n ^xovTa;), or one should understand "ypuna; ^ deTou;", 'griffins or eagles', as if the bronze-beaten shield-devices were either griffins or eagles (cf. sch. rec. Ra. 929a ypuna; Kai deTou; KsxaXKsu^evou;). The latter interpretation, documented in Thomas Magis-ter's and Triclinius' scholia to Aristophanes, corresponds to the type of compound called dvandva, extremely rare in Classical Greek but common in Byzantine Greek,5 which also provided the Byzantine nouns ypu^oXewv ('griffin and lion') and ypunovaypo; ('griffin and onager') (LBG ss. vv.). Therefore, the interpretation 'eagles and griffins' cannot be valid for Aeschylus' time.
2. Modern interpretations
Modern commentators have also contributed their solutions, in many cases derived from the ancient ones we have seen in section 1. In general, they can be reduced to the following three:
(1) YPunatsTo; is simply equivalent to alsTo; ('eagle')6. This interpretation is based on the above-mentioned scholium (sch. Ra. 929 ... slwGaai yap Z^Ypafstv sl; Ta; damSa; dsTou;) and understands YpunaisTo; simply as referring to an eagle portrayed in low relief on a shield, interpreting it as 'hook-beaked eagle' (from Ypuno; 'hooked' + alsTo; 'eagle'). So the creature on the shield would simply be a poetic term for 'eagle'.
But if YpunaisTo; were simply a poetically elaborated name for 'eagle' (or any other readily identifiable animal), would it prove so unusual and memorable as to leave the audience baffled, give rise (decades after!) to Aristophanes' joke, and give 'Euripides' occasion to illustrate by such an example his mockery of Aeschylus' bewildering style? All the more so when one considers how common the adjective ypuno; was, how often eagles appeared as shield devices7 and how banal the meaning of 'hook-beaked eagle' is.8 Would really this meaning (the first that occurs to the scholiast, therefore the most obvious one) be among the things that were ^u^paXsiv ou paSi' ('not easy to make out') and ayvwTa Tot; Gsw^evotc ('unknown to the public'), especially as the hooked beak of the eagle was so proverbial that it even served as a physiognomic description of a type of nose9? Rather, it must refer to a composite creature sufficiently exotic and unknown to bear comparison with the InnaXsKTpuwv and the TpayeXa^o;, other fantastic beings invoked by Dionysus and 'Euripides'.
5 Kühner, Blass 1892, 318, § 338.
6 Dover 1993, 308: "ypunoc; is 'hooked' (including 'hook-nosed'), and aieTo; 'eagle'... there is no need to think that a ypunaisto; differs from an aieTo;"; Arnott 2007, 59: "since the word grypos in ancient Greek means 'hooked' or 'hook-nosed', and every Aetos has a hooked beak, the Aeschylean Grypaietos was presumably a poetically embellished synonym for Aetos".
7 Chase 1902, 104-105.
8 Aeschylus draws attention to the hooked talons ofthe bird of prey, not the beak: PV488 ya|iy«vi>x«v Ts nrfaiv oiwvwv, fr. 193.11 R. aduncis lacerans unguibus. Cf. Ar. Nu. 337 ya^^oü; oiwvoü; (sch. ad loc. Ka^nüXou; Tai; piai Kai Toi; övu£).
9 E. g.: Arist. Physiogn. 811a36: o'i 5s ypun^v exovts; Kai tou ^sTwnou 5ir|p6p«|i£vr|v ^syaXo^uxoi-ävacpspsTai ¿ni Toü; dsToü;; Olymp. In Platonis Alcibiadem comm. 154: out« yap Kai o dsTÖ; ypunö; eotiv, w; ßaaiXiKÖ;.
Secondly, the list of zoonyms mentioned by Aeschylus clearly shows that the interpretation of ypunaiexo; as ypuno; + aiexo; does not correspond to his usage. In all the cases in which Aeschylus names an animal and at the same time indicates a physical or behavioural characteristic, he never uses a compound consisting of an adjective denoting such a characteristic and a noun as the head; rather, he uses a noun accompanied by an adjective or another noun in apposition.10
