Narrative manipulation of Medea and Metis in Hesiod’s Theogony

Narrative manipulation of Medea and Metis in Hesiod's Theogony Medea might reasonably be called one of the most famous female figures of Greek mythology, yet her representation wavers between that of innocent girl, such as in in the Apollonian tradition, and cold infanticide, such as in the Euripidean tradition.Her earliest textual and iconographic representations already anticipate this complexity.While Medea is apparently represented as an innocent girl in the earliest Argonautic account, that of Hesiod's Theogony, 1 her earliest 'Corinthian' representations rather seem to depict an authoritative queen with magical, witch-like powers: in Eumelus' Corinthiaca, probably composed at some time between the eigth and the middle of the sixth century BC, Jason rules only 'through her', 2 and she (unsuccessfully) attempts to immortalize her children.3 In sixthcentury iconography, she rejuvenates a ram and kills Pelias.Her potential presence in eighthcentury BC Corinthian cult further complicates matters.Graf and Johnston argue for the precedence of a Colchian Medea as part of the Argonautic myth; Farnell and Will argue for the precedence of a Medea based in Corinth; and West, following Wilamowitz, maintains that two Medeas originally coexisted and merged by the Archaic era. 5While this chapter will not engage with the discussion of Medea's origins, since they are impossible to trace, it will demonstrate that her Hesiodic representation is more similar to her earliest Corinthian depictions and to the Euripidean tradition than may appear at first reading.I will also engage with the scholarly debate regarding the authenticity of the ending of the Theogony, since this is where Medea is mentioned.I propose that my re-evaluation of 1 The story of the Argo is referred to at Odyssey 12,70 (Ἀργὼ πᾶσι μέλουσα, 'Argo known to all'), but Medea herself is not mentioned in the Homeric epics.Graf 1997 and Johnston 1997 ignore Medea's absence.Petroff 1966, 6, argues that Medea does not need an introduction.Huxley 1969, 61, and Hall 1989, 35, maintain that Medea must be a post-Homeric creation on the basis of the Homeric figure of Agamede (Il.11,741).See also Gordon 1999, 179, on the connection between Medea and Agamede. 2 Paus.2,3,10: δι' αὐτήν, i.e. through her kinship with Helios, whom Eumelus depicts as the first king of Corinth.3 Corinthiaca (fr.1-9 EGF) is dated by Huxley 1969, 64, to the eighth century BC; by Graf 1997, 34, to the seventh; and by West 2002, 109, to the middle of the sixth century BC.On Eumelus, see infra.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.