14 November 2010

The Secret Language of Palmyra

Palmyra, year 108 CE. 

Yarhai son of Elahbel built this grandiose underground tomb, a 'house of eternity' (bt 'lm) as a dwelling place for his family, forever.

We're looking at just one of several chambers (left), with twelve funerary portraits carved on limestone slabs that sealed the  niches (loculi) in which the bodies of the dead were laid to rest.  

Seven men, one boy, and four women were buried in this section.

Altogether, more than 150 tombs have been discovered in Palmyra.  Some had space for as many as 300-400 dead, all commemorated by funerary sculpture.  By far the most common type of sculpture in  the tombs is the individual portrait bust in high relief  (as here, rectangular in shape, ca. 40 x 55 cm [16" x 22"]).  Many of the portraits are inscribed above the shoulder in Palmyrene-Aramaic with the name and genealogy of the deceased, and sometimes the date of death as well.  

The dead man or woman is always depicted in a frontal pose, eyes staring straight ahead.  The men wear a tunic and cloak, with the draping of the cloak creating a sling for the right arm, and the women wear tunic and cloak with a headband and turban under a veil on their heads. Although there is a certain sameness to the images, they are far from identical.  We have to imagine that these people presented themselves -- at least to some extent -- as they wished to be seen by their descendants for all eternity.  There is good evidence that the tombs were regularly visited (water basins and lamps left at different times in the chambers).  The portraits thus remained visible to later generations, though, ideally, only to those who shared the same ancestors.   Of course, over the years, family circumstances might change.  This tomb of Yarhai, for example, was restricted to members of his family for almost 150 years; then, in 241 CE, perhaps because of straitened circumstances or reduced clan numbers, unused loculi in the entrance chamber were sold off to another line entirely. 

Hand in hand... 

"Beauty of Palmyra" (190-210 CE)
Among the many fascinating aspects of the portraits -- with their lavish details of clothing, jewellery, accessories, and indications of changing fashions -- are the varied hand gestures made by the deceased: for example, in Yarhai's tomb (above; click to make larger), the man on the upper left places his right hand flat on his chest while the man below him holds the fold of his tunic in his clenched right hand: both have their left hands with index and little fingers pointing forward, other fingers folded back, probably held under the thumb (looking, for all the world, like the famous Neapolitan gesture of a mano cornuta [cuckold's horns]).  Compare the left hand of the lad in the upper right column, whose index and middle fingers are extended and two fingers folded back.

Women pose their hands differently.  Like the women in Yarhai's tomb, the so-called 'Beauty of Palmyra' -- whose portrait is still embellished with some of its original colours: red, black (for the irises of her eyes), and real gold (at the arrows) on her golden jewellery -- holds the edge of her veil in her raised left hand.  The fingers of the Beauty's right hand rest slightly splayed in a natural, relaxed pose. Not all women are so relaxed: compare the lady in the centre of Yarhai's tomb who makes the same hand gesture (mano cornuta) as the man on her upper left.

Friends sometimes ask me to explain what the different gestures mean.  I have always replied that there is no way of knowing.  Like any other wilful bodily action, gestures are a kind of code that is embedded in the specific culture.  Without written records or living descendants, there is no way to crack the code.  

No wonder no one wants to study gestures

Until now!

Gesture and Identity in the Funerary Art of Palmyra

Maura Heyn of the University North Carolina has just published the first study dedicated to Palmyran gestures (American Journal of Archaeology, October 2010).  Needless to say, I read it avidly.  We'll review her findings in just a moment but, first, I'd like to bring in two points based on my own observations of the hands of Palmyran portraits.

Lady Marti, 170-190 CE
Hands are almost always pictured larger than their normal proportions and without fine details (knuckles, veins, and tendons are scarcely or not at all shown).  Even when finger rings and bracelets on the wrist are intricately carved, the hands remain 'sketchy' and swollen in appearance.  Let's be frank: hands are not the sculptors' strong point.  Compared with the rest of the portrait, they often look gross.  

Why couldn't the local sculptors carve hands properly?  Admittedly, hands are difficult (Dutch Golden Age sitters had to pay extra for each hand portrayed), but fingernails, which are also hard to get right, are done quite well.  As far as I can see, the sculptors didn't even try to depict hands correctly.  Why not?

I think that the answer to this conundrum runs something like this:   
 The over-large size of the hands draws attention to them.  At the same time, their true physical representation was not important to the dead person; what was important was what those hands were saying.  
That is, the gestures (not the flesh) was what they wanted to communicate.

The Dead Speak

Professor Heyn put together a database of 585 bust-length portraits,* classifying the position of right and left hands, descriptions of the fingers (clenched, extended, folded), and any objects held by the dead person.  The database includes 323 males and 262 females -- for practical purposes, roughly equal in number.

Ummayat daughter of Yarhai ,150-200 CE
Ladies First 

For reasons of space (as well as inclination), I am going to focus on the female portraits today -- and get to the males in a later post, if I can. 

de mortuis nil nisi bonum

Palmyra is undoubted patriarchy country.  The wives, daughters, and mothers (whose descent is always reckoned in the male line, even onto three generations) are idealized images of domestic virtue.  This is not to denigrate Palmyran women.  In real life, they were demonstrably active agents in their own fate.**  After death, however, they are portrayed as perfect wives, housewives and helpmates.*** 

There is no rebellious Zenobia in sight.  

But, then, are funerary portraits anywhere ever 'true to life'?

The objects held by the women in the tombs are stereotyped symbols of feminine activity.  A third of the ladies are represented as devoted Penelopes: exactly 33% hold a spindle and distaff (always, rather limply, in the left hand), apparently content to die still spinning yarn for the family loom.  Jewellery boxes, balls of wool, house keys, and, surprisingly, even children are relatively rare.  But whatever the object, it is always appropriate to the private female, domestic sphere.   

Female Gestures

The great majority of females (71%) are shown, as the Beauty (above), with one hand raised to chin or collarbone level.  This gesture never occurs among males so it is a clear marker of gender.

Aqimat, daughter of Wahbi, and her daughter; 200-225 CE
Raising the hand to the face or veil is similar to the woman's gesture of modesty and fidelity (pudicitia) well known in Roman funerary statuary.  

Has it the same meaning in Palmyra?  

There's no real reason to think so.  As Prof. Heyn notes, "It could just have been a conventional way to portray women, modelled on Roman example without the concomitant social baggage." 

But what about the variations in the finger gestures?  In her article, Heyn does not quantify female finger positions nor correlate them with hand poses (unlike for the male busts, where she does exactly that).