(2) ypunaisxoc; is equivalent to ypUy (griffin).11 ypunaisxoc; is just a more sonorous and poetic way of referring to the griffin, just as the terms 'centaur' and 'hippocentaur' refer to the same mythic creature. However, there was a difference between centaur and hippocentaur,12 as shown by the existence of other compounds with -Ksvxaupo; as the head such as ovoKsvxaupo; ('half man, half donkey', gorilla or chimpanzee, Ael. NA 17. 9), vsfsXoKsvxaupo; ('cloud-centaur', Luc. VH 1.16), IxBuoKevxaupo; ('fish-centaur', sc. Triton, sch. Lyc. 34), ^ovoKsvxaupo; ('man with an ox's head', gloss) among which there are obvious differences of meaning. A similar case may be made for another mythological composite creature, the sphinx: there is a difference between a^iy^ and avSpoafry^ ('sphinx with the face of a man and not of a woman, Hdt. 2.175). That is to say, the compound forms are not merely poetic terms to designate the same kind of mythic creature, but show that there is a difference in meaning, of greater or lesser importance, with respect to the simple terms. If XsuKoypu-y ('white griffin') is not a mere synonym
10 See Pers. 81 cpoviou ... SpaKovTo;, 577 dvaüSwv / naiSwv , 611 ßoö; t'dip' ayvfjc;, Sept. 26 xpr|aTr|-piou; öpvi9a;, 53 XsövTwv ... 'Äpr| SsSopKöTwv, 294 navTpo^o; nsXsid;, 1020 nsTr|v«v ... oiwvwv, 10351036 KoiXoyaaTops; / Xükoi, Supp. 16-17 oiaTpoSövou ßoö;, 44 dv9ovo^oüaa; npoyövou ßoö;, 62 KipKr|-XaTou y' dnSövo;, 224-225 KipKwv twv o^onTspwv, 275 sütckvou ßoö;, 284-285 innoßa^oaiv ... Ka||Xoi;, 300 sÜKpaipwi ßot, 301 ßou9öp«i Taüpwi, 307 ßor|XaTr|v ^üwna Kivr|T|piov, 351 XuKoSiwKTov . ..Sa|iaXiv, 511 SpaKövTwv Suacppövwv, 557 ßouKöXou nTspösvTo;, 568 ßoTov ... Suaxsp«; |si^ö|ßpoTov, 800-801 Kd-nixwpioi; / öpviai, 895 Sinou; öcpi;, / sxiSva, Ag. 36 ßoü; ... i^a;, 112 9oüpio; öpvi; ..., o KsXaivo; ö t' g^öniv dpYd;, 119 XaYivav ¿piKÜ|iova ... Y^vvav, 135 rnravoiaiv Kuai naTpo;/ aÜTöToKov ... |ioYspav nTaKa, 141 Spöaoi; dsnToi; |iaXspa>v XsövTwv navTwv t' dYpovö|wv 9iXo|aaToi; 9r|p«v oßpiKaXoiai, 394 no-Tavov öpviv, 717-720 XsovTo; 1- / viv ... dYaXaKTov ... 9iXö|iaaTov, /... d|ispov, sü^iXönaiSa / ... ¿nixapTov ... ^aiSpwnö;, 827 Xswv, 1142-1145 ^ou9a dKöpsTo; ßod; ... dr|S«v, 1146 Xrysia; ... driSövo;, 1169 ßoTwv noiovö|wv, 1224-1225 Xsovt' avaXKiv ... / oiKoupöv, 1228 iia^Tf; Kuvö;, 1232-1233 SuacpiXs; SaKo; ... / d|9iaßaivav, 1258-1259 Sinou; Xsaiva ..., / Xeovro; sÜYsvou;, 1297-1298 9sr|XaTou / ßoö^, 1472 KöpaKo; ¿x9pou, Ch. 247 aisTou naTpo; 9avövTo; .Ssivf; ¿xiSv^;, 421 Xüko; ... «iiöcppwv aaavTo;, 446 noXuaivou; Kuvö;, 924 ¿ykötou; KÜva;, 938 SinXou; Xswv, 994 |üpaiva y' s'it' sxiSv', 1050 nuKvoi; Spa-Kouaiv, Eum. 127 Ssivf; SpaKaivri;, 193 Xeovro;... ai^aToppö^ou, 246-247 TSTpau|aTia|£vov ... vsßpöv, 866 ¿voiKiou S' öpvi9o;, PV 286 Tov HTspuY«Kf TövS' oiwvöv, 395 TSTpaaKsX^; oiwvö;, 452-453 d|aupoi / |üp|nKs;, 465-466 ^iX^viou; / innou;, 488 Ya|i^«vi>x«v ... oiwvwv, 588 Td; ßoÜKspw nap9svou, 674675 6^uaTö|wi / |iüwm, 803-804 ö^uaTö|ou; ... dKpaYsi; KÜva; / Ypuna;, 1009-1010 vso^uY^; / nwXo;, 1022 m^vo; küwv, Sacpoivö; aisTö;, frs. 74.2 R. op9öKspw; ßou;, 123 R. x^phTi; SpaKwv, 160.2 R. nup-cpöpoiaiv aisToi;, 193. 21 R. diram volucrem, 210 R. SüaT^vov d9Xiav ^aßa, 227 R. dpoupaio; ... a|iv9o;, 233 R. AiTvaio; ... Kav9apo;, 236 R. Z^iYYa Suaa|spidv npÜTaviv KÜva, 282 R. iTa|ai; Kuaiv dspo^oiToi;, 298 R. Taupo; . vsoa^aY^;, 310 R. Xsuko; . o xoipo;, 330 R. XsovTöxopTov ßoüßaXiv vsaipsTov, 370 R. lisXavoaTCpcpwv Y^vo;, 426 R. iprysvsia (Xsaiva). On the extreme rarity of dvandva compounds in classical Greek see section 1 above.
11 Ziegler 1912, 1928: "G[ryps]-Adler sagte der geniale Schöpfer der pr||ia9' innöKpniva und ßosia statt des üblichen, etwas dürftig klingenden Ypu^"; Sommerstein 1996, 237: "Griffin-eagle" is probably a more sonorous name for the same creature, just as kentauros ... and hippokentauros ... denote the same being".