But, look carefully.  Some women are touching their veils ('Beauty of Palmyra', Lady Marti), others their cheeks (Ummayat), and still others simply raise a hand without touching either (Aqimat).  Are we to assume that these gestures are mere variations on feminine pudicitia?  Perhaps, but it's not a safe assumption.  For example, only half of the women (51%) who hold spindle and distaff -- clearly, a very domesticated bunch -- also raise their hand in a pudicitia pose.  Thus, the prime domesticity symbol and pudicitia -- if that is what it is -- only partly overlap.  So, more may lurk behind this gesture (or gestures) than first meets the eye.

Palms Up and Out

The second most common gesture made by women (6.5%) is called the 'palm out' gesture -- raising the right hand with the palm facing outward.  Heyn catalogues 18 'palm out' portraits -- 17 women and only one man. So, though not exclusively female, the 'palm out' gesture is disproportionately made by women, a gender bias  underscored by the fact that all of these women (when intact), also hold spindle and distaff in their left hands.

'Palm out' is usually considered an apotropaic  gesture (that is, meant to ward off evil). Heyn thinks it more likely to indicate the person's prior involvement in ritual activities: full-length figures of both men and women on votive altars are sometimes depicted with both hands raised up and palms held outward.   The gesture might thus indicate an act of worship or prayer. 

Just these two gestures cover 77% of Heyn's (intact) female portraits.  Since no other female pose is described in any detail, the remainder presumably are either too varied or too isolated for any pattern to emerge.***

The Sign Language

As mentioned, Heyn did not publish figures for the positions of fingers on women's portraits.  Yet anyone looking at these busts will find their eyes quickly drawn, first to the hands and then to the fingers.  Although hand gestures are not usually shared, both men and women do share the same animated finger gestures.  These are the finger-signs that she lists for men:

1. All fingers clenched or extended; 
2. Index finger extended;
3. Index and middle fingers extended; 
4. Index and little fingers extended; 
5. Index, middle, and little fingers extended.

So here we go, ladies.



Two women, Tamma (left; dated 100-150 CE), and Akmath (right; 2nd C) have identical hand gestures -- a raised right hand holding the edge of their veils and left hand below, held fairly flat against the body; but their fingers are saying quite different things.  Tamma holds her veil with two fingers extended, two folded back; Akmath holds hers with the index finger extended, three fingers folded.  I am willing to admit that this could be meaningless: you have to hold a veil somehow.  But Akmath's left hand is clearly making an intentional gesture: two fingers extended, two folded.  Both women hold spindle and distaff in the left hand (thumbs not indicated), so it is not the object that determines a different finger gesture.

 
The right-hand touching-face gesture is shared by Lady Haliphat (left; 231 CE) and a nameless woman now in the Petit Palais, Paris, a suitably aristocratic home. Haliphat touches her cheek with two fingers extended, two partly folded -- lending her a slightly coquettish air; her left hand shows the mano cornuta gesture, a particularly unnatural gesture if you are holding an object between your fingers and thumb. The nameless lady touches her face with a slightly extended index finger; the fingers of her left hand, which holds no object, are extended (with a large thumb).

The Point of it all 

 
These two women have their hands differently posed but both right hands have index finger extended in what looks like a straightforward pointing gesture. The lady in front of two lion-headed door knockers (symbolizing the entrance to the world of the dead) points to the spindle and distaff held in her other hand.  The bejewelled lady points at something perhaps near her waist or beyond the frame of the slab, or at nothing at all.  Compare Aqimat (above) whose overly large index finger points downward and away into nothingness, too. 

My main point, however, is clear by now: that there is no fixed correlation between specific hand poses and finger gestures.  So, are hands and fingers really communicating a message, albeit one that we cannot easily read? 

Grabbing Attention

Or is their purpose purely decorative?  For example, some scholars argue hands and fingers are simply contributing to drapery arrangements, "grasping here, pulling there, and altogether creating a degree of movement...."  As such, they lend animation to the figures and give the portraits "a greater sense of physical presence".  

Prof. Heyn comes down in the middle: gestures have a dual function.  Yes, they are decorative, but they are also 

drawing attention to attributes that enhanced the [subject's] standing in the local community, whether that status was conveyed by ... wealth (jewelry), or family status (spindle and distaff).

So, the pointing finger must be understood as an attention-getter: "Look at my spindle", "Look at my jewels".  But what, I wonder, are they telling us to look at when they are pointing at nothing at all?  Heyn suggests that this calls attention to the portrait as a whole -- a "LOOK AT ME" gesture.  This could be meant, then, to emphasize the individuality of the deceased.

That leaves us, though, with the unhappy flip-side of this argument, to wit, that the most common gestures -- with all the fingers being extended or clenched -- were meant not to draw particular attention to the dead person.  The 'Beauty of Palmyra' -- and many more of her ilk -- would surely demur.  

And so must I.  

For you have only to enter an underground tomb with its sculpture still in situ -- at the tomb of the brothers, Bwlh and Bwrp (aka the Japanese tomb, in honour of its excavators) -- to realize that you are being looked at, and called by, every single person in stone.  Hands seem to come towards you, figures are gesturing, nothing is still. You have entered their house of eternity, a place where the living and dead confront each other.  If they are gesturing, they are, I think, gesturing at you.

Benedica! mal-uocchie non ce pozzano. ("Blessings! May evil eyes not be cast here.") 

Until a century or so ago, any Neapolitan who uttered this wish would have immediately accompanied it with the mano cornuta gesture -- with this difference: the fingers would not be positioned vertically toward the forehead (the cuckold's horns) but directed edgewise.  The flat, rather than vertical gesture, was a way of protecting another person from the evil eye or is meant to drive away someone who might have the evil eye. As such, it works as an amulet against evil spells in general, and can be traced back to the Roman period (Andrea de Jorio, Gesture in Naples and Gesture in Classical Antiquity). Have we any reason to think that it might have the same meaning in Palmyra?  That's rather a stretch, I admit, but warding off the evil eye does rather make sense within the context of your entering into a tomb.

More gestures, more thoughts, and very possibly even more speculation, when we come to Part II (Gestures in Male Relief Busts)



Heyn estimates that this covers a little less than half of the existing corpus -- a consequence of the fact that most reliefs were looted from Palmyran tombs in the late-19th and 20th centuries, and now dispersed, are, for the time being at least, inaccessible. 

** In contrast to the demure image of females restricted to household matters, as suggested by the funerary reliefs, Palmyran women were actually capable of buying and selling properties, erecting funerary reliefs or columns for themselves and relatives, and could issue dedicatory inscriptions, altars, and ex-voto inscriptions to celebrate the gods.  See E. Cussini, 'Beyond the Spindle: Investigating the Role of Palmyrene Women', in (D.R. Hillers, E. Cussini, eds), A Journey to Palmyra, 26-43.  This study is available through Google Books.