12 According to D. S. 4.70.1, Sch. Pi. P. 2.2.78, 'KsvTaupo;' defines the original sons of Ixion and Nephele, who had human form (dv9pwno9usi;), while 'innoKsvTaupo;' designates the offspring of their union with mares, who had both equine and human form (Si^usi;). Cf. dvSpönai; ('child who is like a man') as opposed to nai;.
for Ypu^, but names the Lammergeier (CGL 3.188.29, 258.16),13 then it stands to reason that Ypunaisto; and YP^^ should also be different (or at least different-looking) creatures.
Thus, none of these compounds can be used as a parallel to argue that YpunaisTo; is simply equivalent to YP^^, but rather the opposite: the use of the compound introduces a difference in the meaning of the base term. As seen above in section 1, Greek writers saw griffins as fantastic composite creatures with the back, feet and claws of a lion (hence quadrupeds) and the beak and wings of an eagle. This is exactly the same creature that Aeschylus himself describes in PV 803-804 under the name YP^ (6^uaTo|ou; Yap Znvo; dKpaYst; Kuva; / Ypvna;) and introduces on stage as a 'quadruped bird' (TSTpaaKsA.^; ol^vo;, 395): a four-legged animal with the hooked beak of an eagle, metaphorically described as a 'dog of Zeus' precisely because of its four limbs and eagle-like physical features (cf. PV 1022). Photius (i 157) is adamant: a griffin has four legs, wings and a hooked beak (yp^^ Sia to T£TpdaK£\ov eivai Kai nTepuYa; Kai p^Yxo; ex£iv eniKa^ne;). If yp^ and YpunaisTo; were different names for the same fantastic animal for Aeschylus, would YpunaisTo; be so unknown or unusual to Aristophanes' audience? Would Aeschylus have felt the need to use differentiated terms? It is logical to suppose that for Aeschylus yp^ and YpunaisTo; denote different creatures, with some resemblance to each other.
(3) YpunaisTo; denotes an eagle of the griffin species. Tucker (1906, 201) stated that "a 'griffin-eagle' is an 'eagle of the griffin species, cf. aXiatsTo;, vuKTaisTo;". However, in Greek the formation of hyponyms for a given bird species usually takes place by adding a first element, consisting of an adjective, an adverb or a noun (in either genitive or dative), to the basic zoonym, which forms the head of the compound.14 This first member of the new compound specifies the habitat or some physical or behavioural characteristic of the new species that defines it or distinguishes it from the species whose name it is based on. Let's see it in practice with the different hyponyms that designate species of 'eagle' in Greek:15 aXidsTo; ('sea eagle' = Osprey), u^iatsTo; or undsTo; ('high-eagle, 'sub-eagle' = Egyptian or Griffon Vulture), |sXavdsTo; ('black eagle' = Greater or Lesser Spotted Eagle), xpuadsTo; ('golden eagle' = Golden Eagle), vuKTaisTo; ('night eagle' = Night Heron or Eagle Owl).16 Therefore, YpunaisTo; does not follow the Greek usage that we would expect to classify the eagle as belonging to the species of the griffin.17
13 Arnott 2007, 196.
14 Adjetives: cpaXaKpoKopa^ ('bald raven', Cormorant or Bald Ibis), xX«poaTpou9iov ('green sparrow', Serin, Siskin or Greenfinch), xpuadsTo;, ('golden eagle', Golden Eagle), nuppoKopa^ ('red raven, Red-billed Chough), XsuKspwSio; ('white heron, Little Egret or Spoonbill), XsuKOYpu^ ('white griffin', Lammergeier), isXavdsTo; ('black eagle, Greater or Lesser Spotted Eagle); adverbs: dsiaKwy ('always-scops owl, European Scops-owl, being a resident and not a winter migrant), unoXat; ('under the stone, Black-ear Wheatear), ¿niXat; ('on the stone, unknown bird), unaisTo; ('sub-eagle, Egyptian or Griffon Vulture), u^iaisTo; ('high-eagle', the same), unoTpiopxn; ('sub-buzzard, Sparrowhawk); nouns: aXidsTo; ('sea eagle, Osprey), vuKTaisTo; ('night eagle, Night Heron or Eagle Owl), vuKTiKopa^ ('night raven, Long-eared or Eagle Owl or Night Heron), opsineXapYo; ('mountain stork', Egyptian Vulture), opoaniZo; ('mountain chaffinch, Bluethroat or Cretzschmar's Bunting), oaToKopa^ ('bone raven, Lammergeier), nsTpoxsXiSwv ('rock swallow, Crag Martin). For identification see Arnott (2007, ss. vv.)
15 Buck, Petersen 1984, 478.
16 For identification see Arnott 2007, ss. vv. It would be tempting to cite such delightful compounds as innoYepavoi, innoYunoi and inno|up|n5 (Luc. VH 1.12-13), but unfortunately all they mean is 'cranes, vultures and giant ants used as cavalry' (LSJ ss. vv.), so they are of little use as parallels.