*** A rare exception shows a woman  baring her breast to feed an infant
(late 2nd C); not because her breast is bare -- though that is extremely unusual -- but because her hair is completely dishevelled ... which seems to me a serious breach of funerary decorum: National Archaeological Museum, Damascus (Fig. 96, catalogue of the exhibition Zenobia, Il Sogno di una regina d'Oriente, Palazzo Bricherasio, Torino, 2002). 


Illustrations (in descending order)

Tomb of Yarhai (built 108 CE) , Palmyra: detail of loculi.  Photo credit: Demetrius @ Australian National University

The so-called "Beauty of Palmyra"( 190-210 CE) from Carlsberg Glyptotek. This bust retains an unusual amount of its original paint, which gives a wonderful idea of how vividly the statues were painted: imagine, now, walking into the entrance chamber of Yarhai's tomb, pictured at the top of this post.

Lady Marti, 170-190 CE, Photo: Wolfgang Sauber, Ny Carlsberg Glyptothek

Ummayat daughter of Yarhai , 2nd half 2nd century CE, Photo © Musée du Louvre/C. Larrieu

Mother and daughter, who may both have died in childbirth: 'Aqimat, alas! Wahbi's daughter', and her daughter 'Alas, Jehiba's daughter, Shalmat'. 200-225 CE.  Traces of blue and red paint.  Photo: RMO Leiden.

2nd century. Right hand: palm out; left hand: index finger extended (holding spindle and distaff).  MMA 01.25.1.  Photo credit: FlickRiver.com  (also available from MMA ).

Left: Tamma, daughter of Shamshigeram, son of Malku, son of Nashum. 100-150 CE. Photo: © Trustees of British Museum.
Right: Akmath, 2nd C. Royal Ontario Museum, Toronto.  Photo: Via Wikimedia Commons

Left: Haliphat,  231 CE. Smithsonian: Freer-Sackler Gallery. Photo: Ann Raia, 2006.
Right: Funerary relief of a lady, early 2nd C. Petit Palais, Paris.  Photo: Via Wikimedia Commons.

Left: Funerary relief of a lady. 120 CE.  Photo: Wolfgang Sauber, Ny Carlsberg Glyptothek.
Right: Funerary relief of a lady. ca. 220-230 CE (this dating is mine, based on an almost twin relief in National Archaeological Museum, Damascus, of Bat-Habbai, Daughter of Zebida, 226/27 CE).  Vatican Museum, Coll. Federico  Zeri, from Zenobia, Il sogno di una regina d'Oriente (Palazzo Bricherasio, Torino, 2002) Pl. 36.

 

Aha, daughter of Zabaila (149 CE).  Photo: Wolfgang Sauber, Ny Carlsberg Glyptothek

28 October 2010

Zenobia on 'Zenobia of Palmyra'

If you need background information on Zenobia, click on Now All Shame is Exhausted.

History, Myth and the Neo-Classical Imagination

Review of Zenobia of Palmyra
by Rex Winsbury

This is a book for all Zenobia fans.  Even before you open it, you know it will be something  special.  The cover places Harriet Hosmer's larger-than-life size statue of Zenobia In Chains (1859) right in front of the triple gate of Palmyra's Grand Colonnade, a leap of imagination across the centuries to unite two feminist icons: Hosmer's most admired work (and her own remarkable life*) and the history of the real-life Queen Zenobia.

Zenobia in Chains is considered Hosmer's masterpiece, and there's no doubt that the artist put her heart and soul into the monument.  Bringing the two icons together, as Winsbury does, "makes the aesthetics of the statue and its symbolic and historical values impossible to separate one from another." 

A Life in Legend

Most historical biographies begin at the beginning -- first what is known of the subject's early days (birth, childhood, education) -- and go on till they come to the end (death); then stop.  Death need not always be the final page, of course: exceptional people and exceptional events often have a vigorous afterlife.  Zenobia's story never died: that rare creature, a female ruler, continued to fascinate those who came afterwards.  How was her reign understood by later generations?  As an awful warning, or an inspiration?  This afterlife, too, is part of a modern biography.  

Normally, though, one expects to get the life story before its afterlife.

But 'heads becomes tails' in Rex Winsbury's diverting history of Zenobia.  

He starts with a rather bushy tail, "Inventing Zenobias: pen, brush and chisel"; not so much the broad sweep of her 'afterlife' as an account very much focussed on the expatriate Ms Hosmer and her unconventional life in mid-19th-century Rome (lots more gossip at Zenobia is Back in America)
How her vision of Zenobia chimed with or was at odds with other people's visions of the famous Syrian queen, and with what we can say today about the historical Zenobia in the light of the latest evidence, is the main theme of this book.  Hosmer's infatuation with Zenobia illustrates how easily fact and fiction came together in the person of this Syrian queen.
Fact and Fiction

Facts about Zenobia are thin on the ground.  Fiction abounds.  Zenobia lived, strutted the stage, and battled in mid-third century CE, surely the worst documented period in the history of the Roman Empire. Every bit of information about her is contentious, fragmentary, or biased -- and often all three together. 

Anyway, when ancient authors wrote about the past, they rarely had in mind what we think of as the aim of history ("things as they really were"), but rather mixed in generous dollops of myth and legend, gossip, hearsay, moralizing, ethnic stereotypes, political propaganda, and plain wishful thinking ("the way things should have been"). 

A bit like television news, really.  

Except for a handful of contemporary inscriptions and some very rare coins, everyone who has ever made a Zenobia statement -- whether using pen, brush, or chisel -- is at the mercy of the same broken records.  As Winsbury remarks a trifle wistfully, "interpreting events and people in the third century is often about using historical judgment to arrive at what may be the least worst interpretation of what we have....

Real-Life or Inventio

And so to Zenobia's 'life'.
'What do you know about this business?' the King said to Alice.
'Nothing,' said Alice.
'Nothing whatever?' persisted the King.
'Nothing whatever,' said Alice.
'That's very important,' the King said....
In "Zenobia - 'a brigand, or more accurately, a woman'" (Chapter 2), Winsbury gives the background on Zenobia's life in a brisk but measured manner.**  

Zenobia's father might (or might not) have been the J. Aurelius Zenobius who was governor of Palmyra when the Emperor Alexander Severus visited the city in 230-231 CE -- right before his disastrous Persian campaign. Zenobia was probably born soon after that visit (Winsbury suggests 240 AD but I would put her birth earlier).  

We don't know her mother's name or family.  He gives short shrift to the claim that "she was of the family of the Cleopatras and the Ptolemies", classing this as self-invention and political propaganda.  I am not so sure.  It doesn't seem to me improbable that she was descended on her mother's side from Ptolemies -- not especially the Great Cleopatra VII but quite possibly a lesser, still regal lady: Cleopatra Thea and her third husband King Antiochus VII (who ruled Seleucid Syria) are good candidates.  That would even explain an inscription which refers to Zenobia as 'daughter of Antiochus'.  The Palmyran upper class did marry out.  Her husband, Odenathus, had two Emesene paternal ancestors whose names suggest they were part of Emesa's old royal family. 

What I greatly like about this book is its emphasis on Odenathus, the warrior prince, who is rightly given almost as much space as his wife.  This is hardly an anti-feminist position.  Rather, it makes no sense to ask what Zenobia thought she was doing without first trying to understand the extraordinary career of her husband.  Winsbury argues (correctly, I think) that Zenobia basically continued her husband's policies, albeit that road led her into still more rocky places. 

Their choices were bleak.  As Winsbury puts it succinctly, "Those were rough times and rough places.

The First Mr Zenobia

It can't have been much fun being ruler of an eastern outpost of Rome just when the Romans were reeling from defeat after defeat delivered by the new Persian empire across the Euphrates.  In 253, the Persians attacked Syria and looted Antioch, the greatest city of the East.  Three years later, Dura Europos fell, the river stronghold garrisoned by both Roman and Palmyran troops.  Now, nothing but empty steppe stood between the enemy and Palmyra itself, the richest surviving city of Syria.  There are hints, and Winsbury stresses them, that Odenathus, although a Roman subject, tried to treat with the Persians.  He calls this "double-dealing".  I call it the better part of valour.  Not only was Palmyra itself in grave danger but the Persians were in control of the trade routes that had made the city so wealthy in the first place.

Whatever the truth of the matter, Shapur, the Persian King-of-kings, turned him down.  A bad decision, as it turned out, for both sides.  If the Palmyran army had been added to Persian forces at this pivotal moment, the history of the East would have been very different. Instead, with no room for negotiation, Odenathus led the Palmyran army against the invaders, chased them out of Syria and harassed them all the way back to their own capital at Cteisiphon.  Winsbury rather underplays the strength of those Palmyran troops.  In a sense, he is right: Odenathus may have been just another local 'war-lord' who stepped into a temporary vacuum ... but that is not how he was remembered in the 4th century: 

Festus (writing ca. 370) called him 'the avenger of the Roman Empire', a remark Winsbury judges too grand in the light of some admittedly damned-by-slight-praise from other sources.  For what it's worth (which isn't much) Historiae Augustae, sings his praises too (probably copying from the same earlier history as Festus).  Still, there is an important witness whom Winsbury doesn't quote: Libanius, the great orator of Antioch.  In a letter written ca. 391, Libanius says that Odenathus was everywhere victorious, that "his name alone shook the heart of the Persians"; and that, as a final flourish, he must have been a son of Zeus because he could not have accomplished so much if he were merely mortal (Letter 1006).  High praise indeed from one who knew, if anyone did, what had happened in the East.

While returning from his victories in the Persian realm (267/268 CE) Odenathus and his son from an earlier marriage were both murdered at Emesa; the assassin is described as a cousin.  Although Winsbury toys with the idea, there is very little justification (other than the wicked step-mother motif) for suspecting Zenobia of involvement in the murder. Gallienus, the Roman emperor at the time, had plenty of reason to want Odenathus terminated (with extreme prejudice) and the wherewithal to get it done.  If Zenobia plotted against her husband, she would have needed backing from high-ranking Palmyrans; why would they have wanted to kill Odenathus and his eldest son in favour her under-age boy?  Odenathus was victorious on every front; he was riding high.


Zenobia: Empress of the East
 

In the next three chapters, Winsbury recounts in concentrated (but not potted) fashion the story of Zenobia that is reasonably well known to readers of this blog: how she came to the throne in 268 as regent for her son Waballath and became the ruler of all the East, then Empress of the short-lived Palmyran Empire and, finally, her defeat by Aurelian in 272 CE.  Winsbury tells it well.  Naturally, I disagree with some of his emphases but, to keep this review at a reasonable length, I give just one example, but an important one: What happened to Zenobia after her defeat?

There are, as we know, three different versions of her fate.

 Zosimus, one of the last pagan historians (writing ca. 500 CE, almost certainly copying the 4th-century history of Eunapius,) says she died on the way to Rome either by starvation or illness.

Malalas, 6th-century Byzantine chronicler, says that Aurelian paraded her in his triumph in Rome (274 CE), and then "beheaded her in the traditional manner".

All other writers essentially follow the exotic description best known from the Historiae Augustae. In this account, Zenobia is:
led in triumph with such magnificence that the Roman people had never seen a more splendid parade.  For, in the first place, she was adorned with gems so huge that she laboured under the weight of her ornaments.... Furthermore, her feet were bound with shackles of gold and her hands with golden fetters, and even on her neck she wore a chain of gold....
 That is the moment Harriet Hosmer envisaged, her marble Zenobia in chains but, even in defeat, erect and majestic (and, as Winsbury rightly notes, sexless).  Now Historiae Augustae goes further into la-la land ... and I am surprised that Winsbury chooses to follow.

Aurelian, that most cruel of emperors, pardoned Zenobia
and they say that thereafter she lived with her children in the manner of a Roman matron on an estate that had been presented to her at Tibur, which even this day is called Zenobia, not far from the palace of Hadrian...
And so she lived happily ever after.

I don't think so.  The writer(s) of Historiae Augustae seem to have conflated our Zenobia with another, earlier Zenobia, queen of Armenia.  As preserved by Tacitus, this Other Zenobia, too, was taken to a hostile king who received her kindly and granted her life and living, and treated her with royal honours.  

That two queens named Zenobia shared a common fate seems more than coincidence.  I remain extremely sceptical.

Re-assessing Zenobia

Putting aside Neo-classical notions of the sublime feminine and the romantic sultry desert-queen of the fabled east, Winsbury concludes that the real Zenobia was not even a feminist icon, but no less -- and no more -- than: 
the ruler and head of state of a remarkable city at a remarkable period of history who won praise from her natural enemies for some of her qualities and odium among her admirers for some of her faults, and who just happened to be a woman. 
And so we are left with a Zenobia for our disenchanted times: "Her actions were the actions of a ruler, doing what rulers do, for good or ill."  

Pragmatic, not visionary. 

You have to read this book, well-written, clear, and quite thorough.  Then, we can go on arguing, probably forever.



Zenobia of Palmyra
Rex Winsbury

published by Duckworth
ISBN 9780715638538
September 2010
£16.99 / Paperback, 192 pages


* We have written about Hosmer's monumental statue and its creator a number of times:  Zenobia is Back in America; The Huntington Makes Space -- for Zenobia; and (Hosmer sharing top billing with Patricia Cronin) Zenobia Lost and Found.