17 A counter-argument could be made out of YunaisTo; (Suda y 506), 'vulture-eagle', perhaps to be understood as 'eagle of the vulture species'. However, this is very likely a ghost word, either a varia lectio
3. The meaning of ypunaietog an animal with the physical characteristics of an eagle and a griffin
My suggestion is that it is necessary to go back to the beginning and to start from what we can deduce from Ra. 928-937 about Aeschylus' ypunaiexo;: (a) the ypunaiexo; was already unknown at the time of the performance of Frogs (405 BC) (v. 930); (b) it is different from the traditional griffin, which Aeschylus calls ypu^ and describes as a four-legged bird in PV 904; (c) it is a decorative element used in art (in this case a shield-device) (v. 927-929); (d) it is homologous to other fabulous composite creatures mentioned in Aeschylus' tragedy, such as the InnaXeKxpuwv and the xpayeXa^o; (vv. 932, 937). Let us see if this can help us to discover what the mysterious ypunaiexo; is and what it was like.
Aeschylus had a certain fondness for describing monstrous creatures, many of them winged:18 these include the four-legged bird of Oceanus (PV286, 395-396), the half-woman, half-swan Graiai (PV 794-795), and the Gorgons, innovatively described as winged monsters (PV 798-799).19 In doing so, Aeschylus is merely following the taste for the visual representation of monstrous animals such as sirens, centaurs, sphinxes and griffins, which appear as decorative elements mainly on Corinthian vases from the beginning of the 7th century BC.20
As we have seen in section 1, Aristophanes parodies Aeschylus' taste for composite animals by citing, in addition to the ypunaiexo;, the InnaXeKxpuwv ('cock-horse') and the xpayeXa^o; ('goat-stag'). Therefore, in order to understand what kind of animal the ypunaiexo; is, it seems appropriate to compare it with these two other exotic creatures that appear in the same context as the ypunaiexo;: they are equally unknown to Aristophanes' audience, their name is composed in the same way, and they are also decorative elements (cf. d supra).
Let us begin with the meaning of the name. One of the systems used by the ancient Greeks to name an exotic or unknown animal was fusing in a compound name two zoonyms of known animals whose physical characteristics, by their size, appearance or colour, were reminiscent of the new creature to be named.21 Let's see what happens with InnaXeKxpuwv and xpayeXa^o;, terms which, being better attested, can serve as a model to find out the meaning of ypunaiexo;. TpayeXa^o; (Ar. Ra. 937 = Aesch. fr. inc. fab. 444 R.), 'goat-stag', was a fantastic mixture of several animals which was a favourite with vase painters (Pl. Resp. 488a oiov ol ypa^; xpayeXd^ou; Kai xa xotauxa ^eryvuvxec; ypd^ouaiv). It was later identified with an exotic but real animal, an antelope, a deer-like mammal with a goat's beard (Plin. Nat. 8.120).22 As for the InnaXeKxpuwv, or cock-horse,
or a corruption of unaexo; (DGE s. v. yunaiexo;). The Ixeuticon, a prose paraphrase of a didactic poem on bird-hunting attributed to Dionysius Periegetes or Dionysius Philadelphus, contains an interesting observation: griffins are included among the birds of prey, but must be carefully distinguished from eagles (Au. 1. 2 ndvxwv Se xp^ npoKpiveiv xou; aexou;, ¿nei irSev unep ypunwv aacpe; saxiv einetv), so that it could be understood that eagles and griffins both belonged to the raptor family, but were different creatures. Immediately after the griffin, Dionysius mentions the other raptor species distinguished by the Greeks: eagles (1.3), harpai (unidentified birds of prey) (1.4), vultures (1.5), falcons (1.6) and kites (1.7).
18 Pollard 1977, 123.
19 Ib. 124.
20 Doerig 1983, 140.
21 Cioffi 2015, 210-212. Cf. D. S. 2.51 (on giraffes, called 'camel-leopard' in Greek): al Se KaXou|ievai Ka^rXonapSdXei; t^v [|ev] ^i^iv a^^oxspwv sxouai twv ¿v xfj npoaryopia nepieiXr|i|i£v«v (««v.
22 Bothe 1828, 96.
Dionysus says that he stayed awake to find out what kind of bird it was, to which Aeschylus angrily replies that it is a sign on an Achaean ship (Ra. 932-933). The InnaXsKtpuwv was a horse with a cock's hindquarters, wings and tail, which appears at the end of the 7th century BC and is frequently depicted in Athenian black-figure vases of the 6th century BC.23 Therefore, innaXsKTpuwv and xpayeXa^o; seem to mean either 'mixture of horse and cock' and 'mixture of stag and goat',24 on the one hand, or 'cock that is like a horse' and 'stag that is like a goat' on the other.25 In reality, the exact nature of the compound is of little importance,26 because the meaning is essentially the same: an unknown or fabulous animal described by its resemblance to the physical characteristics of one or several other more familiar animals.27
In this vein, YpunaisTo; should mean 'animal with physical characteristics of eagle and griffin', as the recent scholium to Ar. Ra. 929a mentioned in section 1 above, or 'eagle that is like a griffin'. We return to the original question: but what exactly is a mixture of eagle and griffin?