** For more elaborate detail, see Pat Southern's Empress Zenobia, reviewed here.














  • 06 October 2010

    Queen Helena Returns to Jerusalem

    At last!  Helena is back in the city where she was buried.  This is her sarcophagus and Queen Helena was once resting inside.

    No, not that Helena.  

    I don't mean the mother of Constantine, FLAVIA JULIA HELENA AUGUSTA, who went to the Holy Land in 326 AD, found the True Cross, and built the Church of the Holy Sepulchre -- and who, along with her son, became a saint in the eastern church.  Anyway, that Helena was an Empress, not a mere Queen.  She died in Rome (330 AD) and was interred in the imperial vault of the Church of the Holy Apostles in Constantinople.  

    Where her body isn't to be found any more; but that's another story.

    There's no doubt about it.  This sarcophagus is inscribed (twice) with her name.* 



    So who is our Helena and why has she been returned to Jerusalem?

    Helena of Adiabene


    Nearly 3,000 km [2,000 miles] from Judea, east of the Tigris River, lies the ancient land of Adiabene -- nowadays more or less Iraqi Kurdistan (upper middle of map).  In Helena's time, during the early first century CE, Adiabene was a client kingdom of the Parthians.  According to the Jewish historian, Josephus,** it was also where the remains of Noah's ark were still visible and could be shown to anyone who was interested in such things.  

    Some time around 30 CE, Monobazus, king of Adiabene, married his sister, our Helena.  Brother-sister royal marriages were not uncommon in the Parthian and Persian east and no eyebrows were raised by the deed.  They had one son (also called Monobazus) and then Helena became pregnant again:

    But as [the king] was in bed with her one night, he laid his hand upon his wife's belly and fell asleep, and seemed to hear a voice, which bade him take his hand off his wife's belly, and not hurt the infant that was therein, which, by God's providence, would be safely born, and have a happy end. 

    This god-chosen younger son was given the name Izates (said to mean 'angel').  Despite having many other sons by a bevy of wives, the king loved his little angel best.   Naturally, Izates' half-brothers were jealous of his open affection for the last-born son.  Among Parthian princes, jealousy was not merely a private affair: the fight for the throne would be a fight to the finish.  Knowing this, Monobazus sent Izates away to the kingdom of Charax on the shores of the Persian Sea (lower-right black dot on the map) to keep him safe from the envy and hatred of his half-brothers.  The king of Charax received him gladly and gave him his daughter in marriage along with a country estate from which he received large revenues.   

    Something totally unexpected happened to Izates while he was at Charax: he was converted to Judaism.

    Izates, the God-Fearing Jew

    Now during the time that Izates resided at Charax, a certain Jewish merchant named Ananias visited the king's wives [the harem], and taught them to worship God after the manner of the Jewish tradition.  It was through their agency that he was brought to the notice of Izates, whom he similarly won over with the cooperation of the women.

    Luckily for the young man, Ananias did not insist that Izates be circumcised.  On the contrary, he said that the king could worship God without performing this rite as long as he otherwise followed the Jewish law entirely.  In short, according to Ananias, worship of God was of a superior nature to circumcision and, he added helpfully, God would forgive him this lapse.

    When the aged Monobazus realized he had but a short time to live, he recalled Izates to Adiabene.  Ananias went with him.  Imagine their surprise when they discovered that a (nameless) Mesopotamian Jew had also converted Queen Helena to Judaism and that she was highly pleased with the Jewish customs.  What a happy coincidence!  Or, as we may suspect, Josephus conflated two different stories of the conversions.  No matter.  It's certain that both queen and prince became Jewish proselytes and  established close contacts with Jerusalem and Palestinian Jews.

    You can't have too much of a good thing

    Monobazus now gave his son the western country of Carrae (perhaps because that was where Noah's Ark had come to rest).  Izates stayed in this land until after the king's death.

    On the very day that the king died, with Izates far away, Queen Helena called an assembly of noblemen, district governors, and army commanders in the royal palace at Arbela [modern Arbil]The grandees first of all paid their homage to the queen, as their custom was.  Then, she explained that Monobazus had chosen Izates to succeed him and had thought him worthy to do so.  She appealed for their support.  

    The fact that the queen summoned the council and had the honour of speaking first -- rather than her eldest son --  bolsters the idea that brother-sister royal incest increases the power and status of a queen [as recently discussed in my post on the incestuous Ptolemaic queen Arsinoë II].

    Meanwhile, the assembled grandees said that they confirmed the king's determination, and would submit to it.  Following protestations of joy, they advised the queen to slaughter all of Izates' half-brothers and kinsmen -- a brutal but effective way, as they pointed out, to avoid future and fratricidal civil wars.  Helena thanked them for the advice but said that the decision to murder all and sundry belonged to Izates; she agreed, however, to hold their relatives-in-law in prison until he should arrive.  Her next move was unexpected, perhaps even naive: she entrusted her eldest son, Monobazus, with the diadem and insignia of office until Izates could get to Arbela and begin his reign.  

    Perhaps  Helena knew something that  cynics didn't know: Monobazus duly surrendered his temporary powers, and Izates was crowned king in 36 CE.  Inspired by his religious scruples, we are told, Izates acted with a clemency extraordinary for the age: rather than kill his kinsmen, he sent them away as hostages to Rome and Parthia.

    A man's got to do what a man's got to do

    Afterwards, Josephus tells us, another Jew  named Eleazar came to Adiabene from Galilee to pay his respects to the  Jewish king.  Eleazar had a reputation for being extremely strict concerning the ancestral laws.  He entered the Royal Palace, possibly at the request of the increasingly pious but hesitant Izates, and persuaded Izates to become circumcised.  When he found the king reading the law of Moses, Eleazar admonished him:
     In your ignorance, O King, you are guilty of the greatest offence against the laws and thereby against God.   How long will  you continue to be uncircumcised?
    Shortly thereafter, Izates agreed.  And the deed was done.  

    When his brother Monobazus and other relatives saw that the people admired Izates due to his zeal, they also abandoned the ancient Parthian gods and adopted Judaism and the Jewish way of life.  The high nobles in Adiabene reacted negatively to their conversion and made political and military moves to have them removed, but in vain.  The rebels were executed by King Izates.

    Now that all was peaceful in the land and the throne secure, in 46 CE Helena decided to go to Jerusalem, in order to worship at that temple of God which was so very famous among all men, and to offer her thank-offerings there

    Helena's pilgrimage to Jerusalem

    When Helena reached the Holy City, she found that a terrible famine was spreading in Judea -- the same famine as mentioned in Acts xi.28 -- and people were starting to die of hunger.  

    The queen immediately sent some of her servants to Roman Alexandria with money to buy a great quantity of grain, and others of them to Cyprus, to bring a cargo of dried figs. The food arrived quickly and was distributed under the queen's direction.