The next question we need to ask then is what exactly the physical characteristics of the griffin were. The most complete description of the outward appearance of the traditional griffin appears in Ctesias (688 F 45h FGrH):
tov Ypuna äKou« to (wiov to 'Iv5ikov Tsrpdnouv slvai Kara roü; Asovra;, Kai sxsiv övuxa; Kaprspoü; w; öti ^aAiora, Kai toutou; |evtoi toi; twv AsövT«v napanAi"|tfiou;. KaranTs-pov 5s ra vwra slvai, Kai tout«v twv nrspwv r^v xpöav |EAaivav ai5ouai, ra 5s npöaGia spuGpa ^aai-rd; y£ nrspuYa; aüra; oüketi roiaura; dAAa AsuKa;. r^v 5spr|v 5s aÜTwv Kuavoi; 5ir|vGiaGai Toi; nrspoi; Kr^ffta; [aropsi, arö|a 5s sxsiv dsr«5s; Kai r^v Ks^aÄ^v onoiav o[ xsipoupYouvrs; Ypa^ouai rs Kai nAarrouai. q>AoY«5si; 5s roü; öq>GaA|ou; fr|aiv aüroü.
I hear that the griffin is a quadruped animal of India, quite like the lion, and has very strong claws, very similar indeed to those of the lion. It has wings on its back, the colour of the feathers of which, they claim, is black, but the front parts are said to be red. The wings themselves are not red or black, but white. Ctesias says that its throat is adorned with blue-black feathers, and that it has a beak like that of an eagle, and a head like that drawn and made by artists. He says that its eyes are the colour of flame.
23 Doerig 1983, 141-142; Perdrizet 1904, 29.
24 Copulative compound, of the type iarpö|avTi;, 'soothsayer and physician'.
25 Attributive compound, of the type dv5pönai;, 'boy but like a man' (Amado 1998, 110).
26 Opinions differ as to the exact nature ofthe compounds Ypunaisro;, InnaXsKTpuwv and rpaYsAacpo;. Debrunner (1917, 46) considers InnaXsKTpuwv and rpaYsXacpo; to be attributive compounds, while Kühner, Blass (1892, 318, on InnaXsKTpuwv) and Todt (1855, 17) consider them to be copulative compounds. Risch (1944, 56) called them Mischungskomposita and considers them related to determinative compounds, but not entirely identical.
27 Cioffi 2015, 210. To give some bird examples: arpouGoKd|ir|Xo; ('bird that is like a camel', Ostrich, because of its size) (D. S. 2.50), YunaÄEKT«p ('bird that is like a vulture', Hoopoe, perhaps because of its tawny colour) (PMag. Berol. 2.18), InnaXsKTpuwv ('bird that is like a horse', a vulture, Hsch. i 780, for its size), xnvaAwnri? ('goose-fox', Egyptian Goose, perhaps because of the colour of its head) (Hdt. 2.72). Examples from the other animal classes are xoipomGr|Ko; ('monkey that is like a pig', perhaps Baboon) (Arist. HA503a19), Ka|nAondp5aÄi; ('mixture of camel and leopard', Giraffe) (Agatharch.72), KpoKo5iÄondp5aÄi; ('mixture of crocodile and leopard, Nile Monitor, for its spots) (IG14. 1302), xoipsXacpo; ('mixture of pig and deer, perhaps Babirusa, because of the strange tusks that resemble horns), kuvöäuko; ('mixture of dog and wolf', Hyena), [nroXacpo; ('deer that is like a horse, perhaps Nilgai Antelope, for its size), XuKondvGr|po; ('mixture of wolf and panther, Jackal, for its spots), ovsXacpo; ('deer that is like a donkey, Antelope). For the identification of these zoonyms see: Cioffi 2015, 211; Arnott 2007, ss. vv., LSJ ss. vv.
Notice that Ctesias does not describe the head of the griffin as simply an eagle's head, but as something distinctive and peculiar to this creature, seen more easily in paintings and statues (t^v Ks^aX^v onoiav ol xeipoupyouvTs; ypd^ouai ts Kai nXdxxouai). Let us also add two pieces of information that can be deduced from the presentation of the yp^me^; in Ar. Ra. 928-930: it is a form of griffin already unknown in contemporary iconographic representations (Aristophanes assumes that the audience will not even recognise the word) (cf. a supra) and does not belong to the standard type of griffin explicitly described by Aeschylus in PV 803-804 as a yputy (cf. b supra).
Now, what was a griffin's head like? Following the indications of Aristophanes and Ctesias, let us see what painters and sculptors were doing. Vase paintings show certain physical features of the griffin which, I believe, provide the answer to the riddle of what a yp^me^; was and what shape it had. In archaic representations (7th-6th century BC), the head of the griffin was iconographically very distinctive: aside from its open hooked eagle-like beak, it was characterised by a pair of long, narrow, erect, pointed ears, a prominent protuberance or horn above the eyes, and sometimes a sort of plume or curl descending down the neck.28 This, and not an eagle's, was the real griffin's head, as depicted by Greek artists (Figs 1-2).