    But it wasn't her only good deed.   The queen also made offerings to the Inner Sanctuary of the Great Temple (the Kodesh).  The Talmud remembers one such item thus:
    Over the doorway of the Kodesh was a carving of a golden menorah donated by Queen Helena, a convert to Judaism. The morning service could not begin before sunrise.  The Temple was surrounded by high walls, and it was not possible to see the rising sun, so a priest had to be sent outside to see if it was time for the service to begin.  After Queen Helena donated the Menorah, it was no longer necessary to send a priest outside the Temple.  As the sun rose in the east it shone against the menorah and the reflected light was cast into the [courtyard].   (Yoma 37b; Tosefta Yoma 82)

    Since the queen had decided to remain for a time in Jerusalem, she built herself a palace. Its location in the lower City of David (above left) was only discovered in 2007.  Two thousand years ago, this area was home almost exclusively to the city's poor.  The palatial building is by far the largest and most elaborate structure yet discovered in the vicinity.  

    Since Josephus mentions just one wealthy family living in the area -- the family of Queen Helena -- it's more than likely the archaeologists have indeed uncovered her palace.

    The remains of the building (left) includes massive foundations, some walls built of stones that weigh hundreds of kilograms, halls preserved to a height of at least two stories, remains of polychrome frescoes, water installations and ritual baths (miqve’ot).  

    The palace was destroyed along with the temple and the rest of the city when Roman legions crushed the first Jewish revolt against the Romans (66-70 CE). That ghastly event was still some years in the future. 

    Last Act in Jerusalem

    In 55 CE, Helena received news that Izates had died.  Despite the political turbulence on all sides of Adiabene (wars, rebellion, pressure from Rome through Armenia; the ups and downs of Parthian imperial rule), the king had managed to stay in power for 24 years and died a natural death at the age of 55 years.  He gave an order that his older brother, Monobazus, should be king after him.
    When Helena, his mother heard of her son's death she was greatly distressed , as was but natural, upon her loss of a most dutiful son.  Yet it was a comfort to her that she heard that the succession came to her eldest son.  Accordingly she went to him in haste, and after she arrived in Adiabene, she did not long outlive her son Izates [died 56 CE].  But Monobazus [II] sent her bones, as well as those of Izates, his brother, to Jerusalem and gave an order that they should be buried at the tombs which their mother had erected.


    Helena's royal sepulchre was the subject of both enthusiastic literary descriptions and archaeological investigations. Josephus tells us that Helena in her lifetime built three pyramids (which no longer exist) over the intended tomb. Pausanias (Description of Greece 8, 16, 5), mentions a unique mechanism that opened the tomb automatically at certain times and sealed it at others:
    They have contrived to make the door of the tomb, which is stone like all the rest of it, so that it opens only on a certain day of the year at a particular season: at that moment the machinery opens the door on its own, holds it open for a little while, and then closes it up again.  At the time you can get in like that, but if you tried to open it at any other time it would never open -- you would have to break it down first.
    The tomb was re-discovered in 1863 by the French archaeologist Louis Félicien Caignart de Saulcy who conducted the first systematic archaeological dig in Jerusalem.  De Saulcy thought the magnificent facade looked royal enough to associate the monument with the kings of Judah; hence, erroneously referred to as the Tomb of the Kings, it should, of course, be called 'The Tomb of the Queen'.  

    The stone sarcophagus, weighing almost  1,200 kilograms [more than a ton] wound up in France after it was discovered almost by accident.  On the third day of the dig -- which was undertaken after the Ottoman authorities issued a firman, or formal permit, for it -- one of the workers stepped on a tile in the floor of a structure. The tile moved, revealing an alcove beneath the floor that contained the sarcophagus.  During the troubles of the Second Jewish War (132-135) it had been hidden in this small chamber. In order to bring it to its hiding place the corners of the chest were knocked off. 

    Helena in Exile

    News of the discovery of human bones, and from a Jewish queen moreover, inflamed the Jewish community in Jerusalem. The community petitioned prominent figures in Europe and lobbied the Ottoman authorities. De Saulcy was forced to suspend his excavation, but not before managing to send the sarcophagus and his other findings to France.  Since then the queen's coffin has languished, largely unseen, in the basement of the Louvre in Paris.

    And Now She's Back 

    The sarcophagus arrived at the Israel Museum in Jerusalem on 21 September 2010 on special loan from the Louvre Museum.  It will be on display for four months in the Museum’s newly re-opened Archaeology Wing as the centerpiece of the inaugural exhibition: Breaking Ground: Pioneers of Biblical Archaeology.


    Breaking Ground revolves around the stories of three European explorers: Félicien de Saulcy of France, Sir Flinders Petrie of Great Britain (pictured on the museum wall) and Conrad Schick of Germany, who together with members of the London-based Palestine Exploration Fund, were among the first archaeologist-researchers to reach the Holy Land in the mid–late 19th century. They were the first to photograph, document and report on their excavations, laying the foundations for modern archaeological research.

    Our Helena

    If you have a chance to visit Jerusalem and see the show, take a walk afterwards down to the centre of Jerusalem to the street called 'Helena the Queen' (Heleni HaMalka).  In the time of the British Mandate, this street was already known by this name but it was meant to honour that Helena: Saint Helena, empress of Rome.  It has since been re-baptised (if one may put it so) in honour of a queen altogether more favourable to the Jewish people -- and another reading of history. 




    * The centred fainter inscription is written in Palestinian Aramaic in a 1st C script; the second, that runs a bit across the first, is Syrian Aramaic (Syriac) perhaps of somewhat later date.  Both read Tzadda[n] Malka[ta], Sadan the Queen; that is, a Semitic transcription of the Greek 'Helena'.

    ** Citations and further direct quotations in the text from Josephus, Antiquities 20.17-96, unless otherwise noted.  The chapters of Josephus give us the most elaborate texts on a conversion to Judaism in all of ancient literature.  The passages are available on-line in Lawrence H. Schiffman, Texts and Traditions: a source reader, via GoogleBooks


    I am grateful to Antonio Lombatti of the Pseudoscienze blog for alerting me to this exhibition of Helena's sarcophagus.

    My sources for this post include: on Adiabene, Encyclopaedia Iranica; John P. Dickson, Mission-commitment in Ancient Judaism, 33-46 (partly available via GoogleBooks ); P. Borgen, Early Christianity and Hellenistic Judaism, 52-55 (via GoogleBooks).

    Illustrations

    Top centre:  Sarcophagus of Queen Sad(d)an.  Photograph (via Archeogate.org): © Ch. Larrien/Museo del Louvre

    Middle centre: Aramaic inscriptions on a 1st century Sarcophagus of Queen Helene that was excavated in 1863 at the 'Tombs of the Kings' in Jerusalem and now on loan from the Louvre Museum at the Israel Museum in Jerusalem.  Photo: Getty Images

    Top left: map of Parthian Empire and eastern Roman Empire, adopted from WorldNews.com 

    Middle left: Rock relief at Bātās, Iraq, depicting Izates II (r. 36-62 CE); drawing by H. von Gall.  Via WithinLandofKurda blog.

    Lower left:  Aerial view of Temple Mount and City of David: Bible Places.com (Palace of Queen Helena Found?)

    Still lower left: Skyview of the excavation of Helena's palace.  Photo: IAA (via Ferrell's Travel Blog)

    Lower centre: Reconstructed facade of Helena's tomb (J. Finegan, The Archeology of the New Testament, page 315)

    Lowest left: Helena's sarcophagus in the Israel Museum in Jerusalem.  Photo: Haaretz Daily Newspaper, by: Michal Patael

    17 September 2010

    Oh my gods, Rome is burning (again)


    In heaven's name, what happened? The Colosseum was struck by thunderbolts ...and such a blaze followed that its entire upper circuit and everything in the arena was consumed, and the rest of the structure was ravaged by the flames and reduced to ruins. Neither human aid could avail against the conflagration, though practically every aqueduct was emptied, nor could the downpour from the sky, which was most heavy and violent, accomplish anything....

    You can't say it wasn't foretold.  

    As Roman newspapers were quick to report, a  mule gave birth to a mule and a sow to a piglet with four ears, two tongues and eight feet.  While, on the other side of the Palatine, bees formed honeycombs in the heart of the cattle-market.  It was all too much.  Gladiatorial games are postponed indefinitely.

    Oh sorry, that was in 217 C.E.  And the intrepid reporter was Cassius Dio (79.25).

    But after dark tonight, the Colosseum will go up in flames again.

    A huge virtual inferno is set to blaze inside the building, while flames flickering through the Colosseum's arches will be visible down to the far end of the Roman Forum.

    Who's Fiddling Now?

    On the nights of 17, 18, and 19 September  you can take in an extraordinary video installation conceived by the artists Thyra Hilden (Denmark) and Pio Diaz (Argentina): video screens placed in the arches of the Colosseum will make it appear as if the amphitheatre is on fire. 

    Hilden and Diaz achieve this fantastic illusion by displaying a pre-recorded video of real fire on a scale of 1:1 using a series of powerful projectors.  By digitally manipulating the footage, they create the effect of wind blowing through the monument in a wave of flames.

    The 'Colosseum on Fire,' is part of a wider project, City on Fire, to which the artists have devoted themselves to for some years, creating virtual fires in important institutions, monuments, museums, and churches throughout Europe. 

    This is how the young artists explain their pyromaniacal urges:
    This world is on fire. Modern life and technological development wipe away our cultural roots and heritage. Throughout history, we have torn down to build up. Cultural evolution involves destruction. Damage and destruction can be fertile, like the Italian Futurists preached before they experienced the terror of World Wars. Fire is an obvious symbol for this ambiguous process. Fire is an irrational, uncontrollable destroying force or a warm embracing source. Fire is also a symbol of spiritual transcendence and personal transformation - or terrifying acts by man destroying life and civilization.
    Over the last four years, the Danish-Argentine artist couple has been working with the city of Rome to realise the ultimate site for this project, and following intense negotiations, the pieces have finally fallen into place.  Tonight, the Colosseum will burn!

    "This multimedia installation will create an amazingly realistic impression of the Colosseum in flames," said the installation's curator, Gianni Mercurio. "The artists' aim is to show just how fragile and transitory mankind's creations are, even great buildings that are considered symbols of eternal culture."

    But beware Gianni, beware Rome! 

    As the Venerable (even if pseudo) Bede prophesied in the 8th century:
    As long as the Colosseum stands, so shall Rome; when the Colosseum falls, Rome shall fall; when Rome falls, so falls the world.
    Meanwhile, enjoy the spectacle.



    My thanks to the EternallyCool website for the heads-up on this imminent project.

    Illustrations

    Top left: EternallyCool

    Lower left: from the artists' webpage, City On Fire 

    12 September 2010

    Myrtis and the End of the Golden Age

    The Long War
     
    By any reckoning, the Peloponnesian War (431-404 BCE) was a great war -- a war to be compared with World War I -- not only a world-shattering conflict in itself but in its bitter consequences.  As a struggle between imperial democratic Athens and its autocratic enemies (Sparta & allies), it opposed two irreconcilable ways of life.  It lasted off and on for 27 years and caused terrible suffering to the innocent and guilty alike.  With vast swathes of countryside devastated and whole cities destroyed, the war marked a dramatic end to the golden age of Greece.

    Blowback

    The unintended consequences of war were as devilish then as they are  now. 
    Pericles, the renowned Athenian general, saw the fight between Athens and Sparta as an inevitable clash of imperial ambitions. Convinced that his city was militarily stronger, he incited the populace with a sort of arrogance and a love of strife. Later writers, rightly or wrongly, blamed him for being the sole instigator of the disaster (Plutarch, Pericles xxix.5-xxx).  

    His strategy was to wear out Sparta by evacuating the Attic countryside before the Spartans invaded.  The displaced inhabitants would then retreat behind the city's unassailable walls while the superior Athenian navy harassed Spartan troop transports and cut off enemy supply lines.  They would thus be able to 'Starve the beast'.  The Athenians took his advice and brought in from the country their wives and children and all their household goods, including slaves.  They sent their sheep and cattle across to the islands off the coast.

    What Pericles didn't foresee were the consequences of adding so many people from the countryside to an already well-populated city. 


    The Spartan offensive

    During the second year of the war, in the early days of summer, the Spartans and their allies invaded Attica and put Athens under siege.  Almost immediately, in the heat and the dirt of the overcrowded city, an epidemic broke out,
    a pestilence of such extent and mortality as was nowhere remembered.  The plague wiped out tens of thousands of Athenians.  


    The Greek historian Thucydides,* writing from personal experience, tells us about its horrors:
    Words fail one when one tries to give a general picture of this disease; and as for the sufferings of the individuals, they seemed almost beyond the capacity of human nature to endure....  Nor was any human art or science of any help at all. Equally useless were prayers made in the temples, consultation of oracles, and so forth; indeed, in the end people were so overcome by their sufferings that they paid no further attention to such things.
    Even the vultures abandoned the city.
    Here in particular is a point where this plague showed itself to be something quite different from ordinary diseases: though there were many dead bodies lying about unburied, the birds and animals that eat human flesh either did not come near them or, if they did taste the flesh, died of it afterwards.  Evidence for this may be found in the fact that there was a complete disappearance of all birds of prey: they were not to be seen either round the bodies or anywhere else.
    People died like flies.