Although the typology of the Near-Eastern griffin is much broader and must necessarily be left out of this work, artistic representations show that until the Hellenistic period the Greeks knew basically two main types of griffin, both four-legged: the griffin-bird, with the body of a lion and the head of a bird of prey, and the griffin-lion, with the body and head of a lion and the hindquarters of a bird of prey.29 However, I would like to draw attention to a third, rarer and highly idiosyncratic type, characterised by the fact that the typical griffin head and neck described above were not superimposed on the body of
Fig. 1. Caption: Bronze griffin head from votive cauldron on tripod stand, Olympia, 7th cent. BC, Bronze Gallery, National
Archaeological Museum of Greece, Athens. Copyright notice and licence: (c) Gary Todd from Xinzheng, China, CC0, via Wikimedia Commons. Link: https://commons. wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Bronze_ Griffin_ from_ Votive _ Cauldron_on_Tripod_Stand,_from_Olympia,_7th_Cent._BC_ (28382328972).jpg
28 Ziegler 1912, 1927-1928; Dierichs 1981, Beilagen 4, 6; MacDonald 1987, 4-5; Winkler-Horacek 2015, 226-227. In addition to its head, the griffin must have had other distinctive parts, different from those of the eagle and the lion, such as its claws: Tz. Theog. 173-174, Sch. Lyc. 1465A ^ Se Z^iy? — ^v xa avw sxov napOevou Kai xa |eaa Xeovxo;, noSa; Kai ovuxa; ypuno;, nxepuya; aexou.
29 Furtwangler 1884-1890, 1742-1777; Leventopoulou 1997, 610; Winkler-Horacek 2015, 207-231.
Fig. 2. Caption: Four-legged griffin (detail). Attic black figure belly-amphora type B, Nessos Painter, ca 610-600 BC, Berlin, Altes Museum (Antikensammlung), 1961.7.
Copyright notice and licence: (c) ArchaiOptix, CC BY-SA 4.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/ by-sa/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons. Link: https:// commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Nessos_Painter_-_ ABV_5_2extra_-_panthers_-_confronted_griffins_-_ Berlin_AS_1961-7_-_02.jpg
a lion, but on the body of a bird. Its two-legged body had curved and spread wings, and sometimes the feet of a water bird (Figs 3-4).30 That is to say, this type of griffin represents a bipedal monster, not a quadruped like the usual griffins, with a raptor's winged body crowned by the characteristic griffin head (with its protuberances, its open hooked beak, its curly plume and its long, pointed ears), rather than a proper eagle's head.31 This description fits well with the meaning I propose for ypunaisto^, 'animal with the physical characteristics of an eagle and a griffin': unlike the traditional ypu^, there was nothing of the lion in it.
Let us recall that the ypunaisto^ is, according to Aristophanes, a shield-device, i. e. it is a decorative element, not a literary creature (cf. c supra). Now, there are examples of two-legged griffins with the body of a bird used as decoration. The best known of these is the famous dinos from the cemetery of Arkades in Crete (Heraklion, Afrati L18a, second half of the 7th century BC):32 three griffin-birds' robust, two-legged bodies, with wings outstretched on either side, are painted on the surface of the dinos, while their bronze heads protrude from it.33 These two-legged griffins with the body of a bird, very popular in Corinthian vase-painting in the first half of the 6th century BC,34 were also well known
30 Furtwängler 1884-1890, 1762; Reed 1976, 373; Leventopoulou 1997, 610; Winkler-Horacek 2015, 278. No Greek term has survived for this last type (or perhaps species) of griffin, but Greek vase-painting specialists have called it 'griffin/griffon-bird' or 'Greifenvogel' (Payne 1931, 51).
31 Karo 1900, 150-153; Dierichs 1981, Beilagen 1.2, 5.6-7, Abb. 14-31; Winkler-Horacek (2015, 226) describes it as an eagle's head, but the differences are very clear. A good illustration of the type is LIMC VIII/2, catal. nr. 4 s. v. 'gryps' (Stuttgart, Württemberg Landesmuseum, 4.60, 575-550 a. C.).
32 Benton 1938, 58.
33 Levi 1945, 13, 23; Reed 1976, 373, n. 22. A griffin-headed bird of prey is documented as a device on a bronze shield found in the Ida cave (Heraklion, Archaeological Museum 8, 7th century), but in this case it is not clear whether the body has four or two legs. See: Reed 1976, 366, n. 2; Winkler-Horacek 2015, 228.
34 Payne 1931, 90; Boardman 1974, 33; Winkler-Horacek 2015, 228. It would not be the first time that Aeschylus had been inspired by the monstrous creatures in Corinthian vase paintings: the unusual depiction of the Graiai as half-swans in PV 793-796 may also be reflected in a black-figure Corinthian amphora (see Pollard 1977, 124, n. 3).
Fig. 3. Caption: Swan between two-legged griffin-birds. Corinthian terracotta krater, ca 580-550 BC, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1979.11.7.
Copyright notice and licence: Public Domain, CC0 1.0. Link: https://www.metmuseum.org/art/ collection/search/255650
Fig. 4. Caption: Two-legged griffin-bird (detail). Attic black figure Siana cup, Griffin-bird Painter, 575-525 BC, Tübingen, Eberhard-KarlsUniversität, Archäologisches Institut, OZ191.
Copyright notice and licence: (c) ArchaiOptix, CC BY-SA 4.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/ by-sa/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons. Link: https:// commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Griffin-bird_ Painter_-_ABV_extra_-_swan_-_floral_between_ confronted_griffin-birds_-_T%C3%BCbingen_ MUT_7391.jpg
in Athens from the time of Proto-Attic pottery,35 but by the end of the 6th century BC they had fallen out of fashion or had disappeared completely.36 Thus, although Aeschylus (b. 525 BC) may have seen some of these paintings or ornaments from an earlier generation (especially if they belonged to prestige or heirloom objects such as a shield or a vase), they would have been completely alien to both Aristophanes (b. 444 BC) and his contemporary audience. This would explain the surprise that 'Euripides' expresses about the meaning of YpunaieTo; in a comedy performed in 405 BC (cf. a supra). Once again, we can turn
35 Moore — Gisler 2009, 8, n. 25; Winkler-Horacek 2015, 226-229. In fact, the Corinthian griffin-bird gives his nickname to the so-called 'Griffin-Bird Painter' (Beazley 1956, 71-74), a prolific Attic black-figure painter active between 575-550 BC, so called because of his penchant for depicting two-legged griffin-birds in his works.
36 MacDonald 1987, 9, 53; Leventopoulou 1997, 610. As luck would have it, the bipedal griffin resurfaced in the Middle Ages as the Wyvern, a two-legged winged creature resembling a dragon. (I owe this reference to Ralph Hancock.)
to the parallel offered by the lnnaA.eKxpuwv (cf. d supra):37 this fabulous beast, which was extremely common as a decorative element in Aeschylus' childhood and young adulthood and throughout the 6th century BC, abruptly and completely disappeared from the Athenian artistic repertoire around 480 BC.38 The absence of contemporary representations undoubtedly explains the confusion of Dionysus.39 In short, both the lnnaA.eKxpuwv, the cock-horse, and the ypunaiexoq, the two-legged griffin-bird, are fabulous composite animals, typical of an earlier artistic period, which served as decoration (on shields, ships or tapestries) and had already vanished by the time of Aristophanes, so that their meaning, and what manner of creatures they were, was already unknown to the audience of Frogs and could be exploited for comical purposes.
4. Conclusions
The aim of this paper was to find out the exact nature of the mysterious ypunaieroq (Aesch. fr. 422 R.), a term used to describe a fabulous composite animal. From Ar. Ra. 928-930 the following can be deduced: (a) the ypunaieToc; was already unknown at the time of Aristophanes (v. 930); (b) it is different from the four-legged griffin; (c) it is a decorative element or an art object (v. 927-929); (d) it is homologous to other mixed mythological beasts mentioned by Aeschylus, such as the InnaXeKTpuwv and the TpayeXa^oc; (vv. 932, 937). A comparison with the sense of the compounds InnaXeKTpuwv and TpayeXa^oc; (d) shows that ypunaieToq designates a mythical creature that combines the physical characteristics of two better-known animals, the griffin and the eagle (d).
In the light of this, I propose that ypunaieToq designates a specific and highly idiosyncratic type of archaic griffin, particularly well documented in Corinthian vase-painting but also known from Athenian black-figure paintings, characterised by having the distinctive head of a griffin on an eagle's two-legged body, not a four-legged lion body (b). This fabulous and archaic animal, frequent in vase-painting until the end of the 6th century BC (c), had completely fallen into disuse by the time of Aristophanes' Frogs (a), which would explain the bafflement of 'Euripides' and his inability to understand the meaning of the term. Thus Aeschylus' ypunaieToq differs clearly from a four-legged ypú^ and would correctly be called a griffin-eagle, the most natural interpretation of the term: a mixture of the physical characteristics of the eagle (two-legged and feathered body, wings, talons) and the griffin (distinctive head with its protuberance or horn, long, erect, narrow ears, open hooked beak and curly plume or lock).
References
Amado Rodríguez M. T. Panorama general de la composición nominal en griego antiguo. Verba 1998, 25,
93-125.
Arnott W. G. Birds in the Ancient World from A to Z. London — New York, Routledge, 2007. Beazley J. D. Attic Black-figure Vase-painters. London, Oxford University Press, 1956. Benton S. The Date of the Cretan Shields. The Annual of the British School at Athens 1938, 39, 52-64. Bothe F. H. (ed., comm.) Aristophanis Ranae, Lipsiae, Libraria Hahniana, 1828.
37 So much so that Hsch. i 780 even got the two mixed up: innaXeKTpuwv- tov |i£yav aXeKTpuova, ^ tov ypa^o^evov ev toi; nepaiKoi; nepiaxpw|aai. ypacpovxai Se oiov ypuweg.
38 Doerig 1983, 141-142; Perdrizet 1904, 29; Williams 1990, 432.
39 Cioffi 2015, 211.
Buck C. D., Petersen W. A Reverse Index of Greek Nouns and Adjectives: Arranged by Terminations with Brief Historical Introductions. Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1984.
Butler S. (ed.) Aeschyli Tragoediae quae supersunt deperditarum fabularum fragmenta et scholia Graeca ex editione Thomae Stanleii, cum versione Latina ab ipso emendata, et commentario longe quam antea fuit auctiori ex manuscriptis ejus nunc demum edito. Accedunt variae lectiones et notae vv. dd. criticae ac philologicae, quibus suas passim intertexuit Samuel Butler. Vol. VIII. Cantabrigiae, 1816.
Chase G. H. The Shield Devices of the Greeks. HSCP 1902, 13, 61-127.
Cioffi R. A Trugeranos for Seleukos? An Animal Name and the Power of the Exotic in Philemon, Neaira fr. 49 K-A. RhM 2015, 158 (2), 209-213.
Debrunner A. Griechische Wortbildungslehre. Heidelberg, Carl Winter, 1917.