    The bodies of the dying were heaped one on top of the other, and half-dead creatures could be seen staggering about in the streets or flocking around the fountains in their desire for water.  The temples in which they took up their quarters were full of the dead bodies of people who had died inside them....  All the funeral ceremonies which used to be observed were now disorganized, and they buried the dead as best they could.

    Fast forward 2,500 years 

    In 1994, while excavating for the new Metro (underground/subway), workmen uncovered the skeletons of about 150 men, women and children, all hastily buried in a 'plague grave' (above, left) at Kerameikos, the ancient  cemetery of the city.

    According to its excavator, E. Baziotopoulou-Valavani, the mass grave did not have the slightest monumental character.  The offerings were of common, even cheap, burial vessels; black-finished ones, some small red-figured, as well as white lekythoi (oil flasks) .... The bodies were [randomly] placed in the pit within a day or two ... with no layers of soil between them. 


    Among the bones was an almost intact cranium of a young girl, her sex defined by the anatomy of the skull, complete with her jaw and a mixture of 28 milk and adult teeth preserved.  She was about 11 years old when she died.  The Greek archaeologists gave her the name of 'Myrtis'.

    Although she was buried in the Kerameikos cemetery, it is not known if she was an Athenian, a resident immigrant (that is, a Metic) or a slave.  My guess is that she was not from a citizen family.  Despite the death rate, Thucydides shows that people did try to maintain proper funeral rites, which at this time meant cremation and burial of ashes, not interring of bodies.  Even those who could barely cope burnt the corpses somehow:

    Because so many deaths had already occurred in their households, [many people] adopted the most shameless methods.  They would arrive first at a funeral pyre that had been made by others, put their own dead upon it and set it alight; or, finding another pyre burning, they would throw the corpse that they were carrying on top of the other one and go away.
    Of course, Thucydides was not interested in the disposal of dead Metics or slaves, so I think it likely that such lower-class victims would be dumped, uncremated, into mass graves.   

    What killed Myrtis?

    Historians have long tried to identify the disease behind the Athenian plague -- an infectious disease virulent enough to carry off one-third of the population (and a quarter of the army) in just four years.  Was it bubonic plague, smallpox, typhus, measles, ebola fever, or some deadly disease that no longer exists? 

    We now have the answer.

    A group of Greek scientists (led by Dr M. Papagrigorakis of Athens University’s School of Dentistry) examined the dental pulp of teeth recovered in remains from the grave.  They discovered microbial DNA sequences very similar to Salmonella enterica serovar Typhi, that is, typhoid fever.  Typhoid's clinical characteristics, too, are in close accord with the agonizing symptoms described by Thucydides -- who himself fell ill with the plague and was among the lucky few to recover. Overcrowding and poor standards of hygiene in the besieged city would have allowed the disease to appear and then develop into a deadly epidemic.

    Now Meet Myrtis

    Scientists have been able to reconstruct her face almost down to the last detail (top of the post, left, and below).  This kind of facial reconstruction requires the expertise of a physical or forensic anthropologist and extensive experience of the anatomy of the face as well as good artistic abilities.

    Oscar Nilsson, a Swedish sculptor and model-maker, carried out the recreation.
    By combining knowledge of the tissue-depth of the human face with the technique of building up the face muscle-by-muscle, an individual appearance is achieved.  The shape and size of eyes and nose are calculated from the size of the ocular and nasal cavities.  Myrtis evidently had a straight nose and slightly protruding teeth.  On the assumption that she was Greek, she was given reddish-brown hair and brown eyes (although if a resident alien or slave, her ancestry is unknown; further DNA studies will be needed to confirm hair and eye colour). 
     
    Myrtis: Face to Face With the Past


    Tomorrow, 13 September, Myrtis will move to the National Archaeological Museum of Athens for temporary display (until 30 November).  It is an ideal setting for her to be placed among so many Classical burial sculptures and funerary reliefs.  

    Through the face of little Myrtis, sepulchral monuments and memorials of the 5th century BC come back to life and talk with us.  They remind us of the common human fate, death, but also of its defeat by means of memory.  It is no coincidence that Myrtis was declared “Friend of the Goals of the Millennium” by the United Nations.

    Her picture has been posted on a website supporting the UN Millennium Goals
    on disease prevention and the campaign, "We Can End Poverty". And, needless to say, the 21st-century Myrtis has her own website The 11-year from Athens has posted a letter to the leaders of the world:

    My death was inevitable. In the 5th century BC we had neither the knowledge nor the means to fight deadly illnesses. However, you, the people of the 21st century, have no excuse. You possess all the necessary means and resources to save the lives of millions of ... children like me who are dying of preventable and curable diseases.
    Even today, typhoid fever is a major health problem in the developing world where overpopulation, inadequate water supplies and hygiene, as well as poor access to health services, allow epidemics to spread. Every year there are about 20 million new cases that lead to 600,000 deaths.  With only five years left until the Millennium deadline, the achievement of the goal of prevention looks doubtful. 

    Well, reborn Myrtis is doing her bit.


    But, why in the world was she called Myrtis?    


    I assume that the archaeologists named her after the ancient woman poet.**  This 5th-century Myrtis, remembered as 'Sweet-voiced', was said to have been the teacher of two of the best Greek lyric poets, Corinna (another woman) and Pindar.  It is a pity that all of her verse is lost; not a single word survives.  So I borrow a fragment from Corinna, appropriately composed, I think, for public performance by a choir of young girls:

    Enjoying the gifts of the Muses
    I tell my story in song...
    If you are in Athens this autumn, do visit Myrtis at the National Archaeological Museum. She may not sing but she's otherwise brought to life rather well.  




    *Thucydides, The Peloponnesian War, 2.47-55, translated by Rex Warner, Penguin, 1954.

     ** I assumed this, really, because I have named one of my Siamese cats 'Myrtis' and, yes, I had the Boeotian poet in mind.  The truth is sadly more mundane.  Prof. Papagrigorakis asked the archaeologists to come up with a list of girl's names from the classical era.  He chose a two-syllable sonorous name that is still in use today (Myrto in modern Greek).My thanks to Prad Patel on Heritage Key (1 September) for alerting me to the temporary exhibition of Myrtis in Athens.

    Illustrations 

    Above left: from the press release of the National Archaeological Museum

    Middle left: Mass grave containing the remains of 150 plague victims.  Photograph Ta Nea Online 10/04/10 (via Archaeology News Network 

    Insert left: Image of Myrtis' skull.  Photograph Ta Nea Online 10/04/10 (via Archaeology News Network)

    Lower left: Close-up of Myrtis (via dimos-nestoros.gr



    Lowest left:  Myrtis (via the WHBC-gr website)






    Blog Archive