Dierichs A. Das Bild des Greifen in der frühgriechischen Flächenkunst. 2 Bildteil. Münster, Lit Verlag, 1981.
Doerig J. НоиЭос; 'mnaXsKtpuwv. La monture fabuleuse d'Okéanos. MH 1983, 40 (3), 140-153.
Doro L. Early Hellenic Pottery of Crete. Hesperia 1945, 14 (1), 1-32.
Dover K. J. (ed., comm.) Aristophanes. Frogs. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1993.
Furtwängler A. Gryps, in: Ausführliches Lexicon der Griechischen und Römischen Mythologie I/2. Leipzig, Teubner, 1884-1890, 1742-1777.
Italie G. Index Aeschyleus. Leiden, Brill, 1964.
Karo G. Zu den altgriechischen Fabelwesen. Strena Helbigiana. Leipzig 1900, 146-154.
Kühner R., Blass F. Ausführliche Grammatik der griechischen Sprache, I/2. Hannover, Hahnsche Hofbuchhandlung, 31892.
Leventopoulou, M. Gryps, in: LIMC 1997, VIII/1, 609-611.
MacDonald K. The Grypomachy in Fourth-Century Attic Vase-Painting. PhD. diss. McMaster University, Hamilton (Ontario, Canada), 1987.
Moore M. B., Gisler J. R. An Early Protocorinthian Conical Lekythos-Oinochoe in the Metropolitan Museum. Antike Kunst 2009, 52, 3-19.
Payne H. Necrocorinthia: a Study of Corinthian Art in the Archaic Period. Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1931.
Perdrizet P. L'hippalectryon. Contribution à l'étude de l'ionisme. REA 1904, 6, 7-30.
Pollard J. Birds in Greek Life and Myth. London, Thames and Hudson, 1977.
Reed N. B. Griffins in Post-Minoan Cretan Art. Hesperia 1976, 45, 365-379.
Risch R. Griechische Determinativkomposita. Indogermanische Forschungen 1944, 59(1), 1-61.
Sommerstein. A. H. (ed., comm.) Aristophanes, Frogs. Edited with a translation and notes. Warminster, Aris & Phillips, 1996.
Stanford W. B. (ed., comm.) Aristophanes. The Frogs. Edited with introduction, revised text, commentary, and index. London, Macmillan, 21963.
Stephanus H. Thesaurus graecae linguae, ab Henrico Stephano constructus. Post editionem anglicam novis additamentis auctum, ordineque alphabetico digestum tertio ediderunt C. B. Hase, G. Dindorfius L. Dindorfius. Vol. II. Parisiis, A. Firmin Didot, 1830.
Thompson D. A Glossary of Greek Birds. Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1895.
Todt B. Commentatio de Aeschylo vocabulorum inventore. Halis, Programm Halle Pädagogium, 1855.
Tucker T. G. (ed., comm.) The Frogs of Aristophanes. London, MacMillan, 1906.
Williams D. Hippalektryon, in: LIMC V/1, 1990, 427-432.
Winkler-Horacek L. Monster in der frühgriechischen Kunst. Die Überwindung des Unfassbaren. Berlin — New York, De Gruyter, 2015.
Ziegler, K. Gryps, in: RE 1912, VII/2, 1902-1929.
Что такое ypunaietoç (Aesch. Fr. inc. fab. 422 R. )?
Мириам Либран Морено
Университет Эстремадуры,
Испания, 10003, Касерес, авенида де ла Универсидад; mlibmor@unex.es
Для цитирования: Libran Moreno M. What is a ypunaiexo; (Aesch. Fr. inc. fab. 422 R.)? Philologia
Classica 2023, 18 (2), 177-189. https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu20.2023.203
Цель данной статьи — определить, каким мифическим существом был эсхиловский Ypunaistoi («грифон-орел»), вызвавший такой скандал у Еврипида в «Лягушках» Аристофана 928-930 (= Aesch. fr. inc. fab. 422 R.). Этот термин обычно интерпретируется в трех вариантах: (а) как поэтическая форма «орла»; (б) как поэтическая форма «грифона»; (в) как «орел породы грифонов». Свидетельства «Лягушек» Аристофана и вазовой живописи позволяют предположить, что это мог быть идиосинкратический, архаичный вид грифона, называемый современными специалистами «грифоном-птицей» и характеризующийся наличием двух, а не четырех ног и телом птицы, а не льва. Это фантастическое существо довольно часто появлялось на архаических чернофигурных вазах в Афинах, но полностью исчезло к концу VI в. до н. э. В связи с этим его внешний вид должен был быть неизвестен публике Аристофана, что делает невозможным понимание термина ypunaisTOi (Ra. 930). Поэтому в данной статье высказывается предположение, что эсхиловский ypunaisTOi («грифон-орел») — это сказочное животное, состоящее из частей грифона и орла, как следует из названия: голова грифона (с открытым крючковатым клювом, длинными заостренными ушами, выступом или рогом над глазами и завитком или плюмажем, спадающим на одну сторону шеи), венчающая тело орла (двуногое, пернатое, с крыльями и когтями). Ключевые слова: Эсхил, Аристофан, грифон, ypunaisTOi, грифон-орел.
Received: July 30, 2023 Accepted: October 21, 2023
